Defining the 21st Century Republican Party?

[Holman]

a died-in-the-wool social conservative

copy editor/ "dyed-in-the-wool" /copy editor

I like your version better in this context though.

[edit accepted]

[Octavious]

Graham is telling people to not vote for the debt ceiling because it will anger Trump. So defaulting the country and creating chaos is a better option?

[Remus West]

Graham is telling people to not vote for the debt ceiling because it will anger Trump. So defaulting the country and creating chaos is a better option?

Screwing America is always a better option for them than angering Trump. Screwing America may cost real people their livelihood or even their lives. Angering Trump may cost Republicans elections. God's sake, man, where is your perspective?

[malchior]

Dan Crenshaw trashes the Freedom Caucus:

LOL.

[Pyperkub]

Graham is telling people to not vote for the debt ceiling because it will anger Trump. So defaulting the country and creating chaos is a better option?

For spite. Oh joy.

[Carpet_pissr]

Graham reminds me in some ways of Giuliani, and many other notable R’s of late: say what you will about their politics in the Beforetimes, but they didn’t seem to be batshit insane, flip-flopping rage monsters.

They, and others in their narrow but growing band, literally seem to be unhinged now. Maybe playing a political role as opposed to how they really are in private, but it’s pretty damn disturbing.

Or maybe their internal strife from having to come to terms with and/or sucking up to DJT has scrambled their brains permanently.

The mental and MORAL gymnastics required to support him like they do have to be spirit/mind/body breaking.

[Kurth]

Anyone see this piece by Ross Douthat in the NYT yesterday?

He argues that the “New Right” is more tapped in to actual issues of this time than the center-right, moderate conservatives (who he says are pitching Ossified Reaganism) or anyone on the left who are fighting to build social programs that have their origins back in the 60s or who identify racism and the patriarchy as the most pressing problems we are facing today.

Douthat says the New Right is more timely in identifying its aims:

What the New Right Sees

Suppose you made a list of what each tendency in American politics considers our biggest challenges right now. For the new right, the list might look something like this.

Abroad, the double failure of our post-9/11 nation-building efforts and our open door to China, which requires either a recalibration to contain the Chinese regime or else a general pullback from an overextended empire.

At home, the threat to liberty from Silicon Valley monopolies enforcing progressive orthodoxy and the threat to human happiness from the addictive nature of social media, online pornography and online life in general. The collapse of birthrates, the dissolution of institutional religion and the decline of bourgeois normalcy, manifest in the younger generation’s failure to mate, to marry, raise families. The post-1960s “great stagnation” in both living standards and technological innovation. The costs of cultural libertarianism, the increase in unhappiness and high rates of depression and addiction in a more individualistic society.

Then finally, the way in which the technocratic response to the pandemic, the retreat to a virtual life suited only to a “laptop class” (and maybe not even to them), may make these problems worse.

Now, you can critique this list and doubt its diagnoses. But still, if you look at reality through the new right’s alienated vision, you may see the strange world of 2021 more clearly than through other eyes. It responds to 21st-century developments (the China shock, the post-9/11 wars), to trends that have accelerated (religious disaffiliation, the birth dearth) or become more apparent (the great stagnation) since the turn of the millennium, and to institutions and technologies (the tech giants, social media) that were just emerging a generation ago.

But this mostly seems like bullshit to me. If there is a “New Right” separate and apart from Trumpism, it’s so trivial at this point that it barely merits mentioning. To the extent he’s talking about MAGAs and Trumpaloos — which is pretty much the whole of the functioning GOP right now — I think Douthat is trying to cobble together a political ideology/philosophy/platform where none exists. Trump’s followers and enablers and sympathizers aren’t really animated by any of the goals Douthat is trying to foist on them. They have no ideology, no philosophy, no platform. They just have Trump. And their anger and bitterness.

Douthat is living in fantasy land.

[malchior]

I totally agree especially where he tries to forge things that are clearly Trump grudges repackaged as policy.

