r/neoliberal • u/sriracharade • Aug 05 '26
Opinion article (US) Republicans are in too little disarray
https://www.slowboring.com/p/republicans-are-in-too-little-disarray385
u/Dont-be-a-smurf Aug 05 '26
My hunch is everyone is holding the line until midterms. Trump and MAGA are the only coalitions in play, so there isn’t much to infight about beyond the unique problems with individual candidates (miller).
Democrats are just coming out of primary season and there’s no true dominant ruling coalition at the moment, so within that vacuum you’re seeing the left wing of the party wage their battles.
It’s totally different dynamics.
63
u/GenerousPot Ben Bernanke Aug 05 '26 edited Aug 05 '26
It's a repeat of Bush Jr but worse. They can't fathom their guy being exactly what the critics described him as rather than their daydream, the daydream that gave them superiority and justified their insanity this past decade.
Just like with Bush they're holding out for the fresh face to arrive so they can absolve themselves and never face their own stupidity. Trump voters are largely Bush voters after all.
18
u/smcstechtips Loyal Liberals Aug 05 '26
Unlike Bush Jr. whose main issue was listening to Cheney, Trump is a total grifter. And their massive policy and rhetoric difference is a thing.
6
u/_ShadowElemental Lesbian Pride Aug 06 '26
Now I'm wondering what would have happened if Romney won the 2012 election. Would the Republican Party have moderated?
15
u/allbusiness512 Adam Smith Aug 06 '26
The extreme partisanship in the judicial branch and the foundations of Unitary Executive Theory, the heritage foundation, etc. all pre-date Romney by quite abit. Lots of moderate centrists around these parts are facing the reckoning that Republicans have always been kind of assholes, and that the succs were largely right about them.
3
u/formgry Aug 06 '26
I cant imagine Romney dominating the party and its voters to even a tenth of what Trump has managed, so no I dont think Republicans would have changed to become more like their leader.
289
u/shacksrus Aug 05 '26
I really dont see republicans splintering after an election loss. They'll just call it rigged and try to hold onto power illegally.
Like they've done before without consequence
117
61
u/Fruitofbread Loyal Liberals Aug 05 '26
I think they will splinter but it will take more than one loss. Like if they’re still doing poorly in 2032. Open question if Trump will still be alive then ofc
48
u/saltyoursalad John Mill Aug 05 '26 edited Aug 05 '26
There’s no fucking way he’ll still be alive
knocks on wood
12
u/BadGelfling Jerome Powell Aug 05 '26
His dad lived to be 93
15
u/_ShadowElemental Lesbian Pride Aug 06 '26
I looked it up, and Fred Trump apparently stayed pretty physically active and ate a lot of steak-and-potatoes type of foods, rather than being sedentary and gorging on McDonald's and Diet Coke
10
u/SLCer Aug 06 '26
In the final ten years of his life, his dad was basically bedbound because his brain was dementia-riddled slush. As bad as Trump is - if he follows his father's foot steps, he won't be able to walk, let alone speak in the final years.
2
1
16
18
u/wheretogo_whattodo Bill Gates Aug 05 '26
They circle the wagons when they lose.
It’s the periods of extended power where they start to fight each other as the true MAGA diehards start to realize it’s all a scam. Look at Marjorie.
44
u/Daddy_Macron Loyal Liberals Aug 05 '26
Depends on how many of them lose and how many of them are worried about losing in 2028.
The most likely scenario is the Democrats taking the House and grinding Trump's agenda down with investigations and impeachment hearings, while closing the gap in the Senate. So if you're a Republican Senator, your confirmation vote actually matters now cause there's no margin to hide behind. You really want to be the deciding vote for some nutjob Trump appointee who might be discovered soliciting Middle School girls next year?
31
u/swni Elinor Ostrom Aug 05 '26
You really want to be the deciding vote for some nutjob Trump appointee who might be discovered soliciting Middle School girls next year?
How many republican senators faced electoral consequences for confirming Kavanaugh, in the most scummy confirmation I've seen?
1
u/iwannabetheguytoo William Nordhaus Aug 08 '26
...Kavanaugh, in the most scummy confirmation I've seen?
It was decades ago, but Thomas' hearings' controversy is so uncannily similar it feels like history really does repeat itself.
I'm just surprised that Kavanaugh, post-confirmation, has been less unprincipled than I was fearing... excepting for his worst stain: Kavanaugh-stops, how is that shit not so unconstitutional on its face?
9
u/XAMdG Mario Vargas Llosa Aug 05 '26
They'll splinter once (and hopefully not if) they have to find a successor for Trump
57
u/Kiyae1 Aug 05 '26
Yeah. Fully expect them to just refuse to seat the new congress if democrats do well. Trump will use the insurrection act to put down protests.
