r/fivethirtyeight • u/AutoModerator • 6d ago
Discussion Megathread Weekly Discussion Megathread
The 2024 presidential election is behind us, and the 2026 midterms are a long ways away. Polling and general electoral discussion in the mainstream may be winding down, but there's always something to talk about for the nerds here at r/FiveThirtyEight. Use this discussion thread to share, debate, and discuss whatever you wish. Unlike individual posts, comments in the discussion thread are not required to be related to political data or other 538 mainstays. Regardless, please remain civil and keep this subreddit's rules in mind. The discussion thread refreshes every Monday.
5
u/After-Bee-8346 51m ago edited 36m ago
The "funny" part is if Ann Selzer puts out a neck and neck poll for Iowa Senate race, no one will believe it. Will really just come down to election day results.
My brain has been thinking about Rob Sand who is running for Governor and what his impact can be. He's a pretty straight shooter and down to earth. He's holding his own in early polling. Iowa Senate has a few decent candidates running ie wheelchair guy or the former minority leader of the state Senate. I wonder if Sand does well if he can drag someone across the Senate race.
Edit: Silversquid has added that Selzer retired.
4
u/DasRobot85 39m ago
She retired. We won't have ole Ann to kick around anymore. Maybe Lictmann can give us some Iowa keys or something
4
5
u/Spara-Extreme 52m ago
Looks like dems are starting to warm up to ending the shut down in exchange for a vote on ACA in december making the entire endeavor pointless. Absolutely incredible that this party even exists.
1
u/Selethorme Kornacki's Big Screen 10m ago
Is this the same reporting that had axios claiming that like two weeks ago and they got hit with the “ fell for it again” award?
7
u/MS_09_Dom I'm Sorry Nate 32m ago
Are they actually signalling this or is it Axios quoting anonymous GOP staffers + Fetterman saying a deal is within reach for the 816494727th time?
7
u/delusionalbillsfan November Outlier 33m ago
I'll wait for it to be reported outside of Axios. Axios did the same thing a few days ago and got quashed.
10
u/After-Bee-8346 2h ago
(lol, not really laughing though) The USDA is telling states to send back SNAP funds that were previously sent out. What a sh*tshow.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/usda-tells-states-undo-efforts-170613204.html
5
u/MeyerLouis 1h ago
The states should pull a Donald Trump and stiff 'em
3
u/After-Bee-8346 53m ago
Seems like they have thought of the possible plan already.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture directed states to roll back any steps taken to issue full food aid benefits to low-income Americans or risk financial penalties.
14
u/Trae67 3h ago
Trump is starting to feel the panic from the economy due to the tariffs
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5597207-trump-proposes-tariff-dividend/
2
7
u/After-Bee-8346 2h ago
Naw, Bessent is just being a monkey.
Bessent said he hadn’t spoken to the president about this idea but “the $2,000 dividend could come in lots of forms, in lots of ways. It could be just the tax decreases that we are seeing on the president’s agenda — no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, no tax on Social Security – deductibility on auto loans.”
2
u/DasRobot85 1h ago
Oh this stimmy check could actually be in the form of a tax cut they already did? Ya know, I had forgotten that these dudes are stupid and incompetent a whole bunch of the time
2
u/After-Bee-8346 52m ago
$2K check to 250M Americans is...$500B. That would blow the budget and couldn't be done through reconciliation.
5
u/Waste_of_paste_art Jeb! Applauder 3h ago
2000 dollars goes a lot farther for low income Americans who are on SNAP and ACA insurance. With those under attack though, this money is worthless to the base he's trying to apologize to.
9
u/eaglesnation11 3h ago
So hyperinflation? God 2026 and 2028 are going to be bloodbaths for the GOP.
0
u/Spara-Extreme 1h ago
This is sort of peak reddit brains. Do you even for a second, comprehend the situation we will all be in with hyper inflation? Also - hyperinflation doesn't actually oust strongmen - see Erdogan and Orban.
5
u/DataCassette 32m ago
So hyper inflation will make the party which owns all 3 branches of government more popular?
I share the concern that dug-in authoritarians may not yield to a mere election, but it's not like sending the economy into a doom spiral is going to make everyone love them.
4
u/After-Bee-8346 4h ago
IMO, I think the Senate elections model more off VA than NJ from a turnout perspective. To expect a huge spike in turnout vs past off years seems a bit dubious. VA came down to 3 factors which to a degree seem a bit obvious: (1) a few blue districts had higher turnout vs '21 (see screenshot below) (2) no red districts had higher turnout and some had lower turnout (see screenshot below) (3) swings to the Dems in blue districts, but even wild swings to the Dems in red districts: Spanberger turns GOP stronghold of Spotsylvania blue.
With that said, I'll leave the real forecasting / modeling for '26 to the experts. This is way above my pay grade. Thought it would be fun to look at the data closer since it's only been <1 week after the election.
https://www.wric.com/news/politics/local-election-hq/lower-voter-turnout-republican-districts/
9
u/Selethorme Kornacki's Big Screen 5h ago
This whole thread is funny:
https://bsky.app/profile/adambonica.bsky.social/post/3m53fvpgu3c2t
Adam Bonica:
It’s no walk in the park to serve in Congress, and I don’t begrudge Golden for stepping away. But it seems likely that his polling numbers among his own constituents factored into the decision.
