This fork in the road that faces the Democrats represents an existential threat to both the Party as well as our Constitutional Republic. I can't believe this story is over.

Could we simply trade Joe Manchin for, say, Lisa Murkowski (R-AK)?

Facing reelection next year she's scheduled to get major flak from Trump. So she's arguably already half way out of the GQP. Further, she voted both to establish and later to NOT repeal Obamacare. And she voted against Trump in his second Impeachment.

ALTHOUGH ALASKA is "Republican" Trump only won it by 10 points last year (53-43%) so this is not like an Alabama or Idaho. And Murkowski wouldn't even have to turn Democrat -- just so long as she's not #MarchingWithMitch anymore.

The upside is she leaves the madness behind. Period, full stop. No more Big Lie!

The downside ...is not so bad. Of all politicians Murkowski can pull this off successfully.

Remember how she beat the Tea Party candidate along with the field via a freaking write-in campaign? WITH the last name "Murkowski?"

She can do this.

"It is said that if you aren't part of the solution, then you're part of the problem. What are you doing to promote the bi-partisanship that you contend is necessary for the legislative process?"

Followed up by:

"Are you currently working together with a group of your fellow democratic and republican senators to help write or sponsor any significant bipartisan legislation?"

followed up by:

"What actions do you plan to take going forward to develop bi-partisan legislation, or are you simply demanding that your fellow democrats do what you are unwilling to do yourself?"

Up to the day before yesterday, I was told by basically everybody who follows politics for an audience, Manchin has been playing an elaborate game with Biden and Sen. Schumer, holding out for some prize before he concedes the inevitable and votes with his party to deep-six the filibuster. It was 'the long game', 'kabuki theater', 'inside politics', 'just the way the game has to be played.'

Now, suddenly, Manchin is a selfish or deluded man who, all this time, actually meant what he often said: he doesn't want to lose the filibuster, consequences be damned.

It's enough to make one doubt the value of reading political commentary.