>> his position on collective bargaining in the private sector is clear
Oh, it’s plenty clear to ME what it is. For Mitch, it’s A-OK if the citizens of Indiana are slaved to a union.
>> Mitch returned the favor.
Tit for tat is childish. Not what I want to see in a POTUS.
Especially when the course of action he chooses undermines an ally at the worst possible time, and is a “cut off your party’s nose to spite its face” sort of move.
No Mitch Daniels for me, thank you. Not after this BS.
I take him as saying “well, this really isn’t the way I preferred to see this put through. I preferred the other, non controversial items not to get held up by this entirely foreseeable fleeibuster (or fleebagging or boltibuster). I’m not going to get bent out of shape if this union bill dies. Ball in your court now, dear legislators.”
It's actually one of the most successful strategies in game theory. Definitely not childish.
Look, Mitch warned the House about this issue and they went ahead with things. Mitch is letting the House GOP know who is in charge. I don't mind that.