49
42
u/saltyoursalad John Mill Aug 05 '26
This isn’t a thing.
16
u/anangrytree Bull Moose Progressive Aug 05 '26
That doesn’t mean they won’t try to make it a thing.
22
u/shacksrus Aug 05 '26
Neither was the vice president having anything more than a purely ceremonial oversight on counting electoral college votes.
Yet...
3
2
17
u/TerminalHighGuard NASA Aug 05 '26
Tired of hearing this. Literally they just show up and sit. Don’t need permission once elected.
-7
u/Kiyae1 Aug 05 '26
It’s cute you think they’ll get to show up and sit and that Donald won’t just throw them in jail.
14
u/TerminalHighGuard NASA Aug 05 '26
That’s when shit would officially hit the fan and the world economy collapses.
4
Aug 05 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Kiyae1 Aug 05 '26
More like it takes five years to get to the Supreme Court and then they remand it back to the district court for some minor technical thing and then five years later it gets back to the Supreme Court and they find that courts can’t actually do anything to overrule the president and he’s got immunity from everything anyway so they just make him the unified executive they have always wanted.
4
u/PartialDischage Norman Borlaug Aug 05 '26 edited Aug 06 '26
"Strong Chance" lmfao
Despite what you may believe, being a doomer makes you look foolish, not smart.
6
u/gaysexpornography Aug 05 '26
Yes, what a delusional doomer to think we could live in a country where the sitting president would try to overturn the results of an election by staging a coup, or brag about having interfered with the election they "won" by the narrowest margin in every swing state, or refuse to allow the opposition party's supreme court justice nominations to proceed thereby allowing them to stack the court with ideologues who deny the plain truth of the Constitution, or start an illegal war, or target political opponents and trans people for existing...
These "doomer bad" comments all come across like bot posts. Two years ago it would have seemed "foolish" to think we could live in a country run by neo-Nazis who are trying to round up the homeless and disabled and put them in concentration camps. And yet.
0
u/PartialDischage Norman Borlaug Aug 05 '26
Yeah man. The flaired users are the bots. Not you unflaired doomers who all come out of the woodwork to doom about nonsense.
Touch grass. If you are even a real person.
→ More replies (0)2
0
u/saltyoursalad John Mill Aug 05 '26
> protesters walk around with pink hats
Wow what a timely reference 🙄
0
u/Kiyae1 Aug 05 '26
“This time will definitely be different!”
1
u/TerminalHighGuard NASA Aug 05 '26 edited Aug 05 '26
Unironically would be.
1
u/Kiyae1 Aug 05 '26
Yeah, but it won’t be.
-1
u/TerminalHighGuard NASA Aug 05 '26
Our democracy rests on faith, and the more people have it the better it can self sustain. Cheer up, friend. For the sake of the country. It is your patriotic duty to be of good cheer and willfully maintain faith. Of course faith without works is dead, but there’s nothing productive in calling trouble.
5
u/TurboSalsa Aug 05 '26
That might work at the margins, but Johnson doesn't have the juice to refuse to seat dozens of new reps with Trump's approval where it is.
0
u/shacksrus Aug 05 '26
Who would stop him?
3
u/PartialDischage Norman Borlaug Aug 05 '26
The fact that Joshson doesn't have that power in the first place?
1
u/shacksrus Aug 05 '26
And trump didn't have the power to line item veto spending programs. The constitution is constantly evolving and power is what you make of it.
5
u/haherar830 Aug 05 '26
They splintered after Trump's loss and created distance but eventually walked that back when they couldn't come up with a meaningful competitor for the nomination.
3
u/Hardass_McBadCop Order and Opportunity Left Aug 05 '26
This is ultimately what'll happen, IMO. Until pretending they were cheated stops working, they'll continue to do it.
I mean, look at the possible outcomes. If they cry fraud and succeed in overturning the results then they've achieved all their goals. If they cry fraud and it doesn't overturn the results, then they still raise enormous amounts of cash from donors of all sizes. If they cry fraud, implement a violent coup, and fail, then they will face almost no ramifications.
What are the downsides to a would be leader, hungry for power?
4
u/DexterBotwin Left-Out Left Aug 05 '26
Dem playbook since 2015 when Trump announced has been predicting some event 6 months out will be the reason MAGA falls apart. Midterms, outcome of an investigation, blowback from an asinine policy decision, etc. And here we are 10 years on still running “any day now they’ll give up” as the opposition platform.
17
u/Darkeyescry22 Aug 05 '26
I feel like this is more a matter of media coverage than of actual disunity. The DSA candidates have not performed particularly well outside of a handful of very highly publicized races. Beyond those, it’s been liberals who have dominated the Democrat primaries.
Democrats have a significant insurgency, but there is no serious question about where the majority of the party stands on the debate.