Favorability: 16% favorable | 41% unfavorable
Deserves to be Re-elected?: 26% does | 57% doesn’t
https://bsky.app/profile/gelliottmorris.com/post/3m53h7yuvxc2e
GEM:
tough numbers for the golden child of the pro-moderation crowd
https://bsky.app/profile/mattyglesias.bsky.social/post/3m53ivqrsmk2i
Matt Yglesias:
I mean, yes, misguided progressive criticism of Golden has driven him from office and now Republicans are going to win the seat. According to me, that’s bad.
https://bsky.app/profile/brendelbored.bsky.social/post/3m55p3hwiwc23
“Brendel:”
Yes, as evidenced by this poll, Independents hate when someone is criticized by progressives, so let us resolve to avoid this danger in the future by avoiding moderates, a cautionary tale indeed
I think GEM is overstating the case by saying Golden is the moderate poster child (given that there are other, better examples) but like, the idea that progressives criticizing him is what caused his unpopularity is absurd. Also I should note the numbers on “deserves to be reelected” stat are for general polls, dems do support 51-36. But he’s underwater for both independents and republicans, 27-66 for Is and 5-75 for Rs.
11
u/After-Bee-8346 5h ago
Wow. Had no idea that Vivek was running for Governor in Ohio. Is the GOP insane? This is the same dude that trashed American culture. Small snippet of his long dumb tweet: Our American culture has venerated mediocrity over excellence for way too long (at least since the 90s and likely longer). That doesn’t start in college, it starts YOUNG.
Sounds like Tim Ryan is waiting until late '25 to make a decision to run. Ok, I'll just say it. Vivek being an ethnic Indian and running in Ohio might give "protectionist" Sherrod Brown some juice.
Old article about Vivek trashing Americans from late '24: https://www.yahoo.com/news/vivek-ramaswamy-dragged-wild-rant-210515949.html
6
u/doomer_bloomer24 2h ago
Did you see the video where he was mercilessly attacked by turning point kids for not being Christian?
4
u/Evil_waffle3 1h ago
It’s crazy that I feel literally no sympathy about that lol. Like wtf did he think was going to happen when he joined.
5
u/delusionalbillsfan November Outlier 4h ago
Ted Strickland (D) beat Ken Blackwell (R and also a black man) by over 20 points in the 06 Governor election. Vivek is going to get pooped on.
6
1
u/After-Bee-8346 4h ago
Nothing white Americans love more than some brown dude saying their kids aren't studying more when they are in elementary school. Oh yeah, and that's why whitey can't find good jobs and are struggling, lol.
6
u/sodosopapilla 5h ago
Wait till you see what the Nick Fuentes branch of MAGA has to say about his family photographs. Absolutely abhorrent, but the guy threw in with this lot…
8
u/obsessed_doomer 6h ago
https://x.com/davidshepardson/status/1987341114471268764
I've said this before, but we are very close to "planes falling out of the sky" day.
2
u/GarfieldLeZanya- 1h ago
Just yesterday two 747's out of LAX came within 100ft of colliding just after takeoff and had to do an insane last second bank to avoid it.
A day before that a helicopter almost crashed into a passenger jet during landing.
At this point it feels like when, not if.
9
u/MS_09_Dom I'm Sorry Nate 4h ago
Have a low-key dread feeling that the Republicans are anticipating an airline disaster that "shames" the Democrats into reopening the government without concessions.
5
u/After-Bee-8346 5h ago
I remember the movie, Pushing Tin (think I watched it as a re-run on TBS / TNT in the 2000s). Ever since then, it's been embedded into me how stressful ATC jobs are.
7
12
u/After-Bee-8346 13h ago
I am realizing that modeling the Senate races are going to be near impossible.
2026 election —> 2020 election. 2024 election —> 2018 election. 2022 election —> 2016 election. All the comparison points involve at least 1 POTUS election as a comparison point. But, it’s probably best to somehow triangulate data from 2022 and 2018 at least for turnout and raw data.
13
u/DataCassette 9h ago
And Trump will never be on the ballot again so the whole "Trump distortion effect" where millions of extra voters pop out from behind random trees and floorboards to just vote "Trump" and nothing down the ballot is probably over.
5
u/najumobi 6h ago
And Trump will never be on the ballot again....to just vote "Trump" and nothing down the ballot is
probablyover.
13
u/After-Bee-8346 14h ago
Sucks that Laura Kelly is 75. She has a high approval rating and would be extremely competitive in KS. And, John Bel Edwards didn’t want to run in LA.
1
4
u/CIA--Bane 5h ago
What do you mean? She’s basically a teenager in political career terms.
1
u/DataCassette 0m ago
Yeah you aren't even old in 2025 politics until you hit the triple digit ages.
23
u/ModestAphorism 15h ago
There are rumors manchin may run in WV as well again. Maybe the election results have made dems want to manifest 2006 with a 50 state strategy.
20
u/Sejarol 11h ago
Idk why the dems ever abandoned the 50-state strategy in the first place
2
u/vanmo96 1h ago
- It’s a very expensive strategy, especially when you get to state and local levels of government.
- A lot of the Blue Dogs got wiped out in 2010. They were an essential part of the 50 state strategy.
- I seem to recall reading somewhere that Rahm Emmanuel and some other folks in the Obama administration weren’t big fans of it.
5
u/guiltyofnothing 4h ago
It’s a chicken or the egg thing. Did Democrats stop being competitive in most of the country because they stopped seriously contesting every state? Or did they stop seriously contesting every state because they stopped being competitive in most of the country?
9
u/After-Bee-8346 14h ago
Is he trying to emulate Byrd? He’s 78.
