- Joined
- Oct 22, 2010
- Messages
- 23,220
For all the takes that this will cost them -
looking at 2009 (Obama's first term) this seems like a replay. The stimulus is better this time, but much delayed and less than what was promised, and all because of intra-party negotiation. Republicans looked dead in the water in early 2009 and are in disarray now, but came back strongly by the midterms. So if the wipeout happens, it will follow that pattern.
IMO, that's good, it shows voters responding to a party abandoning them.
I am not so sure this will happen. Joe Biden got elected in a surge of popular support, the most votes ever, on the platform of not being Donald Trump- every word about his agenda ("biggest presidency since FDR") was for the rubes who read and believe stuff like that. This article makes a good case that the primary driving force in voting is not material interests, but negative polarisation - hatred of the other side. As long as the GOP remains associated with Trump, that will remain a strong motivator for Democratic turnout. This is combined with the changing base of the party - richer, whiter, more educated - which in itself means they are less supportive and less badly affected by things like the minimum wage not passing. This negative polarisation and changing base demographics were the twin pillars of the Clinton campaign, and what the Clinton project has been since the 90s. It failed in 2016 because she is such an extraordinarily hated person. But since Trump, the party has been very successful.
looking at 2009 (Obama's first term) this seems like a replay. The stimulus is better this time, but much delayed and less than what was promised, and all because of intra-party negotiation. Republicans looked dead in the water in early 2009 and are in disarray now, but came back strongly by the midterms. So if the wipeout happens, it will follow that pattern.
IMO, that's good, it shows voters responding to a party abandoning them.
I am not so sure this will happen. Joe Biden got elected in a surge of popular support, the most votes ever, on the platform of not being Donald Trump- every word about his agenda ("biggest presidency since FDR") was for the rubes who read and believe stuff like that. This article makes a good case that the primary driving force in voting is not material interests, but negative polarisation - hatred of the other side. As long as the GOP remains associated with Trump, that will remain a strong motivator for Democratic turnout. This is combined with the changing base of the party - richer, whiter, more educated - which in itself means they are less supportive and less badly affected by things like the minimum wage not passing. This negative polarisation and changing base demographics were the twin pillars of the Clinton campaign, and what the Clinton project has been since the 90s. It failed in 2016 because she is such an extraordinarily hated person. But since Trump, the party has been very successful.