While many progressive lawmakers have a deep disdain for their liberal allies, Senators Joe Manchin and Kirsten Cinemas — who have been blocking the Democrats’ ambitious social spending infrastructure package — are also furious at Schumer, asking him to keep his caucus. saying for. can be held responsible for the failure. Line. Why can’t they keep the caucus together, they complain, without recognizing Schumer’s bond.
With Munchkin and Cinema, the issue is leverage. Schumer has no one over the munchkin, who thus has a lot of power within his caucus and can decide the fate of President Joe Biden’s agenda.
Theoretically, the more Schumer pushes Manchin, the more he could force the worst outcome of all for Democrats — Manchin switching parties and Republicans taking control of the Senate. It could free up senators like Ted Cruz, Josh Hawley and Tom Cotton with new surveillance powers to help them fulfill their presidential ambitions. Gifting any of those men would be a nightmare for Biden.
But that would mean losing his advantage and power. Being a Democrat gives them nothing to change party and lose.
Without a real understanding of how policies should be developed or implemented, the “you choose your poison” philosophy reveals Munchkin’s thirst to become a kingmaker.
And that’s what makes Schumer weak and ineffective. On the surface, not being able to control one’s own caucus would disqualify someone from leading the caucus. The question here is, who can do a better job? Progressives like Elizabeth Warren? She is strict so can put people in line. It is unlikely that this is an effective Munchkin strategy. Perhaps a popular liberal like Mark Warner of Virginia? Same result – no leverage with Munchkin.
The fact is that Schumer is doing his best in an impossible situation. Munchkin has high cards and is using them well. Schumer is playing his hand as much as he can.
Bottom line – let’s leave Schumer alone for a while.
.