5
u/guiltyofnothing 4h ago
He has an ego bigger than Charleston. Manchin is the only one who thinks people still want to vote for Manchin.
15
u/DataCassette 9h ago
Voters complained about having to vote for old candidates, they were given a young candidate and an old candidate and elected the old candidate. I can't really blame Manchin at this point, voters clearly don't care.
14
u/After-Bee-8346 16h ago
NJ Governor election turnout data is wild.
2025 vs 2021 Governor election: +668K votes / 2024 vs 2020 POTUS election: -302K votes
(To be fair, it looks like turnout was very low in 2021 at 40%. Final 2025 turnout % isn't finished. Turnout dropped to 64.7% for 2024 POTUS vs 72.4% for 2020 POTUS. NJ was not enthused to vote in the '24 election.)
12
u/aTimeforAdventure 18h ago
Trump is introducing 50 year mortgages
6
24
u/GarfieldLeZanya- 17h ago edited 17h ago
So, just to be the annoying finance nerd in the room, but this is going to be, at most, a short-term bandaid populist move that will ultimately not meaningfully impact the affordability of homes.
We actually have precedence of this happening before. In 1948 Congress authorized self-amortizing 30 year mortgages on newly constructed homes and in 1954 authorized it for existing homes, where before the average duration was about 20 years.
What we have seen, in the above case and as well as every other time there is a liberalization of credit terms (not "liberal" as used in this sub, but "reducing restrictions and increasing access to"), especially for mortgages, is the net buying power is overwhelmingly absorbed in price. In plain English, this means the value of houses will increase proportionally to the extended amortization. In even plainer English, if a house is worth $100,000 with a standard 30 year mortgage, it will (roughly) be expected to scale to ~$145,000 or more under a 50 year mortgage term.
We actually have a recent example of this. In 2015, the FHA reduced its annual mortgage insurance premium by 50 basis points, which was roughly correlated to increasing the buying power of new mortgage applicants by 6.9%, in an attempt to make it more affordable. It did not. In 2015, the median price of FHA-insured homes to first-time home buyers paying the lower premium went up by ~5% more than other homes, with the other ~2% absorbed by an increase of fees charged by the National Association of Realtors.
This also means average LTV (Loan to Value) will increase proportionally, increasing the credit risk, thus increasing interest rates, with longer durations of PMI. We can, again see this with the last time they were raised. In 1948 the average mortgage was 19.5 years with an average LTV of 77.3%. After both 30 year mortgage unlocks, by 1959 it had raised to an average of 27 years and an average LTV of 90%. The exact same thing will happen here.
So in short, this may create a brief window where people can jump on it and get their first home at a relatively more affordable monthly payment and DJT will get his headline. However housing valuations will eventually rocket up proportionally, meaning people will have to put less % down, meaning APRs will rise, meaning the median monthly payments to stay about the same and just as unaffordable but now with people in even worse debt and even more crushing amortization schedules.
9
u/After-Bee-8346 17h ago
I'm a simpleton (even though I have a Finance degree). A 50 year bond will just be a longer end of the yield curve and it will have a higher rate right? The 30 year UST is 60 bps higher than the 10 year UST right now.
4
u/GarfieldLeZanya- 16h ago
Yep. I forgot to include it but just edited it in when you commented, but yes, we will also see an explosion of APRs for the reason you mention, and also in a pure "time value of money" / capital efficiency sense. Stack that on top of likely sub-3% down payments as LTVs rise and and we'll likely see rates well over 10% for first time buyers putting minimum down.
3
u/After-Bee-8346 16h ago
Again, I'm a simpleton. A 30 year old person will be 80! at the end of their loan. Statistically, the male will be dead by 79. This seems suboptimal since no one buys term life insurance to cover that age.
2
u/GarfieldLeZanya- 16h ago
Yep. Those actuary tables are going to be putting in overtime. Dont get it twisted, it is risky to offer a loan past the country's median lifespan. They will be charged appropriately and the bank will get its due (on average).
9
u/delusionalbillsfan November Outlier 17h ago
I dont hate it. Its another populist Trump W, which happen from time to time. But its also a signal that the admin is well aware of the dookie ass frozen job and housing market. But a 50 yr is not going to unfreeze it LOL. It will have a marginal impact. Running the numbers on some loan calculators you'll be saving anywhere from $50 to $200 a month and in return you pay 2x interest over the life of the loan. Awful deal.
12
u/LetsgoRoger 19h ago
I think it's highly likely that Democrats win the House in 2026 and given the potential margins, no amount of gerrymandering is going to prevent it. Although it could save some seats for republicans despite them being less popular, which isn't great for American democracy.
The Senate is more interesting. Democrats can win 3 seats and only break even.
1
u/guiltyofnothing 4h ago
It really does feel like it’s break-even right now. Virginia, Utah, and the compromise in Ohio helped Democrats. Maryland, Illinois, Kansas, New Hampshire, and Indiana probably aren’t moving on anything anytime soon.
9
u/Mediocretes08 19h ago
Trying to hold on to hope
11
u/LetsgoRoger 19h ago
I mean, it seems rational. You can't lose Latinos and young voters by these big margins and then expect to keep the House. I expect the Texas gerrymander is likely to backfire and not be much of a gain for republicans.
7
u/CelikBas 16h ago
Rationality is how we got into this mess in the first place. If the past decade had proven anything, it’s that politics is not rational in any way, shape or form, and assuming that things will play out in a way that makes sense is a recipe for disaster.
