If I read it correctly, all they are doing is quoting Sinema, not attesting to the veracity of what she is saying.
Is that what @Atamasama said? Or were they saying that the politics bureau chief at Politico (do we not capitalize Politico either, along with Democrat and Republican?) IS a reliable source so it’s probably true that Sinema told him that five or six Democrats hide behind her no vote, but this has no bearing on whether or not the underlying claim is true?
I am not sure why this idea is controversial, I too have noticed pattern in both parties using this tactic. Republicans typically do it the other way with just the barest majority turning out to pass unpopular policies so the members from competitive districts can go home and loudly proclaim “I didn’t vote to gut your health care and stand behind Trump in deporting the evil brown people that are the cause of all your woe!”
That said, I am not sure you can hold up Sinema and Manchin as examples of this as she was not really integrated into the party and he had an unusual constituency. Just my opinion.
There are all sorts of perverse incentives in politics. Just look at how very few Democrats would support Mamdami for a clear example.
I think it’s more that there’s a bigger divide between the progressive wing of the party and the rest under the “big tent”, than it’s trying to balance progressives vs. the rich.
There are a LOT of people out there who aren’t on board with the Republicans and who vote Democrat, but who are in no way progressives or even close.
So the Democrats try and basically show effort toward the progressive things, but only in safe ways that won’t antagonize the rest of their own party.