2026 Midterm Elections Thread

[wire28]

I don't think the electorate really understands how extreme a lot of the most influential figures in the Conservative movement are. These people want to end no fault divorce, reverse Griswold V Connecticut (protecting a married couple's right to use contraception in the privacy of their own home), ban porn completely, etc. This is not an agenda that is palatable to the American public.

The difference between the right and the left is that we don't actually have any lunatics in public office (at least not that I can think of). If you think Bernie and AOC are extreme, you probably haven't looked at the number of Americans that actually agree with their policy proposals. Our lunatics posts online and on social media. Mike Lee, US Senator from Utah, is pushing a bill to ban porn this year.

If you don't think the judiciary would save us then (if the filibuster is eliminated), there is no reason to think it will save us now. There are still constitutional amendments in place that protect the rights of minorities even if laws are passed to contradict those rights. The Republicans in the Senate could eliminate the filibuster today if they wanted, and there's not a thing any of us could do about it.

Again, it needs to be reinforced over and over again that the filibuster is a senate fiction. They don't have to abide by any of the rules of the Parliamentarian, the parliamentarian works for them. We are not the ones being protected by the filibuster, politicians are the ones who love the filibuster (both Repubs and Dems) because it saves them from having to take unpopular votes. So, for instances, if you don't actually want the minimum wage needs to be raised but you're a Democrat, you can vote for the wage increase (while still maintaining your populist bona fides) knowing it will never actually pass.

I understand the fears of eliminating the filibuster during Trump's Presidency, those fears are reasonable, but if you support ending the filibuster, the threat of an extremist Republican administration will always be around. The same reason why one might support not doing it now would support never doing it at all.

Giving dementia don and his racist cult more power is gonna be a no for me dog.

 

[MAKAVELI25]

Yes if the Republicans become a serious party that competes with Democrats for the vote all of Americans and not just the white males

I mean, in practical terms this is a "No". White nationalism is part of the core of the Republican Party, you're not going to get this out of the bloodstream without creating a whole new party.

Americans have shown us that they are willing to vote for people that they know are despicable if we don't address their material concerns. And I'm not talking about the MAGA's, I'm talking about swing voters. If we truly think that Trump is the threat that we say he is, then we need to start acting like it. But if we continue letting archaic Senate rules like the filibuster prevent us from implementing radical change that will actually address those material concerns (healthcare, wages, housing, childcare, etc.), then we are not acting at all like we think his movement is a threat.

 

[Outlaw]

I mean, in practical terms this is a "No". White nationalism is part of the core of the Republican Party, you're not going to get this out of the bloodstream without creating a whole new party.

Americans have shown us that they are willing to vote for people that they know are despicable if we don't address their material concerns. And I'm not talking about the MAGA's, I'm talking about swing voters. If we truly think that Trump is the threat that we say he is, then we need to start acting like it. But if we continue letting archaic Senate rules like the filibuster prevent us from implementing radical change that will actually address those material concerns (healthcare, wages, housing, childcare, etc.), then we are not acting at all like we think his movement is a threat.

You have part of the answer. The people who vote for Republicans over Democrats do not care about material concerns. They actively vote against their material concerns just to shyt on people they view as beneath them.

With that said, Republicans have a baked in trifecta control whenever apathy sets in, it doesn’t matter how much democrats deliver, it will never be enough and Republicans will eventually have a bite at the apple.

That’s why I say it’s only feasible to have a simple majority legislative branch in this country if both parties act in the interest of the entire country

 

[MAKAVELI25]

You have part of the answer. The people who vote for Republicans over Democrats do not care about material concerns. They actively vote against their material concerns just to shyt on people they view as beneath them.

With that said, Republicans have a baked in trifecta control whenever apathy sets in, it doesn’t matter how much democrats deliver, it will never be enough and Republicans will eventually have a bite at the apple.

That’s why I say it’s only feasible to have a simple majority legislative branch in this country if both parties act in the interest of the entire country

Swing voters don't care about their material concerns? Because that's who I was referring to.

 

[Outlaw]

Swing voters don't care about their material concerns? Because that's who I was referring to.

Swing voters will eventually vote Republican, no matter how much free stuff democrats give the people

 

[Loose]

Swing voters will eventually vote Republican, no matter how much free stuff democrats give the people

What is this based on?

 

[Outlaw]

What is this based on?

They voted for Trump. If you need some type of statistic to explain common sense and human nature then you should stop talking politics because you’re too autistic

 

[MAKAVELI25]

They voted for Trump. If you need some type of statistic to explain common sense and human nature then you should stop talking politics because you’re too autistic

A lot of (if not most) the polling said that the biggest concern voters had in the 2024 election cycle was higher prices/affordability. In 2016, Trump also spoke effectively against trade deals, de-industrialization, and corruption in Washington. He promised to bring back manufacturing jobs, claimed that immigration was also an economic issue because immigrants were taking American jobs, and said he would stop China from ripping of the US.

Now, saying he was obviously a fraud and it was stupid of them to believe him is one thing. But just saying that they voted for Trump does not prove your point.

 

[Loose]

They voted for Trump. If you need some type of statistic to explain common sense and human nature then you should stop talking politics because you’re too autistic

Yes, that’s often what happens: when one party presides over higher prices and an unaffordable cost of living, people vote for the opposition. Most voters don’t watch the news and don’t care about half of the things Trump or the Democrats do, aside from how those actions will affect their own spending.

Trump’s first term felt affordable; Biden’s did not. It’s as simple as that.

 

[the cac mamba]

What a year from the Allstars

just wait for the takes when they start losing primaries next year

 

[42 Monks]

actually a decent thread if you put the top 5 posters on ignore when reading

 

[VegetasHairline]

actually a decent thread if you put the top 5 posters on ignore when reading

That basically eliminates half the thread.

 

[the cac mamba]