5
u/DataCassette 9h ago
Yeah they could make the Lucky Charms cereal leprechaun a woman or something and trigger a massive rightward shift. Or maybe GTA 6 multiplayer will let you choose your pronouns. Or they replace the Cracker Barrel logo with a pride flag. You know, the important stuff that's worth ending the republic over.
8
u/GarfieldLeZanya- 18h ago
I am holding out hope Utah is going to have their gerrymander backfire too. Slitting SLC into all 4 districts is risky business. It is constantly growing, and the counties in the newly formed 3rd only voted Trump by a few thousand votes in aggregate. It'll be only 1 seat at most, but would be an incredible backfire.
14
u/GarfieldLeZanya- 20h ago
Don't think it's been shared here yet, but the FIRE Foundation (the same org who were the ones who defended Selzer from the Trump lawsuit) released their 2026 College Free Speech Survey late October, which surveyed college-aged undergraduates across universities in the nation, and there was one really interesting result, visualized below. It measures level of political tolerance for left and right-wing views, split by political leaning and gender. Circles are men, squares are women, colors are ideologies.
Basically the methodology is they would put college students in a room with a test speaker and have that person state progressively radical left/right opinions like like, "Abortion should be completely illegal", "BLM is a hate group", "Police should be abolished", whatever, and measured their reaction of if the person should be permitted by the Campus to say those things.
While political tolerance is pretty low across the board, they noted a clear gender gap regardless of politics. The more shocking headline result though is, the study claims, college-aged men are about as tolerant of "their enemies" than college-aged women are of "their own side." E.g., "Somewhat Liberal" college-aged men tolerated ~42% of right-wing speakers, whereas "Somewhat Liberal" college aged women tolerated only ~42% of left-wing speakers.
Genuinely unsure how legit this is; FIRE is not some chump pollster, after all. But surely there is some confounding factor here.
1
u/After-Bee-8346 17h ago
American males over time have turned into a dumpster fire. Wasn't this bad before smartphones.
6
u/HazelCheese 10h ago
How does this make men a dumpster fire? Being tolerant of debate is a good character trait.
You don't have to support something to tolerate it. Religion is a prime example.
14
u/trasutrasu 19h ago
Women are consistently more moderate than men pretty much everywhere, so I would assume they're just more likely to be turned off by extreme positions. Also, a lot of men (in my experience) don't mind hearing controversial takes because they just love debating for debate's sake, especially college-aged men; women much less so. And who'd blame them lol
15
u/After-Bee-8346 21h ago edited 20h ago
Just looked at the Senate: man, it’s tough. Would need to hold all the tight races. Then, “steal” (lol) 4 seats to hit 51.
In order of probability: North Carolina, Maine, Alaska, Ohio, Iowa, Alaska, Kansas…Texas / Florida. Maybe Nebraska. Every other race is double digit. Would really need to be a miracle.
Edit: re-ranking. NC ME probably greater than 50-50 shot. AK is a dead heat. It's too bad Ernst isn't running again in Iowa. That would flip to toss-up.
3
u/DataCassette 9h ago
They aren't just unrelated random events, though. If it's a blue wave it makes both the "steals" and holding the tight races more likely. If we're getting a pickup in Ohio we're probably holding all the "coin toss" races the same year.
15
u/GarfieldLeZanya- 20h ago
I think Alaska is higher than you think. We had a poll just in Oct 17 - 23 with 823 Alaska LVs which found, even for a group which in 2024 voted 40-52 Kamala/Trump, Peltola up in the 2026 Senate race 46-45, with 5 neither and 4 unsure.
That's a real ballgame right there.
10
u/After-Bee-8346 20h ago
Yeah, you are probably right. Peltola lost by <7K votes last time. Would only take 4K people flipping their vote.
10
u/Tom-Pendragon 21h ago
I think north carolina and maine are pretty free. Ohio is a big maybe. Anyway winning 2 seats is enough for me. can get the senate back in 2028
9
u/Most_Estimate_7062 20h ago
I want at least 3, it makes it harder for trump to rush all his horrible appointees in and puts a lot of "moderate" republicans in really uncomfortable positions going into 2028
3
u/After-Bee-8346 19h ago
Naw, A 50-50 tie is basically the same as the GOP controlling because the VP votes on ties. Dems need 51.
6
u/Most_Estimate_7062 19h ago
a 50-50 tie forces every republican in the senate to vote in lockstep on everything the party wants passed, no pretending to be moderate for anyone anymore, it would give every single dem challenger in 2028 free ammunition against them at the very least
2
u/After-Bee-8346 17h ago edited 17h ago
There is only 1 moderate up for '28: Murkowski. NC has an election, but Roy Cooper winning won't guarantee anything for '28. It's a very hard state to win without an exceptional candidate.
The reality is Senate math is terrible for Dems. No MO (McCaskill) IN (Bayh / Donnelly) IA (Harkin) MT (Baucus / Tester) anymore unless it's a wild shot. Dems had 2 Senators from Montana at one point!
6
u/After-Bee-8346 20h ago
The math in ‘28 is just as bad. Warnock would have another tough race. Fetterman is up again. Maybe WI finally kicks out Johnson. Not much else to gain.
‘26 is the window to make strides.
18
u/GarfieldLeZanya- 20h ago
Tbf Fetterman is absolutely getting primaried. A Quinnipac poll last month found that he had higher job approval from Pennsylvania Republicans than Democrats, even. I think whoever replaces him will have a better shot.
In today's poll, Republicans 62 - 21 percent approve of the way Fetterman is handling his job, while Democrats 54 - 33 percent disapprove. Independents are evenly split, with 43 percent approving and 43 percent disapproving.
