Quick follow-up on Manchin and the social spending bill

 We are learning more about what happened with Manchin and the social spending bill.  Manchin claims that he was alienated both in personal terms, and that his policy demands were not being met.  So two things.  First, the Democrats are being fools if they don't understand that Manchin runs the show.  This is what we call the "median voter theorem."  The Senate has 100 members.  Manchin is pivotal.  He is the effective median.  He runs the game.  He gets what he wants.  The left doesn't like it?  Tough shit.  There are 50 to the right of Manchin who really don't like the idea of any of this stuff passing, and you know what?  They count too.

Manchin also bristled personally.  Policy should not be personal.  As the saying goes, if you want a friend in Washington, get a dog.  That said, if you alienate the pivotal voter, you're a moron.  Biden has been playing nice with Manchin, in a lot of ways, but you know what?  What the White House actually needed to do was treat him the way Lindsay Graham treats Donald Trump.  With full slobber.  Why?  "Median voter theorem."  At least this is based on math rather than obsequiousness and spinelessness.

Anthony Downs, Duncan Black, William Riker... we have plenty of mathematics to explain this, but ultimately, it's really simple.  Nothing passes with 49.  50 turns to 51 with Harris.  You want 50?  You need Manchin, and you have zero disciplinary tools with which to threaten him, and for the rest of the caucus, it's a difference between something and nothing.  Manchin gets whatever he wants, or the rest of you get nothing.  Capisce?