A few had already started jumping ship a couple of months or so ago. But not because they want to tell the world that they’re sorry, but because they had already thought they saw the writing on the wall, and figured getting out early might help them in the future.
Many will deny ever supporting Netanhayu or Zionism.
Saying that, it still feels a little like counting chickens before they’re hatched.
This:
Vice President JD Vance, assessing why his Republicans fared poorly, listed four ways to bring voters back, including ending the Iran war and changing “our relationship with Israel”.
If that was to work on any level, then there is no hope for the U.S. at all.
Because there are only two options. Think of aggregate voter sentiment as being “If things are good/ok, vote incumbent. If things are bad, vote for change/the other guys”. It doesn’t matter who the ‘other guys’ are, just that they’re recognised as ‘the only alternative’.
Eg. Canada’s third largest province just elected a totally unknown conservative leader – like the ‘real’ leader stepped down a day before the election was called, and a temp got put in place… who then ‘won’ the election. That cycle wasn’t about “voting for the random temp” / supporting conservative values, it was a repudiation of the previous government. People just didn’t feel like there was any other viable alternative.
So if the dems don’t markedly improve the living conditions in the USA somehow during their term, and get people thinking “Yeah, things are good!”, they’ll be kicked out again, and replaced by whatever monstrosity the R’s have dredged out of the Trump Ocean.
That’s because D presidencies (and Congresses) have failed to meaningfully deliver for decades, so people pick the other guy by instinct. When the Dems delivered they had national politics by the balls for thirty years.
It depends on your definition of meaningful delivery. W started a hugely expensive war that Obama had to manage. He pushed trough healthcare reforms (that I am not qualified to judge) and in general kept things stable. Biden had Covid to manage and made substantial investments in green technology, again keeping things stable and bringing the Afghanistan war to it’s inevitably bad conclusion. Ds typically also are able to balance the budget, whereas Rs always overspend and give tax breaks to the rich.
Ds have also been the party of civil rights and minorities, but they always face relentless and shameless propaganda from Rs, aimed only at riling up the voters in anger. So I would argue it’s more a matter of how things are perceived rather than how they actually play out.
The problem with the perception of Ds is that R voters see them as a strange caricature, and independents and D voters don’t give them enough credit for what they achieve (and for just not being R in a two-party system).
I accidentally deleted my long-ish reply so I’m gonna be brief here, but basically you’re assuming you know how people are doing better than they do. Democrats have scored some wins, but given the timescale and the sheer magnitude of crisis facing ordinary Americans most of it is too little, too late (the Affordable Care Act, originally Romneycare, being a good case in point). Virtually every stat tracking how people actually live (as opposed to how much money they have) has been declining over the past two to four decades and people are feeling it in their wallets, and Democrats have near-universally failed to address that. There’s a reason progressives have gained so much momentum over the past decade. Compare to someone like FDR and you’ll see why modern Democrats are perceived as useless.
basically you’re assuming you know how people are doing better than they do.
Can you point out where I am assuming this? I understand things are bad, and in case you haven’t noticed they have gotten significantly worse under R presidency once again.
There’s a reason progressives have gained so much momentum over the past decade.
Also, in case you haven’t noticed, the progressives come from within democrats. This is great development and I hope it continues, but it needs people to participate and think of Ds as their party that they take control over. Otherwise there will be just corporate democrats who struggle to win against R. But even they are better than Rs, by a wide margin.
Compare to someone like FDR and you’ll see why modern Democrats are perceived as useless.
Interestingly, FDR got the presidency after the great depression had started. That sentiment and economic hardship allowed him to carry radical changes.
A few had already started jumping ship a couple of months or so ago. But not because they want to tell the world that they’re sorry, but because they had already thought they saw the writing on the wall, and figured getting out early might help them in the future. Many will deny ever supporting Netanhayu or Zionism.
Saying that, it still feels a little like counting chickens before they’re hatched.
This:
If that was to work on any level, then there is no hope for the U.S. at all.
I really really hope people don’t forget the shitpile this administration has been and don’t vote R again in their lifetime.
My fear is that the neocon wing of the party grabs the power back and pretends they’re all different in the 2030s.
R presidencies are always such incredible clusterfucks, and yet they get voted back every few election cycle.
Because there are only two options. Think of aggregate voter sentiment as being “If things are good/ok, vote incumbent. If things are bad, vote for change/the other guys”. It doesn’t matter who the ‘other guys’ are, just that they’re recognised as ‘the only alternative’.
Eg. Canada’s third largest province just elected a totally unknown conservative leader – like the ‘real’ leader stepped down a day before the election was called, and a temp got put in place… who then ‘won’ the election. That cycle wasn’t about “voting for the random temp” / supporting conservative values, it was a repudiation of the previous government. People just didn’t feel like there was any other viable alternative.
So if the dems don’t markedly improve the living conditions in the USA somehow during their term, and get people thinking “Yeah, things are good!”, they’ll be kicked out again, and replaced by whatever monstrosity the R’s have dredged out of the Trump Ocean.
That’s because D presidencies (and Congresses) have failed to meaningfully deliver for decades, so people pick the other guy by instinct. When the Dems delivered they had national politics by the balls for thirty years.
It depends on your definition of meaningful delivery. W started a hugely expensive war that Obama had to manage. He pushed trough healthcare reforms (that I am not qualified to judge) and in general kept things stable. Biden had Covid to manage and made substantial investments in green technology, again keeping things stable and bringing the Afghanistan war to it’s inevitably bad conclusion. Ds typically also are able to balance the budget, whereas Rs always overspend and give tax breaks to the rich.
Ds have also been the party of civil rights and minorities, but they always face relentless and shameless propaganda from Rs, aimed only at riling up the voters in anger. So I would argue it’s more a matter of how things are perceived rather than how they actually play out.
The problem with the perception of Ds is that R voters see them as a strange caricature, and independents and D voters don’t give them enough credit for what they achieve (and for just not being R in a two-party system).
I accidentally deleted my long-ish reply so I’m gonna be brief here, but basically you’re assuming you know how people are doing better than they do. Democrats have scored some wins, but given the timescale and the sheer magnitude of crisis facing ordinary Americans most of it is too little, too late (the Affordable Care Act, originally Romneycare, being a good case in point). Virtually every stat tracking how people actually live (as opposed to how much money they have) has been declining over the past two to four decades and people are feeling it in their wallets, and Democrats have near-universally failed to address that. There’s a reason progressives have gained so much momentum over the past decade. Compare to someone like FDR and you’ll see why modern Democrats are perceived as useless.
Can you point out where I am assuming this? I understand things are bad, and in case you haven’t noticed they have gotten significantly worse under R presidency once again.
Also, in case you haven’t noticed, the progressives come from within democrats. This is great development and I hope it continues, but it needs people to participate and think of Ds as their party that they take control over. Otherwise there will be just corporate democrats who struggle to win against R. But even they are better than Rs, by a wide margin.
Interestingly, FDR got the presidency after the great depression had started. That sentiment and economic hardship allowed him to carry radical changes.
Be prepared. Media outlets will memory hole the whole thing.