We may not be able to know for sure, but we just disagree here. I just don’t think many major Democrats are that worried about 250K vs 400K for tax increases, and I don’t think many would vote against one but not the other.
Many of them asked for a $1 million threshold, most notably second ranking Senate Democrat Chuck Schumer:
Pelosi backed that proposal:
Those were attempts to compromise, not ideological proposals. I see no evidence that Schumer or Pelosi actually oppose raising taxes on 250K plus.
The Democrats simply had to do nothing to repeal all the tax cuts and the blame would have fallen on Republicans. They actually did want to shield people making over a certain amount, and if anything they would have had more leverage had they stuck together at $250K. Schumer broke ranks because he thought that was in his constituents’ interest.
When the wealthy consistently, vehemently vote for their economic interest against the interests of the nation as a whole, and most especially against the interests of the poor and the middle class, I think the middle class and the poor should be beaten with something a LOT more painful than a brow when they go along with it, as they so often do. We are NOT a nation of temporarily embarrassed millionaires, dammit!
I don’t buy this. I think you’re wrong here.
. . . then their actual votes would be too few to matter, if they did not also hold the power of campaign-funding.
Never, ever listen to a VSP.
Agreed. I suppose I can get around that by saying “push their agenda” instead of vote, but yeah, they run the money primary that decides who the rest of us schlubs get to vote for.
I think Hitler did something like that, but I could be wrong.