What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

The Reality For Progressives If Things Hold As Expected (1 Viewer)

rockaction

Footballguy
https://reason.com/2020/11/06/socialism-2020-trump-biden-rebuke-left/?utm_medium=email

Robby Soave of Reason asks the question and proffers up this excerpt:

"This is something of a reversal of fortunes. For democratic socialists, the 2020 election cycle began with great promise; the hard left had not one but two ardently progressive primary candidates in Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.) and Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.), the latter of whom had shown auspicious resilience against Hillary Clinton in 2016. There had also been small, encouraging signs in the years between then and now: the surprise election of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D–N.Y.) in 2018, the success of socialist magazines and podcasts, the increasing salience of issues like economic inequality and Medicare for All, the formation of "the Squad."

But neither Warren nor Sanders could overcome Biden, the candidate who had worked hardest to put serious distance between himself and the term socialist. If anything, Biden needed to work even harder at this, since President Donald Trump's reelection campaign was able to tie Democrats to Latin American socialism in the minds of some Florida voters, leading to a surprisingly good showing for Trump among Latino—and particularly Cuban—voters.

Progressives often operate under the assumption that their failure to win elections is a result of malfeasance: More democracy, more activism, and more turnout will produce the broad mandate they need to enact change. They also assume that an increasingly racially diverse electorate will override the white voters who don't support fundamental, revolutionary changes to the economy. But the 2020 results are casting doubt on both of these beliefs: Trump is on track to have the GOP's best showing among minorities in decades, and while he will indeed lose the popular vote to Biden, the unusually high turnout did not lend itself to any sort of blue wave."

I agree with Soave. Any dissenters?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Be like Mitch McConnell.  Mandate be damned, might makes right.  Don't be afraid to weild your power when you have it. 

 
As I see it, very little happens for 2 years, but after that Democrats are likely to take control of the Senate. And then we will see if they do good stuff or overreach. 

 
rockaction said:
Progressives often operate under the assumption that their failure to win elections is a result of malfeasance: More democracy, more activism, and more turnout will produce the broad mandate they need to enact change.
Just to comment on this: it’s true, but it’s also true or conservatives. The idealistic base of each party always assumes that if they are just consistent and honest and uncompromising, they will win over public opinion. And they always despise middle of the roaders who push for compromise. 

 
As I see it, very little happens for 2 years, but after that Democrats are likely to take control of the Senate. And then we will see if they do good stuff or overreach. 
I think they'll overreach and say they have a mandate to do so. One nice thing about 2022 is that I don't feel impelled to vote again. I hate voting. It's beneath me, in a way, putting my voice out there to be equal to the teeming and dirty masses of unwashed simpletons in our confederacy of dunces.

/jk

 
I’d love to see a federal price put on carbon, either as a tax or returned as a dividend.  But I’m not hopeful.
Interesting. I guess that was, in a roundabout way, germane to the question at hand. Huh. 

If others want to chime in with progressive wish lists, who am I to say no?

 
rockaction said:
Progressives often operate under the assumption that their failure to win elections is a result of malfeasance: More democracy, more activism, and more turnout will produce the broad mandate they need to enact change. They also assume that an increasingly racially diverse electorate will override the white voters who don't support fundamental, revolutionary changes to the economy.
Both of those beliefs have always been wrong.

Higher turnout favors more moderate candidates, not more extreme candidates.

I'm not sure about Latinos and other ethnic minorities, but African-Americans seem to favor mainstream stuff over fringe stuff in lots of contexts, including politics.

Higher turnout and a more racially diverse electorate is good for Democrats -- but it's good for moderate Democrats.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It’s not quite what they said this year. 
Since February--The GOP is going to pay for their sins and lose the Senate.  It looks like they'll not only keep it, but gain in the house.  

In a  year where Biden has the most votes ever, the Senate didn't flip.  The Trump factor will be gone in 2022.  Republicans already show up better in midterms, especially under a Dem president.  

