Well McConnell doesn't think he caved! WTAF?

[Maraya1969]

Link to tweet

[zaj]

1. Good enough

Saving face works.

[The Roux Comes First]

19. And What a Face It Is!!

[rzemanfl]

2. Turtle shit. n/t

[TigressDem]

3. Who cares what he thinks? He didn't get what he wanted. Nuff said. nt

[Maraya1969]

4. Will it be this hard to make PR and DC a state? Geeze nothing is easy anymore.

[tritsofme]

7. It would take 60 votes to beat a filibuster on those bills.

[Indykatie]

5. We Need to Win More Senate Seats in 2022!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[madaboutharry]

6. He learned Twitter speak from Trump.

Telling a lie what actually happened in order to gaslight himself.

He isn’t running the show anymore.

[drray23]

8. if you had followed more carefully

you would have seen that mcconnel was blocking the rules of organization because he wanted the democrats to specifically include that they would not try to later remove the fillibuster.

He caved on that which means dems can try and remove the fillibuster later on. One thing at a time. If course McConnel is trying to save face by pointing out two dem senators are lukewarm about that prospect.
One fight at a time. If McConnel starts obstructing everything, it is very possible Schumer will convince Manchin and Sinema

[Salviati]

12. This

mcconnell was going for explicit protection of the filibuster, and did not get it. He got shot down, and whatever he needs to tell himself in order to make himself feel good doesn't matter.

[Silver Gaia]

15. Agree with both you and drray23 above.

McConnell did not get what he wanted. No way. No how. He's just trying to save face.

[Tommymac]

21. Absolutely. He did not win anything. This is lipstick

on the turtle.

McConnell got owned and is trying desperately to put his spin on the news cycle as cover.

Obvious and pathetic.

[servermsh]

9. "Modeled on that precedent"

If Mitch is happy with only extracting those public assurances from those two Senators, then that is great. Theoretically we can change their minds in the future.

However, if by "modeled on that precedent" he still means he wants extra language on the filibuster in the organizing resolution, then that would possibly mean Schumer and Mitch cut a deal.

For now I'm leaning towards thinking there will be no new filibuster language in the OR, but we'll have to see.

[tritsofme]

24. The precedent he is referring to is the 2001 Lott/Daschle deal.

There will be no new language on filibusters in the organizing resolution.

[Walleye]

10. Did they make a pinky promise, cross their heart and hope to die. Nothing is set in stone

Situations change, I’m just glad we can finally get started

[StarfishSaver]

11. Well, if McConnell said it, that must be what happened

[Me.]

13. Which Two?

[Blue_true]

20. Manchin and Simena. nt

[Me.]

23. Ty

[mn9driver]

14. This IS McConnell admitting defeat.

Those two democratic senators were always in the “no”column on the filibuster repeal. Nothing has changed, except that McConnell is dropping his demand for a guarantee that Democrats will never try to eliminate the filibuster.

That has been the holdup all week. Schumer and probably Biden/Harris must have convinced him that if he didn’t back down, it would be very, very bad. I have no idea what they might have said to him, but whatever it was, he folded like a cheap suit. While claiming victory, of course.

[Silver Gaia]

18. Somebody convinced him, that's for sure!

And I agree with your analysis.

[dflprincess]

16. Now that the Democrats have gotten what they wanted

it's time for the two who said they'd vote against ending the filibuster to change their minds and vote for it.

Just like when all sorts of concessions were made to the Republicans to get the ACA passed and then not a single one of them voted for it.

[blogslut]

17. lol

Spin spin spin, Mitch.

[Cha]

22. mitch is a liar.. the only time hs

told the truth was about trump.

his tweet says "leader mcconnell" & he's MINORITY.