For instance, the Silicon Valley social media angle. There is a legitimate issue of harm that we are discussing. They are trying to seize it for their own purposes to say they are being censored. It is part bitching about the legitimate silencing of Trump and another trying to forge common ground as a suppressed people. All this despite Twitter admitting they favor right-wing speech on their platform. And we know that Facebook also turned a blind eye to right-wing hate speech and organizing on their platform. It's pure bullshit but they have turned it into an organizing pitch and more importantly a huge grift.

He argues that the “New Right” is more tapped in to actual issues of this time than the center-right, moderate conservatives (who he says are pitching Ossified Reaganism) or anyone on the left who are fighting to build social programs that have their origins back in the 60s or who identify racism and the patriarchy as the most pressing problems we are facing today.

Right - this idea has me really scratching my head. We are hearing the conservative moderates and left talking about the same issues with varying levels of coherence. I mean they generally are worried about the same things but have different prioritization of them. The difference is one will not typically find a policy suggestion to address these issues from anyone right of center anymore. And it makes sense because many in that camp want to burn many government functions down.

[Little Raven]

Douthat is living in fantasy land.

The future Ross speculates about is far from becoming reality, but not so far that I would call it fantasy.

We've all become so accustomed to a Republican Party that stands for nothing that it's difficult for us to imagine things being any other way, but this is a state of affairs that cannot ultimately last. When a party has become so utterly bereft of policy that it can no longer even articulate a platform, it has become a party ripe for takeover. And they will be taken over - this vacuum is simply too large to be left unfilled. WHAT will take it over is an open question - I know, everyone here assumes it will be Trump, but even if Trump does win in 2024, the man has no personal ideology, just a love of power. And a cult of personality based on an 78 year old man is not a stable coalition, so the battle to shape the mindset of the party will still rage. I don't know if the New Right can succeed in that fight - they will have a lot of opposition, but I'm certainly not going to write them off.

[Holman]

Douthat is a master of misdiagnosis.

Take this paragraph alone.

At home, the threat to liberty from Silicon Valley monopolies enforcing progressive orthodoxy

Eight or nine of the top-ten most-read posts on Facebook *every day* are right-wing pundits, and that ratio is fueled by the algorithm.

and the threat to human happiness from the addictive nature of social media, online pornography and online life in general

Moral panic much? And is there anything the "New Right" [sic] proposes for this (beyond, I suppose, censoring porn)?

The collapse of birthrates, the dissolution of institutional religion and the decline of bourgeois normalcy, manifest in the younger generation’s failure to mate, to marry, raise families.

Wealth and security among the middle and upper classes lead to lower birthrates as parents invest in one or two children rather than spamming them out. Demographically, the solution to this decline is increased rates of immigration, but I suspect the "New Right" opposes that for... certain reasons.

The post-1960s “great stagnation” in both living standards and technological innovation.

The term he's looking for is "income inequality," but it's apparently Communist to say so.

The costs of cultural libertarianism, the increase in unhappiness and high rates of depression and addiction in a more individualistic society.

By "cultural libertarianism" he means "feminism," "gay rights," and "people quitting religion," but he'd prefer to hid behind neutral-sounding language. He might also want to ask why depression/addiction/suicide rates are higher in white rural areas.

tl;dr Ross Douthat is a dick.

[Kurth]

Douthat is living in fantasy land.

The future Ross speculates about is far from becoming reality, but not so far that I would call it fantasy.

We've all become so accustomed to a Republican Party that stands for nothing that it's difficult for us to imagine things being any other way, but this is a state of affairs that cannot ultimately last. When a party has become so utterly bereft of policy that it can no longer even articulate a platform, it has become a party ripe for takeover. And they will be taken over - this vacuum is simply too large to be left unfilled. WHAT will take it over is an open question - I know, everyone here assumes it will be Trump, but even if Trump does win in 2024, the man has no personal ideology, just a love of power. And a cult of personality based on an 78 year old man is not a stable coalition, so the battle to shape the mindset of the party will still rage. I don't know if the New Right can succeed in that fight - they will have a lot of opposition, but I'm certainly not going to write them off.

I don’t disagree with you that the current state of things is unsustainable, and something is gonna eventually fill the gaping void left when Trump nuked what was previously known as conservatism.