It may happen.  The Senate will surely go Democrat again at some point.  I applaud your constant optimism.  But if they held on during this election cycle, I don't understand your confidence that 2022 is going to be the year.

 
I agree with the OP. Biden’s gonna have his hands full dealing with the pandemic, economy and undoing some of Trump’s damage. Even if the mid-term senate leans D, he should pick maybe one progressive issue to press forward - universal healthcare would be my preference, even though I know he’s not on-board with the idea.

 
A few points. 

It's been clear for a long time that not all minorities are progressive. Examples: Some Cubans in Miami. Some Black men. Some Vietnamese. But younger minorities are more progressive than older minorities, which is the same for non-minorities. Younger people just don't vote enough. The 2020 vs 2016 age group breakdowns would be insightful.

COVID may have prevented progressives from engaging and registering voters on the ground, as well as conservatives did. On the other hand, look at what Stacey Abrams did in Georgia, registering a million Georgians. Maybe they were more anti-Trump and not so progressive. 

Florida and Miami, where Trump won bigger than in 2016, voted for a progressive future. $15 minimum wage passed state-wide with 61%. And Miami-Dade county voted for progressive mayor, Daniella Levine Cava, who beat her conservative opponent by about 10 points, slightly outperforming Biden. She says climate change is an existential threat. But she also stressed her economic recovery plan, which includes a new chief medical officer position to advise on COVID. Maybe that's just common sense and not progressive.

2020 is clouded by COVID and Trump, who is unique.

 
Be like Mitch McConnell.  Mandate be damned, might makes right.  Don't be afraid to weild your power when you have it. 
It would be interesting to re-run the simulation, only this time with progressives not spending the last six months talking about abolishing the police and packing the supreme court.  We'll never really know, but there's a really good chance that you guys talked your way out of being able to follow this strategy.

 
Keep the filibuster, force compromise. 

Otherise all we will have is creation and destruction of policy in a constant loop. 

 
That's what they said this year.  Democrats lost every battle in the house and struggled horribly in senate
Who said this?  At the mid term elections in 2018 the popular opinion was if you squinted twisted your head the right way and stood on one foot you could see the slightest of possibilities that they could get a seat.  It was a tough map for any flipping.  Of course as the years unfolded  in 19 and 20 people started thinking there was a chance with the actions of Collins and the like.  The consensus has been that 2022 would be a much easier lift than 2020 but still no guarantee.  

 
rockaction said:
https://reason.com/2020/11/06/socialism-2020-trump-biden-rebuke-left/?utm_medium=email

Robby Soave of Reason asks the question and proffers up this excerpt:

"This is something of a reversal of fortunes. For democratic socialists, the 2020 election cycle began with great promise; the hard left had not one but two ardently progressive primary candidates in Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.) and Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.), the latter of whom had shown auspicious resilience against Hillary Clinton in 2016. There had also been small, encouraging signs in the years between then and now: the surprise election of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D–N.Y.) in 2018, the success of socialist magazines and podcasts, the increasing salience of issues like economic inequality and Medicare for All, the formation of "the Squad."

But neither Warren nor Sanders could overcome Biden, the candidate who had worked hardest to put serious distance between himself and the term socialist. If anything, Biden needed to work even harder at this, since President Donald Trump's reelection campaign was able to tie Democrats to Latin American socialism in the minds of some Florida voters, leading to a surprisingly good showing for Trump among Latino—and particularly Cuban—voters.

Progressives often operate under the assumption that their failure to win elections is a result of malfeasance: More democracy, more activism, and more turnout will produce the broad mandate they need to enact change. They also assume that an increasingly racially diverse electorate will override the white voters who don't support fundamental, revolutionary changes to the economy. But the 2020 results are casting doubt on both of these beliefs: Trump is on track to have the GOP's best showing among minorities in decades, and while he will indeed lose the popular vote to Biden, the unusually high turnout did not lend itself to any sort of blue wave."