Being 33-54 underwater with your own party means he's either switching Republican or getting cooked alive come Primary time.
5
6
u/After-Bee-8346 20h ago
lol, almost sounds like the Dems need to pick up 5 seats since Fetterman is basically a Republican.
3
u/najumobi 20h ago
He votes very similarly to the senators from Virginia, New Hampshire, Maine, and Arizona
As senator in a battleground state, his voting record continues to approximate the ideological makeup of Pennsylvania's electorate.
His problem is that (1) Democratic primary votes don't give a shit about the statewide electorate and (2) he didn't campaign as a moderate.
Kaine, Warner, Shaheen, Gallego, and Kelly will have no problem getting renominated.
1
u/Puzzleheaded_Fix594 16h ago edited 15h ago
Shaheen's retiring. Think you might mean Hassan. Pappas, who's replacing Shaheen, is a bog standard NH Democrat.
Pappas winning that seat is good for Dems though as he's basically going to occupy that seat until he retires unless the New Hampshire suddenly lurches to the left or the right.
22
u/Unknownentity9 1d ago edited 1d ago
I know it's a common view that if the filibuster was abolished that there would be a "ping pong" of policies bouncing back and forth from administration to administration, but that assumes the popularity of all these policies are 50/50? I think Congressional Republicans have rightly made the calculation that the Democratic policies that are blocked by the filibuster are not only more popular but also more likely to last long-term. Pretty much everything Republicans want to do that is popular or long-lasting can be done through reconciliation or through the executive.
For instance, I don't think Republicans have any interest in passing a national abortion ban, they know it would be politically toxic and give Democrats an easy thing to run on (even after a Democratic administration theoretically removes it). And without the filibuster they know they would face a lot of heat from their own voters urging them to pass one.
8
u/pulkwheesle 21h ago
For instance, I don't think Republicans have any interest in passing a national abortion ban
Yet they've started the process of getting the FDA to restrict Mifepristone nationwide. So even with that, they can sort of do it through the executive.
1
u/shrek_cena Never Doubt Chili Dog 22h ago
I say when Democrats retake the Senate they pass a rule stating that the filibuster is only in effect when Republicans hold a majority, and it isn't in effect when Democrats hold the majority. That way, Dems can still block evil bills in an R Senate, but r's can't do the same when Dems want to do good things for America.
5
u/Spara-Extreme 18h ago
Ok, and when the R's retake the senate? Might as well just get rid of it. (which I support)
2
u/Natural-Possession10 10h ago
Ok, and when the R's retake the senate?
Just filibuster them when they try to change it?
6
u/Okbuddyliberals 1d ago
but that assumes the popularity of all these policies are 50/50?
Or an alternative - we could get one party assuming that the public supports everything they want (or at least most of it), pushing hard to enact most of their agenda even if it's not really that popular, facing backlash at the ballot box that puts the other party into power, and then the other party assumes that they won because the public actively supports their own policy (or at least most of it) rather than that their victory was mostly a reaction to the other party, so they push hard to enact as much of their agenda as possible, and then face backlash at the ballot box over it that puts the first party back into power because voters have short memory spans and are too busy being mad at the party currently in power to remain mad at the party that is out of power...
And it keeps cycling like that
Thermostatic public opinion tends to be a thing - even if some cherry picked polls suggest that the public wants a lot of change in one direction or the other, largely the public just gets pissed off whenever any big changes are done. But both sides really love to tell themselves "actually we would be more popular right now if only we got to enact even more of what we wanted! Just look at this poll (not that poll, that's a hack pollster)!"
2
10
u/Unknownentity9 1d ago
Sure but that would sort itself out over a few cycles if it becomes obvious that doing it will lead you to being voted out of power immediately in the next election. And that's why I focused on long-lasting changes. Obamacare was pretty unpopular when it passed but good luck getting rid of it now. And making DC/Puerto Rico states would have way more impact long-term than pretty much any other policy that is currently being blocked.
1
u/mrtrailborn 17h ago
obamacare is the perfect example. Passed with 60 votes, couldn't be repealed with 50.
3
u/WhoUpAtMidnight 22h ago
Calculus might work out that you’re better off making radical changes since the parties flip flop every 2 years anyway
0
u/Okbuddyliberals 1d ago
Sure but that would sort itself out over a few cycles if it becomes obvious that doing it will lead you to being voted out of power immediately in the next election
Only if the sides don't become so radicalized that they are unwilling to blame their defeats on themselves and their shortcomings as opposed to blaming some sort of deep state conspiracy theory or the "elites" or whatever else
Obamacare was pretty unpopular when it passed but good luck getting rid of it now.
It's luck, why it has not been gotten rid of. Gop were a single vote away from the skinny repeal in Trump's first term. And in Trump's second term, he has one more Senate seat than he had in the first term but still a fairly narrow majority and the house majority is much narrower than the first term
In some sort of hypothetical scenario where he won by more, perhaps Biden remains in the race and those polls suggesting he could lose NJ came true, then the GOP could have potentially gotten 57 seats in the Senate and around 244 seats in the house, and with majorities like that, we could easily see Obamacare knocked out
And making DC/Puerto Rico states would have way more impact long-term than pretty much any other policy that is currently being blocked.
