We begin today’s story with analysis of Senator Sinema’s desire to hold policy hostage from Jonathan Chait:

The centrists are claiming that if the bipartisan bill fails next week, their optimal level of social spending will drop from whatever it currently is to zero dollars, and will remain at zero, even if that means the bipartisan bill fails.[…]

Indeed, the credibility of their threat hinges on them placing enormous value on the timing of the infrastructure vote. If it passes next week, then (presumably) they will continue negotiating on a social spending bill. If the vote fails next week, then (they say) they won’t care what happens.

In reality, if the infrastructure bill fails next week, negotiations will continue […] There’s simply no rational reason why, after September 27, Sinema’s optimal scenario will be complete legislative gridlock, including the likely failure of her personal legacy bill.

Charles Pierce reminds us that while the spotlight is on Senators Sinema and Manchin, the ultimate flaw is in the very rules of the Senate itself:

Here’s Ryan Cooper’s take on how Democrats should deal with the “mess” that moderates made:

I see just one realistic path forward. The infrastructure bill, while it has some worthwhile elements, is small potatoes and won’t have much effect for several years. The only way to see if Democratic moderates are bluffing with their ultimatums is to be genuinely prepared to kill the infrastructure bill.

Biden and the progressive House caucus should fight fire with fire: Demand an end to the filibuster, an end to the debt ceiling threat to the global economy, and a significant reconciliation bill included alongside infrastructure. Moderates can fall in line — or get nothing.

At The Washington Post, Eugene Robinson argues that climate change — and China’s role in it — must be front and center at the upcoming U.N. General Assembly:

What we will not hear is concrete plans to prevent the worst-case climate scenarios. U.N. scientists say that carbon emissions need to be slashed 45 percent by 2030. Instead, emissions are on a path to increase 16 percent above 2010 levels by the end of the decade.

Instead of slamming on the brakes as we head to the edge of a cliff, we’re doing a Thelma-and-Louise and speeding up.

Meanwhile, Dana Milbank calls election denial the GOP’s new “civic religion”:

Now some Republicans worry that the pervasive belief that elections are rigged — an article of faith since the 2016 Iowa caucuses — will discourage voting, as it appeared to do in the Georgia Senate runoff and again in the California recall.

Former California GOP chairman Ron Nehring faulted losing Republican candidate Larry Elder’s campaign for anticipating voter fraud before the California election. “One way not to have Republicans win is by telling Republican voters that their votes don’t matter,” Nehring told a post-election forum, McClatchy reported.

When Republican leaders convince their supporters not to vote, that’s their problem. But when they convince them to reject democracy, that’s everybody’s problem.

On a final note, here’s what’s on the horizon: Democrats are going to try and codify the norms that the Trump presidency busted, along with strengthening laws that he repeatedly broke:

The legislation would make it harder for presidents to offer or bestow pardons in situations that raise suspicion of corruption, refuse to respond to oversight subpoenas, spend or secretly freeze funds contrary to congressional appropriations, and fire inspectors general or retaliate against whistle-blowers, among many other changes.