But the fantasy, at least from my perspective, is that there’s anything approaching that now. Where is this “New Right?” I don’t see anything like that now. All I see is MAGAs and Trumpists, either true believers or spineless opportunistic cowards. The notion that there’s a new, coherent political philosophy being advocated by a movement primed to fill the void once Trump finally dies (please, please let it be as soon as possible), seems like a figment of Douthat’s imagination rather than something grounded in today’s reality.

[Little Raven]

Where is this “New Right?”

As both Adler-Bell and Brooks made clear, it's at the National Conservatism Conference. It's at institutions like the Conservative Partnership Institute, it's in young conservatives at flagship universities like Harvard and Yale, and it's beginning to percolate through the various bodies that shape the conservative movement nationwide.

Where it's not, at least not yet, is in the mainstream - as you correctly point out, that remains dominated by MAGA. But older conservatives are beginning to see the shape of what's coming.

[Jaymann]

I imagine after Florida Man eats his last bucket of Kentucky Fried, he will be denounced as an aberration as quickly as Stalin was denounced. But the stench of his legacy will remain.

[malchior]

Where is this “New Right?”

As both Adler-Bell and Brooks made clear, it's at the National Conservatism Conference. It's at institutions like the Conservative Partnership Institute, it's in young conservatives at flagship universities like Harvard and Yale, and it's beginning to percolate through the various bodies that shape the conservative movement nationwide.

Where it's not, at least not yet, is in the mainstream - as you correctly point out, that remains dominated by MAGA. But older conservatives are beginning to see the shape of what's coming.

I've read these pieces. I think they are good background pieces but the idea these kids will be a locus of power is a bit far fetched to me. A bunch of Catholic college reactionaries are going to take power? What is this? Iran 1979? I totally align with the high-level argument that Trump keeling over would invite a bevy of power plays. I could even see some useful ideas becoming planks in some post-Trump platform. However that the idea that older conservatives would coalesce around these kids ideas seems like a long shot. There is too much money/power at stake.

I think it's way more likely it'd be somewhat like what happened in the years between Goldwater's failed run and Nixon's election. Someone much more senior with street cred within the base will get an edge traction-wise. The Republicans are tight enough they can swing on a dime from one great leader to another. As we saw with Trump. And Nixon. Nixon wasn't even on people's radar right after Goldwater. The easiest path that requires less branding/political spend would be to essentially clone Trump's appeal. That is why the older conservatives are increasingly aping Trump. That is the real shape they see coming.

I imagine after Florida Man eats his last bucket of Kentucky Fried, he will be denounced as an aberration as quickly as Stalin was denounced. But the stench of his legacy will remain.

It's possible but that'll be harder to pull off. They've marched off into crazy land. It'd be easier to just grab power as is and then work themselves back into something more reasonable in an authoritarian way.

[Kurth]

The easiest path that requires less branding/political spend would be to essentially clone Trump's appeal. That is why the older conservatives are increasingly aping Trump. That is the real shape they see coming.

I've seen this said repeatedly, but I don't buy it. I don't think there is such a thing as "cloning Trump's appeal." He and his movement, if you want to call it that, are a cult of personality. It lives and dies with him. Which is why the sooner he exits stage left, the better.

[gbasden]

Douthat is wrong about a lot of that, but this is especially wrong:

The post-1960s “great stagnation” in both living standards and technological innovation

Given that the Right has been instrumental in income inequality, it's rich to call out a stagnation in living standards. And he has to be on some pretty good drugs to claim that technological innovation stagnated after the 1960s. From mainframe computers the size of a room to more computing power in our phones, the internet, robotics, organ transplants, solar and wind power, virtual reality, private space travel, the rise of electric vehicles, and a zillion more things that aren't coming to mind, technological innovation has been on a stratospheric rise in the last 50 years. To the point where many people are concerned that AI is getting close to the singularity - a point where it becomes self aware and can evolve past our control.

And his view might as well be back in the 50s. Oh, people have decided that they don't need to go to church and aren't participating in marriage and child rearing? The horror! People don't have to pretend to be who they aren't anymore. They can lead non-traditional lives and be happy rather than having to hide behind a facade to avoid being ostracised. New right my ass! This is the same old drippy nostalgia for post war America that Republicans have been flogging for my entire lifetime.