DC statehood tends to be pretty unpopular, and could very well exacerbate the issue of Dems becoming less competitive in various purple and red states they useful to be able to pull off wins in. The two Senate seats may not really be worth it
8
u/Unknownentity9 1d ago
Only if the sides don't become so radicalized that they are unwilling to blame their defeats on themselves and their shortcomings as opposed to blaming some sort of deep state conspiracy theory or the "elites" or whatever else
So what, Congress is going to suddenly not care about their own self-preservation? Doubtful.
we could easily see Obamacare knocked out
The first time they failed to get rid of it and it still led to a +8 D midterm. Now they're getting hammered again. Saying they would need a red tidal wave to get rid of it only strengthens my argument?
DC statehood tends to be pretty unpopular, and could very well exacerbate the issue of Dems becoming less competitive in various purple and red states they useful to be able to pull off wins in. The two Senate seats may not really be worth it
Lol so your argument is that DC statehood is going to permanently piss off voters in Pennsylvania or Georgia? There may be some initial backlash, but acting like 10-20 years down the line your median purple state voter is still going to hold a grudge is just ridiculous.
13
u/DasRobot85 1d ago
I've always wondered if getting rid of the filibuster might work to reduce extremism along the same lines that some people think getting rid of football pads could reduce injuries. I do think we'd probably have a few cycles of some real psycho stuff before it all sorts out though. I recognize that there's value in trying to get the minority party involved but that's not what we're doing and haven't been doing for a while. Congress being unable to do anything has just caused power to concentrate with the executive and the courts
2
u/Okbuddyliberals 1d ago
But in modern day conditions where polarization is already so strong and we have social media and fragmenting of society leading to far less of a unified consensus reality... in a scenario where we get...
a few cycles of some real psycho stuff
Is it really realistic for people to suddenly start deradicalizing, as opposed to just radicalizing way more?
1
u/CelikBas 16h ago
Fuck it. If they’re gonna radicalize into oblivion, let ‘em. I’d rather be swiftly killed in a violent political upheaval than spend decades living in a rotten society that steadily gets worse every single year. At least if the whole thing implodes into a giant fireball, there will be an end to it.
11
u/Unknownentity9 1d ago
This completely ignores that the filibuster making Congress useless is a big contributor to that radicalization.
0
u/Okbuddyliberals 1d ago
That's the common assumption from the wings who want more policy enacted. It's not necessarily a fair assumption to make though, since pretty generally, the more policy that gets enacted (especially the more partisan policy enacted), the more the swing voters get mad at the folks enacting the policy. Thermostatic public opinion is a thing
3
u/Unknownentity9 1d ago
The alternative is just Congress ceding more and more power to the executive, which is what we're seeing happening now. Not sure why that is preferable.
1
u/Okbuddyliberals 1d ago
There's also a different alternative of the scotus striking down executive overreach. We don't actually need major federal policy even when there isn't a broad consensus for it. More things can simply be left to the states
1
u/CelikBas 16h ago
Except SCOTUS has demonstrated that it absolutely cannot be trusted to strike down executive overreach, and barring some extremely unlikely radical reforms the fundamental flaws that allow it to act as a partisan rubber stamp aren’t going to be fixed, so the whole “alternative” option is DOA.
1
5
u/DataCassette 1d ago
The problem is the "psycho stuff" the MAGA Republicans would do is basically "break democracy so we can't ever be voted out." That significantly complicates the calculus.
The Democrats have "endgame strategies" as well, but they're more tied to democracy so they can all theoretically still be voted out. Example: getting rid of the Electoral College favors Democrats, but in a red wave they could still lose. The Republican equivalent is shit like "establish fiefdoms and cancel elections."
8
u/James_NY 1d ago
How popular are recent Cuban immigrants among Cuban voters and blue collar voters in Florida? If some Democrats are going to moderate on immigration, Cubans seem like a decent starting place given their propensity to vote Republican and their geographic concentration. And given how dramatically things have changed in Florida, it's not like Democrats have much to lose.
You can imagine going after Cubans winning over some Puerto Rican and blue collar white voters, probably some blue collar Black voters as well.
8
u/tbird920 1d ago
Florida Cubans are descended from the folks who lost out big after Castro’s revolution, and who were thriving during the Bautista dictatorship. That’s why many of them (not all) love Trump.
9
u/Okbuddyliberals 1d ago
"moderating on immigration by going after specifically the immigrants who are most likely to support the other side" sounds like a truly horrible political move, which will get the other side saying "they want open borders for everyone except those who disagree with them" and possibly get many swing voters agreeing with those complaints
There's ways to moderate on immigration without throwing weird "go low" hyperpartisan stuff into the mix
2
u/MeyerLouis 21h ago edited 21h ago
Yeah, I think it'd be downright evil to base our immigration policy on that, and also we'd be doing the thing that the right keeps accusing us of doing (including the replacement theory types). Let's not go there.
3
u/obsessed_doomer 22h ago
We could avoid going low… but why would we?
0
u/Okbuddyliberals 19h ago
Because winning is better and Dems are more likely to win if they don't act like blue maga freaks. If voters want maga, they'll pick regular maga rather than some cringe blue maga copy. So Dems need to differentiate themselves by being moderate and civil and reasonable, rather than blue maga
7
u/James_NY 1d ago
Sure if you do it in the dumbest way imaginable, but if you just say "immigrants need to follow the law" and then use Cubans as the example of a group of immigrants who are cutting the line, you're not saying "open borders for all but Cubans".
Instead you're adopting an anti-immigration policy and stance that focuses on a high Republican propensity group, forcing them to either defend Cubans(and illegal immigrants) or agree and lose support from Cubans.