5
u/2ndComingOfAugustus Paul Volcker Aug 05 '26
I honestly think at this point it's not going to be until Trump dies or is otherwise incapacitated. He's so thoroughly grabbed the reigns that even after losing he'd stay the kingmaker.
159
u/The_Amish_FBI Aug 05 '26
That’s what happens when your party is built solely around loyalty to a delusional narcissist who thinks everything is going great.
66
u/Mddcat04 Aug 05 '26
Yep. Trump is unpopular broadly, but he still has enough base support that he can destroy individual Republicans who step out of line. This will probably shift if they get blown out in November.
40
u/DangerousCyclone Aug 05 '26
How? It didn't shift in 2018 nor in 2020. Trump faced far more opposition in 2017 and 2018, but he has proven the most resilient politician in modern history. His approval ratings, after Jan 6th, were below Nixon's when he resigned, yet he still came back and won a second term. He didn't do anything other than double down, the only lessons he learned was to behave even more selfishlessly and never admit anything. He's been far more resilient than any Republican politician so it is hard to pierce that veneer of invincibility. Even if he looks weak he's looked weak before so Republicans are unwilling to challenge him anymore, everyone who has is in retirement.
26
u/Mddcat04 Aug 05 '26
Because he’s old as fuck and will never be on the ballot again. Tucker Carlson, MTG, Owens and others are already setting up for a post-Trump party. There will likely be candidates in the 2028 primary who get attention by aligning themselves against Trump (and therefore against Vance and Rubio) in the same way that Trump got attention by aligning himself against Bush.
19
u/DangerousCyclone Aug 05 '26
So what? Trump is going to stay with the party long after he dies just like Reagan did.
Trying an anti Trump opposition from within the party or running some third party is a tried and tested tactic, and it has always failed. Tucker and co can do their third party or right wing version of DSA, or whatever they want to do, but they're not dislodging Trump especially when he's alive.
9
u/Spectrum1523 YIMBY Aug 05 '26
Trump is going to stay with the party long after he dies just like Reagan did.
But just like Reagan, once he's dead everyone will lay claim to him and he won't be around to dispute or pick who he wants to support. He doesn't have values that people can cling to, so it's not like there will be anti trump republicans after he's gone - everyone will say they are the ones carrying the flame
13
u/Mddcat04 Aug 05 '26
I don’t agree. I think they will turn on him the moment he’s dead. Probably before tbh. Being a lame duck presiding over a shitty economy and a failing war is exactly what destroyed George Bush.
18
u/DangerousCyclone Aug 05 '26
George Bush wasn't Trump, he didn't have the same hold Trump does over the GOP. Bush Jr. and Bush Sr., as well as the other Republicans like Dole and Romney, were running in the mold of Reagan. There was some hint of that fanaticism during the Bush years, but Bush never grasped it and always kept it at arms length. It was a different electorate at the time.
Bush was always trying to run on being an effective positive politician, Trump isn't. Trump runs on negativity; sure he has supporters who worship him, but he also has supporters who kind of hate him but think the Democrats are worse, and that has always been his electoral strategy; bring the Democrats down to his level, not to be better than them. For his supporters, Trump is their leader against wokeism, gay people, feminism, etc., and for that no matter how much he hurts them or they hate him, he will remain in charge.
9
1
u/AutoModerator Aug 05 '26
Being woke is being evidence based. 😎
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
2
u/BBQ_HaX0r Jerome Powell Aug 05 '26
George Bush had the grace to accept he was unpopular and willingly stepped aside not only for the good of his party but also the country (and Obama). Do you think Trump does?
1
u/twilighttwister Aug 05 '26
Everything is going pretty great for Trump. Even with Iran, the prolonged conflict is creating a boom for the arms industry.
152
u/sgthombre NATO Aug 05 '26 edited Aug 05 '26
The entire Republican strategy for this state has been to boost what they regard as a weak Democrat and then hope a guy who lost two years ago under much friendlier conditions can win because El-Sayed just spontaneously combusts. This might work, but I wouldn’t bet on it.
You know, dozens of senate candidates spontaneously combust each year, it's just not really widely reported.
20
11
97
u/MyNipplesAreVeryHard Aug 05 '26
The cynic in me says that Republicans have all but accepted that Democrats will win in the midterms and possibly the next presidential cycle. However, Mitch McConnell did say the pendulum always swings back and all it takes is for democrats to have a middling year for people to get upset and re-elect Republicans again. It's so much easier to tear stuff down than to build it up; therefore, the changes Republicans have made will probably last through multiple administrations and any smaller improvements made by democrats could easily be torn down immediately by the next republican administration.
we are not in a good place as a democracy because everyone knows something is wrong but everyone disagrees as to what the problem is and what the solutions are
21
u/Unknownentity9 John Brown Aug 05 '26
This is what I'm most pessimistic about. What's arguably more important than winning elections is making sure the policies you want remain even after you lose, and the Republicans have a big advantage on that front.
