• Makeitstop@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    108
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    There’s gonna be some really great attack ads running in swing districts next year. Every vulnerable moderate just got handcuffed to this guy. Now they can be accused of supporting all the most extreme, unpopular, and unlawful things in Johnson’s record. And on top of that, this almost certainly means that the agenda moving forward will be dominated by things which would alienate moderates and independent voters.

    Apparently the lackluster mid terms weren’t enough of a wake up call. I wouldn’t be surprised if this turns out to be the moment that the Republicans lost the house. (Of course, I also wouldn’t be surprised to see the Democrats find a way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory)

    • limelight79@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      49
      ·
      1 year ago

      And the way Trump was controlling the vote by endorsing candidates? The whole party is shackled to him, whether they admit it or not, and I hope the Democrats go HARD on that in the next election.

    • Flambo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      If the Republican party ever becomes irrelevant, Democrats will be stuck waiting to find out what their new opposition party will be. If it winds up being an actual progressive party, I don’t really see what options Democrats would be left with. Either they try to gain support from people leaving the Republican party, or they try to be “progressive enough” without losing corporate support?

      If Democrats share that uncertainty about a post-Republican future, and if they think the way most status quo actors seem to, then I imagine they’d prefer the Republican party to hang on as long as possible.

      What I think that strategy would look like: Democrats going as fiscally conservative as they can while still remaining left of Republicans. Democrats lamenting their inability to make progressive changes, all the while not investing much more than lip service towards advancing said progressive changes.

      • quicklime@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        24
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        The Democratic Party has shown very clearly that they would much rather lose to Republicans than allow their own platform to be dragged any more than just a tiny bit to the left.

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        If the Republican party ever becomes irrelevant, Democrats will be stuck waiting to find out what their new opposition party will be.

        My guess is a split between moderate Dems and fleeing “90s Republicans” on one side, and more extremist progressive Dems uniting with extremist Republicans as allies of convenience on the other, fighting to be more isolationist and nationalist.

        Essentially I think the future debates will be over the role of America in society, as economic issues are largely a “solved meta” and most social issues tend to fall by the wayside as time marches on. No political party is seriously trying to contest gay marriage the way they did abortion, for instance.

        Middle vs non-middle seems like the battle of the future.

        • Powerpoint@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You don’t have any extremist Dems. You have a right wing party that has two centrists and you have a party full of fascists.

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            This is basically exactly what I’m describing. Great example.