GOP looks to win over Collins, Murkowski on Trump bill

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: The Hill

06/08/25 6:00 AM ET


Senate Republicans are trying to win over Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) to back the party’s ambitious tax cut plan amid fears they could lose a couple of conservative senators. President Trump has made it a priority to engage with Sens. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), who all have concerns about the emerging package.

But some Republicans worry Johnson and Paul could be particularly tough sells on the legislation, which makes winning over Murkowski and Collins all the more important in a vote where the GOP cannot afford more than three defections. “It’s shortening,” one Senate Republican told The Hill about the party’s margins.

Paul has long been viewed as highly likely to vote against the eventual bill as it includes a $4 trillion debt ceiling hike. He’s made it known that is a red line for him. But it’s Johnson who is a more acute problem for leadership.

According to two sources familiar with the meeting, Johnson on Wednesday got into an extended back-and-forth with Trump during the Senate Finance Committee’s meeting at the White House, with one of the sources going a step further and describing it as “contentious.” While Republicans think Johnson may still come to back the bill, the exchange only made GOP leaders more unsettled about him.

Read more: https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5337418-gop-tax-cuts-murkowski-collins/

[calguy]

1. They'll all fold and vote yes on the bill.

[emulatorloo]

4. Collins maybe. Murkowsky no.

[Bobstandard]

2. "Win over." What a joke.

They have always been in the bag for Trump and willingly helping to destroy this country. Too obvious. And so sad.

[emulatorloo]

3. " Murkowski Votes to Convict President Donald J. Trump"

Yeah right, Murkowski has always been ‘in the bag for Trump.’ /s

https://www.murkowski.senate.gov/press/release/murkowski-votes-to-convict-president-donald-j-trump

U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) issued the following statement after voting to convict President Donald J. Trump on charges of "incitement of insurrection" over the January 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol:

“On January 13, when the U.S. House of Representatives impeached former President Donald J. Trump for a second time, I committed to upholding my oath as a U.S. Senator—to listen to each side impartially, review all the facts, and then decide how I would vote. I have done that and after listening to the trial this past week, I have reached the conclusion that President Trump’s actions were an impeachable offense and his course of conduct amounts to incitement of insurrection as set out in the Article of Impeachment.

“The facts make clear that the violence and desecration of the Capitol that we saw on January 6 was not a spontaneous uprising. President Trump had set the stage months before the 2020 election by stating repeatedly that the election was rigged, casting doubt into the minds of the American people about the fairness of the election. After the election, when he lost by 7 million votes, he repeatedly claimed that the election was stolen and subjected to widespread fraud. At the same time, election challenges were filed in dozens of courts. Sixty-one different courts – including many judges nominated by President Trump himself – ruled against him.

“President Trump did everything in his power to stay in power. When the court challenges failed, he turned up the pressure on state officials and his own Department of Justice. And when these efforts failed, he turned to his supporters. He urged his supporters to come to Washington, D.C. on January 6 to ‘Stop the Steal’ of an election that had not been stolen. The speech he gave on that day was intended to stoke passions in a crowd that the President had been rallying for months. They were prepared to march on the Capitol and he gave them explicit instructions to do so.

More at link.

[Bobstandard]

5. Even a stopped clock, etc. not

[emulatorloo]

15. Yeah I don't think you really know much about Murkowsky. Most definitely not MAGA.

Sees Trump for exactly what he is.

[Bobstandard]

17. She's an enabler

Yeah, she voted to impeach—a long time ago. More recently she voted to approve twenty of 21 Cabinet appointees. She’s now a go along to get along person.

[emulatorloo]

24. Confidently incorrect n/t

[travelingthrulife]

20. Oh please.

[emulatorloo]

25. Oh please yrself. Probably best to be informed before you make 'definitive' statements.

[cadoman]

21. Murkowski is their Sinema/Fetterman

Makes sense to court them because the repukes hate their guts and a bit of courtesy & friendliness goes a long way.

[dlk]

6. Do thy understand that in many ways they will be voting themselves out if a job?

With power consolidated in the executive branch, the Senate will become toothless, and superfluous, and the very red six on SCOTUS will not save them.

[Irish_Dem]

26. They will be rubbe rstamps who get full salary, pension, healthcare, bribes, insider trading $, etc.

They don't have to do any work, but live a life of prestige and luxury.

Not a bad gig if you can get it.
Of course you must have no morality and no shame.

[dlk]

27. No doubt

n/t

[MLAA]

7. They always get Collins with little to no effort.

[paleotn]

8. Collins backs this pile of stinking shit and she's done.

Even Maine's D2 will send her ass packing.

[Wiz Imp]

9. There is absolutely no chance of Collins, Murkowski, Johnson & Paul all voting for the bill.

To get Murkowski and Collins guarantees that Johnson & Paul will vote NO. And vice versa. Note they can lose 3 votes and still pass the bill, but they have to decide how they can most easily get to 50 votes (without losing the house). I would not try to guess what the bill they pass will ultimately look like, but I bet whatever it looks like it will only get 50 votes.

[nycbos]

10. Murkowski has shown more courage than Collins.

[travelingthrulife]

19. If she had courage she would have left the GOP years ago. She has none.

[mdbl]

11. They can lose 5 repug votes and still pass it thanks to stupid voters.

Why are the so worried about those two?

[BumRushDaShow]

13. There are only 53 Republicans in the Senate

If ALL Democrats (which is 45) + the 2 (I)s who caucus with Democrats vote "no", then if the (R)s lose 4, they lose and if they lose 3, then they need Vance to break the tie.

They already know that SPAWN of Ron Paul is a hard "no" and there is a strong possibility (although he is usually a wimp-ass in the end) that Ron Johnson will be a "no". Lose Collins and Murkowski too and the bill is DOA.

[mdbl]

16. One can only hope.

[BamaRefugee]

12. This is just theater, and by theater I mean PUPPET SHOW.

[Rebl2]

14. Little

running Josh will give in I am sure-what a wimp.

[travelingthrulife]

18. Same old tired routine. Traitors, all of the GOP

[sakabatou]

22. Could Collins be concerned?

[BumRushDaShow]

23. She's up for reelection in 2026

so her "concern meter" might have shifted up a notch.