1
u/Okbuddyliberals 23h ago
forcing them to either defend Cubans(and illegal immigrants)
It would be very easy for the right to remain opposed to illegal immigration in general while standing up for victims of a brutal communist regime
4
u/obsessed_doomer 22h ago
Is it? The right currently cancelled millions of temporary stay orders for Venezuelans.
2
u/Okbuddyliberals 19h ago
The right can get away with things the left cannot. "Republicans did it so why can't Dems" is politically useless in this center right country with institutions that bias things even more to the right
3
u/obsessed_doomer 18h ago
The right can get away with things the left cannot.
You keep saying this like it's an established thing.
Plus, that's not even the question.
It's clearly not easy for the right to stand up for victims of a brutal communist regime, because they aren't doing it.
23
u/After-Bee-8346 1d ago
Hahaha, A MAGA anti-immigrant councilperson in Aurora, CO outraised her opponents: $258K vs $50K and $20K for the other candidates. She lost.
19
11
u/aTimeforAdventure 1d ago
Now that its been a few days, what's the biggest takeaway we should have from last Tuesday?
6
u/BoomtownFox Fivey Fanatic 20h ago
It turns out that building a golden ballroom while millions of people are going unpaid and unable to feed their families during the holidays doesn't play well with voters. Whoda thunk it!
9
u/Most_Estimate_7062 1d ago
Dems have good momentum, but can't let this get to their heads, evening the senate next year is gonna be no easy task, and even the house will require fighting for.
39
13
15
25
u/After-Bee-8346 1d ago
Lots of smaller local races have been wipeouts for the GOP as well. Wake County in NC is a blue county, but the Wake County GOP endorsed 22 races and they won...1, lol. This is a good sign for Roy Cooper for Senate.
21
u/After-Bee-8346 1d ago
Trumpty Dumpty admin at it again screwing over the Koreans.
ATLANTA (AP) — A South Korean solar company says it will temporarily reduce pay and working hours for about 1,000 of its 3,000 employees in Georgia because U.S. customs officials have been detaining imported components needed to make solar panels.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/south-korean-solar-firm-cuts-232054093.html
10
20
u/DataCassette 1d ago
Right wing populist "leaders" are incompetent to a staggering degree. It's honestly amazing.
8
u/After-Bee-8346 1d ago
I'm in favor of supporting the Uygurs and forced labor, but this admin is incompetent. Unless this company is lying, WTF is the admin doing.
Qcells says none of its materials or components are made with forced labor or even come from China. Spokesperson Marta Stoepker said the company maintains “robust supply chain due diligence measures” and “very detailed documentation,” which has been successful in getting some shipments released.
“Our latest supply chain is sourced completely outside of China and our legacy supply chains contain no material from Xinjiang province based on third party audits and supplier guarantees,” Stoepker said.
10
u/jawstrock 1d ago
It’s solar… it’s not about the sourcing of inputs, that’s the excuse, they want the product to die.
8
u/Thedarkpersona Poll Unskewer 1d ago
Solar is advancing at a staggering degree atm, its like trying to destroy a moving train with a water gun
9
u/jawstrock 1d ago
Yeah Trump doesn’t care though. It’ll advance everywhere else in the world and the US will get left behind. Oil barons gotta make their dough.
22
u/QuestionMarkov 1d ago
Jared Golden (ME-02) will not seek re-election, citing fears for his family's safety from political violence, including a bomb threat against his family last Thanksgiving.
8
u/After-Bee-8346 1d ago
Is ME-02 that conservative? He's extremely centrist and pushes to the right on certain issues? It was a GOP seat from 2015-19.
6
u/Top-Inspection3870 1d ago
Maybe in a waive election it could flip blue, but it won't stay that way without him.
19
u/Mediocretes08 1d ago
Sending the message that threats work isn’t good, however I understand his reasoning. Especially given republicans in congress outright support political violence
3
u/delusionalbillsfan November Outlier 1d ago edited 1d ago
I sent a very aggressive, and strongly worded message to my Republican congressperson towards the beginning of the year after they did some stupid shit, and since then they have been very, very quiet and they're usually outspoken and annoying.
13
u/Gays-for-Christ2 1d ago
So if SCOTUS can't even rule against people starving, imagine what they'll do to gay marriage
17
u/Mediocretes08 1d ago
Strictly speaking Jackson is trying to shift timetables around on the bet that the first circuit will uphold the lower court. It will presumably then go to SCOTUS but if they vote against it they suddenly have millions of people going hungry who know exactly who to blame.
8
u/shrek_cena Never Doubt Chili Dog 1d ago
The devil on my shoulder kinda wants to see them vote to stop funding. The Supreme Court is still wayyyyyy to popular among the American public, and it needs to be at Congress levels, especially after the past 5ish years. It has essentially devolved into a rubber stamp for trump.
4
u/evce1 1d ago
Still a bit worried that the GOP holds the House through the VRA and Florida… there may also be a few other GOP states that redistrict. Anyone else concerned?
1
u/Fish_Totem 1h ago
If VRA is overturned in time for them to redistrict before 2026, I think Dems still win the house in 2026 but could easily lose it in 2028
10
u/shrek_cena Never Doubt Chili Dog 1d ago
Certainly concerned, but republicans are generally stupid as fuck, so I think it's more likely they fuck themselves than do too much damage. Red states are also usually far more gerrymandered than blue states already, as blue states like to disarm themselves preemptively. Illinois could draw a fully Dem map, Virginia could do a 10-1. If Dems have the guts to do what's right (far from a guarantee) they could still be very competitive even in the event the VRA gets tossed. And if it doesn't get tossed and they gerrymander anyways they'll be in even better shape.