And yeah, Douthat is an ass.

[malchior]

The easiest path that requires less branding/political spend would be to essentially clone Trump's appeal. That is why the older conservatives are increasingly aping Trump. That is the real shape they see coming.

I've seen this said repeatedly, but I don't buy it. I don't think there is such a thing as "cloning Trump's appeal." He and his movement, if you want to call it that, are a cult of personality. It lives and dies with him. Which is why the sooner he exits stage left, the better.

That's fair. It all very well might fall apart. It isn't certain. My thinking though is that cults of personality aren't new in the GOP. There was one around Goldwater. It persisted even after he failed abjectly. There was one around Nixon that persisted (via grievance) after he was driven out of office and eventually there was one around Reagan. This one is just the worst by far. The next cult leader just needs to harness the darkness even if it isn't a true clone. And all those other cult leaders laid out the map. Appeal to white nationalism.

[Holman]

The easiest path that requires less branding/political spend would be to essentially clone Trump's appeal. That is why the older conservatives are increasingly aping Trump. That is the real shape they see coming.

I've seen this said repeatedly, but I don't buy it. I don't think there is such a thing as "cloning Trump's appeal." He and his movement, if you want to call it that, are a cult of personality. It lives and dies with him. Which is why the sooner he exits stage left, the better.

Disagree.

MAGA doesn't love Donald Trump for being Donald Trump. They love him for letting *them* be who they want to be: openly hateful, aggressive, and bigoted.

That isn't going away when Trump clutches his chest and slides off the toilet. These people aren't going to rally behind the next Mitt Romney; they're going to be looking for the next strongman who endorses their hate.

[Octavious]

The easiest path that requires less branding/political spend would be to essentially clone Trump's appeal. That is why the older conservatives are increasingly aping Trump. That is the real shape they see coming.

I've seen this said repeatedly, but I don't buy it. I don't think there is such a thing as "cloning Trump's appeal." He and his movement, if you want to call it that, are a cult of personality. It lives and dies with him. Which is why the sooner he exits stage left, the better.

Disagree.

MAGA doesn't love Donald Trump for being Donald Trump. They love him for letting *them* be who they want to be: openly hateful, aggressive, and bigoted.

That isn't going away when Trump clutches his chest and slides off the toilet. These people aren't going to rally behind the next Mitt Romney; they're going to be looking for the next strongman who endorses their hate.

This.... He opened pandora's box and I don't see anyone fixing that. These people sucked before and now feel empowered to be what they want to be. He didn't make them that way he just made it ok to flaunt it.

[El Guapo]

The easiest path that requires less branding/political spend would be to essentially clone Trump's appeal. That is why the older conservatives are increasingly aping Trump. That is the real shape they see coming.

I've seen this said repeatedly, but I don't buy it. I don't think there is such a thing as "cloning Trump's appeal." He and his movement, if you want to call it that, are a cult of personality. It lives and dies with him. Which is why the sooner he exits stage left, the better.

Disagree.

MAGA doesn't love Donald Trump for being Donald Trump. They love him for letting *them* be who they want to be: openly hateful, aggressive, and bigoted.

That isn't going away when Trump clutches his chest and slides off the toilet. These people aren't going to rally behind the next Mitt Romney; they're going to be looking for the next strongman who endorses their hate.

This.... He opened pandora's box and I don't see anyone fixing that. These people sucked before and now feel empowered to be what they want to be. He didn't make them that way he just made it ok to flaunt it.

There's also a non-trivial number of Republicans for whom Trump proved what they can get away with, and with that proof-of-concept established they're happy to run through the door that he opened.

That said, if Trump died tomorrow most of the Republican contenders would be doing Trump impersonations, which would have appeal but which wouldn't be the same as having Trump himself.