I agree with Soave. Any dissenters?
Most Dems I know are not on board with the so called "progressives"  Just because 4-5 people in congress want things a certain way does not mean the Dem party should go that way.   What will happen eventually it will start to splinter and divide the party instead of being united, and that has already begun.

 
I view myself as progressive, but I guess more of a boil-the-frog type? I often think a problem is that too many untested changes all at once would not be a very wise path. Certainly not from a messaging standpoint.

Pick two issues. Push those. Acclimate the country. Pick two more. Rinse. Repeat. Progress!

 
rockaction said:
https://reason.com/2020/11/06/socialism-2020-trump-biden-rebuke-left/?utm_medium=email

Robby Soave of Reason asks the question and proffers up this excerpt:

"This is something of a reversal of fortunes. For democratic socialists, the 2020 election cycle began with great promise; the hard left had not one but two ardently progressive primary candidates in Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.) and Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.), the latter of whom had shown auspicious resilience against Hillary Clinton in 2016. There had also been small, encouraging signs in the years between then and now: the surprise election of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D–N.Y.) in 2018, the success of socialist magazines and podcasts, the increasing salience of issues like economic inequality and Medicare for All, the formation of "the Squad."

But neither Warren nor Sanders could overcome Biden, the candidate who had worked hardest to put serious distance between himself and the term socialist. If anything, Biden needed to work even harder at this, since President Donald Trump's reelection campaign was able to tie Democrats to Latin American socialism in the minds of some Florida voters, leading to a surprisingly good showing for Trump among Latino—and particularly Cuban—voters.

Progressives often operate under the assumption that their failure to win elections is a result of malfeasance: More democracy, more activism, and more turnout will produce the broad mandate they need to enact change. They also assume that an increasingly racially diverse electorate will override the white voters who don't support fundamental, revolutionary changes to the economy. But the 2020 results are casting doubt on both of these beliefs: Trump is on track to have the GOP's best showing among minorities in decades, and while he will indeed lose the popular vote to Biden, the unusually high turnout did not lend itself to any sort of blue wave."

I agree with Soave. Any dissenters?
It strikes me as a strawman, but I don't claim to have my finger on the pulse of current political discourse.  I've never thought higher turnout or engagement of minorities would favor leftist candidates.

 
Bernie had a much better chance in 2016 when people were sick of the way things were going in the country and wanted change. They had 3 choices, dramatic change right, dramatic change left, or stay the same with Hillary. I really think if it was a true left vs right choice in 2016 Bernie would have won.

Fast forward to 2020 and everyone is sick of the Trump rollercoaster. Now it's a choice between swinging completely the other direction or just having everything return to "normal"... forgetting how much they hated it a few years prior. That's a tough case for Bernie to make. He did a pretty good job with it but turnout wasn't as high as necessary and Warren going knives out with PAC money to hold on through super Tuesday was a deadly blow.

Unfortunately in 4 or 8 years people will probably remember why they wanted change and we may end up with another swing. AOC is possible but I assume she may get spun up in the democrat machine by then and there are far more right wing populist candidates who could swoop in. That group scares me because they won't get the push back that Trump did and will be far more dangerous.

 
Since February--The GOP is going to pay for their sins and lose the Senate.  It looks like they'll not only keep it, but gain in the house.  

In a  year where Biden has the most votes ever, the Senate didn't flip.  The Trump factor will be gone in 2022.  Republicans already show up better in midterms, especially under a Dem president.  

It may happen.  The Senate will surely go Democrat again at some point.  I applaud your constant optimism.  But if they held on during this election cycle, I don't understand your confidence that 2022 is going to be the year.
Are you sure?

 
Are any of us sure of anything?

Logic says people won’t come out to vote as hard as they did this time.  

People don’t come out as much in mid-terms either. 
 