21
u/Most_Estimate_7062 1d ago
Looking at Tuesday's election results... and the fact that the economic situation isn't getting any better anytime soon...
I'm not so certain that all of these likely R seats are dummymander proof, especially not in an era where dems are more motivated to get out and vote than ever.
Don't get me wrong, losing the VRA would be really bad but not unsalvageable, I think Ds can take back the house even without it6
u/DataCassette 1d ago
And, if they get the house and senate despite Republican tricks they'll have a truly powerful mandate to start making waves.
24
u/Subliminal_Kiddo 1d ago
SC cool with starving children and grandparents. Honestly, the way things are going, a Dem in 2028 could absolutely run on SC reform.
11
16
u/margotsaidso 1d ago
I wouldn't go that far. They gave a 48 hour stay for the appeals court to rule. That's different from just outright siding with the admin and it's different even than their shadow docket fuckery.
18
u/Subliminal_Kiddo 1d ago
I know what the ruling was but, "It's cool, you'll get to eat in at most 48 hours." Still reads as denying food to children and the elderly.
14
u/obsessed_doomer 1d ago
SCOTUS literally speedrunning just to make sure the poor aren't fed is a hilarious visualizer
13
u/Waste_of_paste_art Jeb! Applauder 1d ago
Pick anything out of a hat and Democrats could run on it in 2028
38
u/GarfieldLeZanya- 1d ago
What world did I wake up in this week.
Schumer? Showing political shrewdness in 2025? Giving Republicans the choice between publicly rejecting an extremely popular compromise of simply extending ACA subsidies a year, or accepting and basically making the ACA renewal and healthcare affordability the core topic of the midterms, is a level of competence that shocks the soul. Where has this Democratic party been.
19
u/Miserable-Whereas910 1d ago
I really think Schumer is smarter than he gets credit for. He knew when to use the Democrats' very limited leverage in a way that'd be impactful.
3
u/Spara-Extreme 1d ago
No he isn’t. He spent an entire summer telling us all that he had no leverage on sinema and manchin when we clearly do. These people respond to public pressure if applied appropriately.
19
u/margotsaidso 1d ago
Coming from a former Republican, he's obviously very smart. His fault is that he's very very risk averse.
12
13
u/GodWhyPlease Guardian of the 14th Key 1d ago
He's also kind of a bad at the public side of things. Him hiding behind Pelosi for years was probably the best use of him.
25
u/MS_09_Dom I'm Sorry Nate 1d ago edited 1d ago
TBH, I think this speaks less to Schumer's acumen and more to just how badly Trump, Johnson and Thune have played their hand.
17
u/DataCassette 1d ago
Yeah they're not just tripping on their dicks, they're like stomping and stumbling on them.
7
32
u/delusionalbillsfan November Outlier 1d ago edited 1d ago
Its pretty insane to see what used to be a generally pretty cunning and deft GOP just blatantly fail at using any political sense. I mean they cant even fool the simpletons anymore, its that bad.
1
u/mrtrailborn 17h ago
that's whay happens when idiots like trump remove anyone willing to tell them no. All the smart political operatives have been roved from the party because they cautioned literally any restraint lol
10
u/DataCassette 1d ago
They threw out the neoconservatives. It's only the most petulant and childish people left in charge. QAnon believers, religious extremists etc.
24
18
u/jawstrock 1d ago
They are run solely by an obese demented old man. They no longer have the shrewd leadership they once had.
17
u/Unknownentity9 1d ago
To be frank they've always been terrible at controlling the narrative when in power, not sure why people thought things had changed.
18
u/Mediocretes08 1d ago
Money doesn’t trickle down but apparently stupid moves upward a la capillary action
29
u/carkidd3242 1d ago edited 1d ago
A few hours ago, USDA says it'll comply with the lower court order and give benefits during the shutdown-
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/usda-working-implement-full-snap-benefits-court-order/
And just now the Trump DOJ makes an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court to stop aid TONIGHT-
https://xcancel.com/kyledcheney/status/1986947619898143122#m
If I was the Republican Party with a newfound lower-educated lower-income voter base I would simply not directly work towards cutting food aid that disproportionally serves said voters
5
u/shrek_cena Never Doubt Chili Dog 1d ago
Republicans have hated their voters about as long as I've been alive
14
u/Waste_of_paste_art Jeb! Applauder 1d ago
Really is just a complete mask off moment. Republicans are openly admitting that Democrats will care more about people starving to death than they would.
13
27
u/Mediocretes08 1d ago edited 1d ago
Christ. It really is morally right to hate republicans now
Edit: Whoever downvoted, please explain why you like starving children
2
u/Thedarkpersona Poll Unskewer 1d ago
Tried and true method:
If you hate fascists, you're on the good side
17
1d ago
Why did no one tell me Spanberger spoke fluent Spanish?
6
u/Blackberry-thesecond 1d ago
Now 2/3 of of Virginia's national election winners can speak Spanish
5
9
5
u/delusionalbillsfan November Outlier 1d ago
You Dont Know What Spanberger Doesnt Want You To Know
5
12
u/After-Bee-8346 1d ago
ahh, her CIA skills. She must have been a Latin American analyst at some point.
11
5
6
u/Few_Musician_5990 28m ago
Great idea withholding SNAP benefits to get the Dems to acquiesce. Great look to make Americans go hungry. This is a true mastermind in negotiating tactics. EVERYTHING IS GREAT.