[YellowKing]

I think the biggest problem any newcomer will have with imitating Trump is that it's hard to fake mental illness. Trump's narcissism allowed him to say and do things that would be extremely difficult for someone sane to replicate. Sure, there are plenty of Republicans that can stand up there and push stickin' it to the Libtards "policies" and appeal to racists, but someone who can do that AND implement Trump's strong-arm mob boss tactics? Dance nimbly in the gray areas of the law? Turn grift into an art form? I'm sure many of them can do some of those things somewhat well some of the time. It would take a rare individual indeed to be able to do all of them well all of the time.

Trump's grip on the party will be greatly weakened should he pass or choose not to run. But by that time they'll have all the framework in place to ensure victories regardless, and I'm sure that's what they're counting on.

[Pyperkub]

The easiest path that requires less branding/political spend would be to essentially clone Trump's appeal. That is why the older conservatives are increasingly aping Trump. That is the real shape they see coming.

I've seen this said repeatedly, but I don't buy it. I don't think there is such a thing as "cloning Trump's appeal." He and his movement, if you want to call it that, are a cult of personality. It lives and dies with him. Which is why the sooner he exits stage left, the better.

Palin, Santorum, Cruz, Carlson, etc. beg to differ.

[Pyperkub]

I think the biggest problem any newcomer will have with imitating Trump is that it's hard to fake mental illness. Trump's narcissism allowed him to say and do things that would be extremely difficult for someone sane to replicate. Sure, there are plenty of Republicans that can stand up there and push stickin' it to the Libtards "policies" and appeal to racists, but someone who can do that AND implement Trump's strong-arm mob boss tactics? Dance nimbly in the gray areas of the law? Turn grift into an art form? I'm sure many of them can do some of those things somewhat well some of the time. It would take a rare individual indeed to be able to do all of them well all of the time.

Trump's grip on the party will be greatly weakened should he pass or choose not to run. But by that time they'll have all the framework in place to ensure victories regardless, and I'm sure that's what they're counting on.

There are plenty of Nixonites still looking for work doing this. See Roger Stone.

[Little Raven]

Palin, Santorum, Cruz, Carlson, etc. beg to differ.

I think this list rather bolster's YK's point. None of those people has even 1/10 the star power that Trump has, despite their best efforts.

And it's that star power that makes Trump Trump. It's the thing that nobody else can replicate. (at least so far) Which is why the battle for the ideological heart of the party is so important. The GOP cannot count on celebrity to define itself going forward - it just won't work.

[malchior]

I think the "star power" factor is way overblown. Republicans over and over have demonstrated that they own the message space and make the Democrats look incompetent from a communications standpoint routinely. Youngkin in particular is an interesting case of this. He sort of had some star power (enough in the end) and he was able to strong arm Trump out of his race. Despite that he still landed a fingers crossed behind his back story about education that was flatly appealing to white nationalism. I think it is folly to ascribe too much power to Trump as if it'll all fall apart if he'd just keel over for us. The knives would come out for sure but I don't know if it'd meaningfully change the trajectory we are on now.

[Little Raven]

Youngkin in particular is an interesting case of this.

Youngkin also bolsters YK's point. Youngkin has no star power at all, so he had to rely on selling a vision. He picked education, and managed to sell it convincingly. You clearly don't find his vision compelling, but a lot of suburban Virginia voters had no problem signing on. And he did it without sounding at all like Trump - probably because he's smart enough to know that nobody can pull off Trump but Trump.

Our problems don't end when Trump keels over, but they definitely change. The GOP will either have to find another personality to worship or actually produce a vision to work towards. I suspect the latter is far more likely that the former, because I suspect the American political landscape is currently undergoing a great reshuffling as the boomers finally give way to the millennials. I'm very dubious that either party will look very familiar in 10 years.

[Pyperkub]

Palin, Santorum, Cruz, Carlson, etc. beg to differ.

I think this list rather bolster's YK's point. None of those people has even 1/10 the star power that Trump has, despite their best efforts.

And it's that star power that makes Trump Trump. It's the thing that nobody else can replicate. (at least so far) Which is why the battle for the ideological heart of the party is so important. The GOP cannot count on celebrity to define itself going forward - it just won't work.

You don't think Tucker Carlson has that star power? I think he can and does, and he's shown his complete willingness to leverage is - see his Fox Nation 1/6 special batch of lies.

double that up if the 2024 Dem candidate is blase.