But can I be wrong?  Of course
 
I mean specifically in regards to "The Trump Factor"?  Count me as one who doesn't think Biden has a mandate and that the Democrats are on a bit precipitous road for the next cycle.  That being said,  I think nothing will keep the anti- Trump coalition together better than Donald Trump NOT walking away until the start of the 2024 POTUS election cycle.  If he A) doesn't concede or B) complain constantly about being "cheated or C) pushes the narrative that he's going to be the RIGHTFUL POTUS on Twitter (constantly second guessing and attacking Biden online....... he'll be a very nice tool for the DNC to fall back on if they have to rally the troops.  Think how the Right has used Hillary and Obama to "scare" the rank and file into line.  Trump is far more of a boogeyman.

Best thing for the Republicans is that Trump...THE TRUMPS go away for a couple of years and then re-evaluate at the start of the 2024 POTUS cycle.   

 
isnt there traditionally a mid-term backlash to new regimes?
And this is what I am thinking as well. I get the thought about there being a lot of GOP members up for reelection and just by the numbers, there is a chance, but IMO the urgency won't be there for the Democrats to come out in the numbers they need to make this happen in 2022. Just talking with a few of my Democrat friends, they are like whew, glad that is over like they have crossed a finish line or something.

All we have heard for the last 3-6 months was this is a historic election, this is a life changing election. basically this was the most important thing to happen in US politics since 1776.  How are they going to sell 2022?  "No...no THIS IS THE MOMENT. Forget that whole 2020 thing. THIS is the historic election you have to get out and vote for."

I can guarantee we won't see beer/clothing/food commercials promoting voting in 2022 like we saw now.  

 
I mean specifically in regards to "The Trump Factor"?  Count me as one who doesn't think Biden has a mandate and that the Democrats are on a bit precipitous road for the next cycle.  That being said,  I think nothing will keep the anti- Trump coalition together better than Donald Trump NOT walking away until the start of the 2024 POTUS election cycle.  If he A) doesn't concede or B) complain constantly about being "cheated or C) pushes the narrative that he's going to be the RIGHTFUL POTUS on Twitter (constantly second guessing and attacking Biden online....... he'll be a very nice tool for the DNC to fall back on if they have to rally the troops.  Think how the Right has used Hillary and Obama to "scare" the rank and file into line.  Trump is far more of a boogeyman.

Best thing for the Republicans is that Trump...THE TRUMPS go away for a couple of years and then re-evaluate at the start of the 2024 POTUS cycle.   
I guess?

As someone who voted for Trump to avoid Hillary in 2016--I didn't consider Hillary in 2020.  My Hillary concerns are virtually dead.

Driving Trump out was goal #1.  They accomplished it in record fashion.  But it's hard to keep that motivation for a second, lesser goal.  

Maybe the Dems CAN rally the vote by talking about Trump.  But I suspect that motivation fades in the next 2 years.

 
I can guarantee we won't see beer/clothing/food commercials promoting voting in 2022 like we saw now.  
that's a whole nuther kettle of fish - the branding of America by confirming various biases & phenomena which have come to the fore in this bizarre year

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Maybe the Dems CAN rally the vote by talking about Trump.  But I suspect that motivation fades in the next 2 years.
Might depend on whether Trump goes away or not. If he's still interjecting himself into everything and starts taking about a 2024 run (can never be sure with him), Democrats might rally to prevent that. 

 
I guess?

As someone who voted for Trump to avoid Hillary in 2016--I didn't consider Hillary in 2020.  My Hillary concerns are virtually dead.

Driving Trump out was goal #1.  They accomplished it in record fashion.  But it's hard to keep that motivation for a second, lesser goal.  

Maybe the Dems CAN rally the vote by talking about Trump.  But I suspect that motivation fades in the next 2 years.
A lot of democrats just voted by mail for the first time. I predict midterm numbers will be up, and democrats could be well represented because they don’t have to leave the house. 

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top