I’m not even sure the GOP will have a shot at the WH in 2028 because of this, but I don’t see an alternative

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5703565&forum_id=2#48805929)

that being said, I think the DNC needs a very moderate candidate to win in 2028, and I’m not sure Newsom can reform his image fast enough to be that guy

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5703565&forum_id=2#48805949)

it’s insane that we are where we are

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5703565&forum_id=2#48805991)

The Wisconsin Race is your future, hth.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5703565&forum_id=2#48806119)

(Political genius who just six months was crowing about how conturds better get used to saluting Kween K)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5703565&forum_id=2#48808861)

What do you mean they weren't progressive enough on the economy? What exactly is the Democrats' platform on the economy? Biden, after all, unleashed an enormous spending platform, spending on a scale never seen before. What did that accomplish? I don't know, other than inflation. Oh, and yes, rich people got richer due to asset inflation. Otherwise can you tell me?

Because I really don't know what the progressive caucus want. They seem happy to take donations from Soros and most billionaires. Trump, on the other hand, does talk about bringing jobs back for American workers, which in his definition means the old fashioned 1950s factory jobs that paid a decent salary and benefits, not the night shift at 7-11. I don't know if this can actually happen but let's put it this way, I understand why the working classes are steadily flocking to the Republicans while the establishment classes, the top 10-15% of Americans, are steadily Democrats. It's the reverse of the New Deal coalition by party.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5703565&forum_id=2#48806221)

The admin is playing the four year game, not two years. It is a gamble and I can also observe they might be trying to do too much all at once, why the tariff wars now on top of the major budget cuts and tax cuts, rather than in sequence. Maybe their argument is to get all the pain up front this year and into early 2026, then see the shoots of a new boom by summer 2026.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5703565&forum_id=2#48805955)

Pretty much every economist in the world declared Brexit would be an economic disaster for the UK and would plunge the country into a recession. Neither happened. In fact, very little seems to have changed and the UK has done a bit better than the EU economy as a whole, although there are other economic issues but no one attributes them to Brexit.

So while I agree with the economic argument aggressive tariffs do more harm than good, I'm willing to be surprised.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5703565&forum_id=2#48805993)

1. Even with a reasonably popular president, historically the opposition party does better in midterms and picks up seats. Given how narrow the majority is, the Dems taking back the house in 2026 is virtually built in.

2. The seats are now so gerrymandered that any Dem majority is going to be smaller than might have been expected from historical records. The GOP learned this the hard way in 2022. They won the most votes cast nationally by a few points but it translated into far fewer seats than they'd have won a decade earlier thanks to gerrymandering. The Dems misread this as a mandate for Biden to continue with his agenda.

3. The GOP and Dems have changed places as the party getting out the vote in midterms and special elections. But gerrymandering also blunts the Dem's ability to capitalize on GOTV in those years.

4. Hysteria around entitlement reform/cuts is mainly among boomers who watch MSNBC, who are already Dem voters and surefire to turn out in midterms anyway. Younger voters have more to gain from entitlement reform and will turn out in presidential years. Make sure you develop a good policy narrative and strategy targeted to voters under 55 about reform needed to save social security (so far this is a weak spot for the admin. Hope someone is reading this thread and paying attention. Vance? Hello, Charlie Kirk?).

In other words, my war strategy would be to get everything done between now and Nov 2026, then when the house is lost, use 2027-2028 House Dem control as an excuse to blame all the problems on their obstructionism and unwillingness to work with the Admin for the future fiscal good of America, heading into 2028 with a Dem party more unpopular than the GOP presidential candidate especially among voters under 55.

Of course, all these assumptions could be blown out of the water if the tariffs tip the US into a depression.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5703565&forum_id=2#48806165)

a hypothetical landslide victory in the midterms (which is unlikely for the reasons you mention anyway) is not something they could capitalize on anyway when there's GOP POTUS. most people don't think about "who is really at fault" in a nuanced way, which is why POTUS gets blamed/praised for shit that has little to do with them all the top. the perception will be that dems "won" in 2026 and then can be blamed for not capitalizing on it, regardless of whether they had much of an ability to.

additionally, what's the alternative? don't do big changes because you're worried about the short term consequences? that's how we wound up in the current situation. and people are growing tired of it. it reminds me of dems doing victory laps about how dobbs would be devasting to the GOP in the next election. so what? they accomplished what they wanted. the goal is to change policy. and people are getting tired of do nothing democrats and recognize that at least the GOP does things. democratic voters are demoralized by their party's "don't do anything" stance. they're paralyzed by short-term thinking. doing nothing might be tcr move in the short-term, but over time it's devastating.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5703565&forum_id=2#48806214)

top kek

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5703565&forum_id=2#48805965)

Spending cuts: reduce the size of the deficit and weaning government off borrowing.

Outcome is economic growth that simultaneously reduces the share of the deficit as a size of the US economy.

All a theory at this point, of course. But nothing ventured, nothing gained. It also doesn't help the Dems have no credibility from the Biden admin spending and no plans whatsoever to address the fiscal cliff.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5703565&forum_id=2#48806258)

We've had enough experience with the Bush Tax cuts and now the 2017 Trump cuts to know it never works out that way. About half of our 36 trillion debt is attributable to those two cuts. Add Kansas' experiment with big cuts. Your existing tax rates have to be super-high to get more revenue over the long-run from cuts.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5703565&forum_id=2#48806268)

Wisconsin was won by Trump by the tiniest of margins and Tammy Baldwin reelected. The Dems were holding on to a SCOTUS seat they already had. I'm not going to read too much from this election beyond that the state voted, by a landslide, to require voter ID for elections, which is a real punch in the eye for the Dem narrative.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5703565&forum_id=2#48805940)

he could not have been clearer and you're being completely nonresponsive. whether or not this was already required or does anything isn't relevant. he's saying that it's devastating to the dem *narrative* that people don't want voter ID when their own voters voter for it.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5703565&forum_id=2#48806126)

Tell me more about how ACKSHULLY this was a huge win

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5703565&forum_id=2#48806210)

https://ballotpedia.org/Voter_identification_laws_by_state

Nope. Also, a lot of these IDs don't prove citizenship at all. There is no current requirement to prove citizenship to vote at the federal level. It is only an "attestation under penalty of perjury."

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5703565&forum_id=2#48808732)

We had a huge flip in 2018 (40+ seats). Arguably that was further away from the 2010 gerrymandering, which might explain it. But I think there are still enough marginal districts for 20+ seat flips. I do agree about the special elections, especially given how the dem base is now the more motivated party outside of election years.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5703565&forum_id=2#48806255)

"no longer"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5703565&forum_id=2#48806112)

CR.

Also Tesla and Twitter will have both collapsed and he will be both universally reviled and broke and powerless by 2026.

Trust me.

(I know these things.)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5703565&forum_id=2#48808916)