Then look back at the past few Presidential elections and what happens to even sane GOP candidates (Romney/McCain) and how they get stuffed into that role whether they like it or not. Especially in Primaries.

This malady ain't going away when the cult of trump dies.

[malchior]

Youngkin in particular is an interesting case of this.

Youngkin also bolsters YK's point. Youngkin has no star power at all, so he had to rely on selling a vision. He picked education, and managed to sell it convincingly. You clearly don't find his vision compelling, but a lot of suburban Virginia voters had no problem signing on.

True. I tend to find a white nationalist appeal relying on fake CRT bashing to not be too compelling.

And he did it without sounding at all like Trump - probably because he's smart enough to know that nobody can pull off Trump but Trump.

Right because Trump wasn't nearly as popular there. He drew a line and that is the point I'm getting at. He showed that in "purple places" there still is enough racism to tap. You just need to keep it in check. In essence, you need to blow just hard enough on the dog whistle. They threaded the needle. Nationally that'll be tougher but they've got a remedy for that.

Our problems don't end when Trump keels over, but they definitely change. The GOP will either have to find another personality to worship or actually produce a vision to work towards. I suspect the latter is far more likely that the former, because I suspect the American political landscape is currently undergoing a great reshuffling as the boomers finally give way to the millennials. I'm very dubious that either party will look very familiar in 10 years.

We don't have 10 years. We have 2-4 years.

[Holman]

I think the biggest problem any newcomer will have with imitating Trump is that it's hard to fake mental illness. Trump's narcissism allowed him to say and do things that would be extremely difficult for someone sane to replicate. Sure, there are plenty of Republicans that can stand up there and push stickin' it to the Libtards "policies" and appeal to racists, but someone who can do that AND implement Trump's strong-arm mob boss tactics? Dance nimbly in the gray areas of the law? Turn grift into an art form? I'm sure many of them can do some of those things somewhat well some of the time. It would take a rare individual indeed to be able to do all of them well all of the time.

Yeah, but Trump has done the hard work of moving the window towards acceptable bigotry and authoritarianism. In retrospect, his personal greed and paranoia probably had the benefit of distracting him from the kind of back-room mechanics necessary to really solidify and entrench mechanisms of more-than-personal power. Trump's narcissism prevented him from successfully becoming Putin.

The next Trump won't Out-Donald-The-Donald. Instead, he'll present himself as a True Believer among true believers in the MAGA cause. He'll have to be brash, and he'll have to understand how to play the game, but he won't have to be an outright sociopath. The guardrails are already gone, and the worst Americans already accept that lying and even violence are necessary for Making America Great Again.

[Pyperkub]

Youngkin in particular is an interesting case of this.

Youngkin also bolsters YK's point. Youngkin has no star power at all, so he had to rely on selling a vision. He picked education, and managed to sell it convincingly. You clearly don't find his vision compelling, but a lot of suburban Virginia voters had no problem signing on.

True. I tend to find a white nationalist appeal relying on fake CRT bashing to not be too compelling.

And he did it without sounding at all like Trump - probably because he's smart enough to know that nobody can pull off Trump but Trump.

Right because Trump wasn't nearly as popular there. He drew a line and that is the point I'm getting at. He showed that in "purple places" there still is enough racism to tap. You just need to keep it in check. In essence, you need to blow just hard enough on the dog whistle. They threaded the needle. Nationally that'll be tougher but they've got a remedy for that.

Our problems don't end when Trump keels over, but they definitely change. The GOP will either have to find another personality to worship or actually produce a vision to work towards. I suspect the latter is far more likely that the former, because I suspect the American political landscape is currently undergoing a great reshuffling as the boomers finally give way to the millennials. I'm very dubious that either party will look very familiar in 10 years.

We don't have 10 years. We have 2-4 years.

We have until the 2022 election.

[malchior]

We have until the 2022 election.

I think it is too late already. The time to address this was this year. I am just thinking 2024 will be the first one they need to steal. There is an outside chance they'll need to steal some seats in 2022. Either way if/when we see an election successfully overturned due to "fraud"
it'll signal the end of American democracy for some undefined period of time if not forever.

[Pyperkub]

We have until the 2022 election.

I think it is too late already. The time to address this was this year. I am just thinking 2024 will be the first one they need to steal. There is an outside chance they'll need to steal some seats in 2022. Either way if/when we see an election successfully overturned due to "fraud"
it'll signal the end of American democracy for some undefined period of time if not forever.

Eh, if they pass the Voting Rights bill(s) being talked about, it can still be done before the 2022 election. Maybe even the primaries.

IMHO, Biden needs to move his focus from BBB to Voting Rights, and even (finally!) use the 2021 Reconciliation 51 vote path (it has to be in a budget/funding bill for that, so just attach it to election security funds, etc.).

Otherwise, anything in BBB can and will be gutted by the 2022 Congress, the way things are going...

[malchior]

We have until the 2022 election.

I think it is too late already. The time to address this was this year. I am just thinking 2024 will be the first one they need to steal. There is an outside chance they'll need to steal some seats in 2022. Either way if/when we see an election successfully overturned due to "fraud"
it'll signal the end of American democracy for some undefined period of time if not forever.

Eh, if they pass the Voting Rights bill(s) being talked about, it can still be done before the 2022 election. Maybe even the primaries.

IMHO, Biden needs to move his focus from BBB to Voting Rights, and even (finally!) use the 2021 Reconciliation 51 vote path (it has to be in a budget/funding bill for that, so just attach it to election security funds, etc.).

Otherwise, anything in BBB can and will be gutted by the 2022 Congress, the way things are going...

I won't say this it is absolutely impossible but it more than not does seem politically impossible now.

[Pyperkub]

We have until the 2022 election.

I think it is too late already. The time to address this was this year. I am just thinking 2024 will be the first one they need to steal. There is an outside chance they'll need to steal some seats in 2022. Either way if/when we see an election successfully overturned due to "fraud"
it'll signal the end of American democracy for some undefined period of time if not forever.

Eh, if they pass the Voting Rights bill(s) being talked about, it can still be done before the 2022 election. Maybe even the primaries.

IMHO, Biden needs to move his focus from BBB to Voting Rights, and even (finally!) use the 2021 Reconciliation 51 vote path (it has to be in a budget/funding bill for that, so just attach it to election security funds, etc.).

Otherwise, anything in BBB can and will be gutted by the 2022 Congress, the way things are going...

I won't say this it is absolutely impossible but it more than not does seem politically impossible now.

YOu are probably correct. At the begining of Biden's term, Manchin's main worry in his donor call about preserving the filibuster had to do with Voting Rights and the backlash to the insurrection. Everyone was against the insurrection and what needed to be done.

But now? Yeah, it's yesterday's headline and with it no longer in the spotlight as it was, it's easy to bury, and everyone who promised they wouldn't donate to insurrectionists are back to business as usual, supporting those who would continue hacking away at the base of our Constitutional Republic.

[malchior]

I don't even think it is just being out of the headlines which is just the usual decadent state of political and journalistic malpractice. The mechanical issues just seem intractable. Like Manchin seeking 10 votes for a bipartisan solution. He found only one this entire year yet seemingly won't move off his position. The reconciliation option (which no one is even presenting as a serious option) and/or filibuster exception are off the table right now. The end of American democracy isn't going to be Manchin's fault but he might end up owning a lot of it anyway with this indefensible position. Though I actually imagine Biden will take the lion's share for pretty much ignoring it except for some lip service.

[Zaxxon]

[Jaymann]

Zaxxon, your post is nothing to me!

[LordMortis]

We've lost our Rand Paul loyalist, pull yourself up by your bootstraps, crowd. I wonder how they respond to him here.

You (We?) absolutely want to provide aid and quickly but it pains me to do so for those who would spit on giving aid to others all the while already being a black hole for federal money while holding government give aways with contempt.

[Pyperkub]

Our old friend Tareeq!

[hepcat]

Trump and his supporters all share the same hilarious disdain for grammar.



P.S. 95 percent of those children are runaways. No Qanon conspiracy to see here.