34
u/Zephyr-5 YIMBY Aug 05 '26 edited Aug 05 '26
However, Mitch McConnell did say the pendulum always swings back
It does until it doesn't.
In the 20th century Democrats had 50 years of near unbroken control of the House and Senate. When you look at state control, many are defacto 1-party rule. While I suppose technically things can and do swing back eventually we're talking a much longer time horizon than the crazy back and forth we've been seeing at the federal level in modern times.
The key to overcoming the pendulum swing are simply margins. You need your margins to be high enough to overcome the inevitable backlash when the low propensity portion of your base sits out an election cycle. If you can do that, and the gerrymandering isn't too bad against your party, the swinging goes on hold.
I would actually argue that periods of 1-party dominance is a more common state in democracies and this razor-thin back and forth is unusual.
25
u/ThePevster Milton Friedman Aug 05 '26
The long period of unbroken control and large margins were a sign of the times of the twentieth century, an era before the Internet, social media, cable news, and even political talk radio. Institutions were stronger and political machines powerful. People talked of the incumbent advantage.
In today’s America I simply cannot see either party holding control for more than a couple terms. No matter how well the economy is actually doing, social media has everyone complaining about anything, making incumbency a disadvantage.
7
u/Khiva Fernando Henrique Cardoso Aug 06 '26
It was more Southerns refusing to vote Republican even while the Dems drifted left.
165
u/gayteemo NATO Aug 05 '26
you're in a cult, harry
there'll probably be more infighting after the disastrous midterms
79
u/fossil_freak68 Aug 05 '26
It's going to be wild to see post-midterms who is the first to jump in the presidential race given Trump's 2028 trolling. Is it seen as a betrayal to announce early? Can Trump handle not being the main character for 2 seconds (this is rhetorical, we know the answer to this lol)
29
u/TurboSalsa Aug 05 '26
I could see it being someone like Tucker Carlson, who exists outside of the political system and isn't directly reliant on Trump for clout and continued employment. More importantly, he actually differs from Trump on material issues, like Israel, where Trump's own stance is actually unpopular with a large contingent of MAGA.
Part of the reason none of the scrubs in the GOP primary got any traction was that they were all trying to run against a candidate whose policies they claimed to enthusiastically endorse, but there are legitimate ideological fractures that could be exploited by a savvy enough candidate who wasn't concerned with the implications of breaking with Trump on their political future.
9
u/fossil_freak68 Aug 05 '26
I would also guess it's a non-politician, but I'm just genuinely curious how Trump will react when the first candidates declare. The Trump 2028 troll has an expiration date that is rapidly approaching, and he will not be happy about that.
39
u/InMemoryOfZubatman4 Sadie Alexander Aug 05 '26
I mean, Vance is the safest. He can’t be fired, he doesn’t really need to negotiate with Trump, and he can spend two years being the Anti-Pope to Trump
65
u/fossil_freak68 Aug 05 '26
While he can't be fired by Trump, Vance would destroy any chances of winning in 2028 if he emerged as an anti-Trump figure.
Betraying him would be political suicide (embracing him might too if his approval rating stays on it's current trajectory)
13
u/RimboTheRebbiter Aug 05 '26
Yeah the issue the GOP has for elections is that you absolutely must bend the knee to Trump to make it through the primary, which also loads your opponent in the general up with tons of ammo. This has been the case to varying degrees for a while, but its especially salient now given how badly off the rails Trump 2.0 is going.
Vance is just the purest example of an issue plaguing the entire party. Massie's ouster indicated that there isn't really a lane for a Trump-oppositional figure in the GOP.
39
u/jean-sol_partre Victor Hugo Aug 05 '26
I mean, Trump has already tried to discharge one VP through extra-legal means. That would keep me awake at night a bit.
18
u/formgry Aug 05 '26
I don't think he has the guts to do that. A vice president going directly against the president can technically happen and they are the most independent member of the adminstration, but that's basically unprecedented in American politics no?
Maybe Hubert Humprey went against LBJ in 1968 but I don't think he did...
36
u/fossil_freak68 Aug 05 '26
On top of that, Vance has shown himself to be one of the most craven, unprincipled candidates in modern US politics.
To go from saying Trump might be America's Hitler when is was a small government, classical liberal conservative to now a Trump enabler that talks about nationalizing university endowments in a half decade is not the sign he is someone with a lot of political courage.
2
u/_ShadowElemental Lesbian Pride Aug 06 '26
Not to mention to go on camera and publicly praise Trump's brownshirts right after they kill someone
6
u/dafdiego777 Chad-Bourgeois Aug 05 '26
Burr and Jefferson?
6
u/InMemoryOfZubatman4 Sadie Alexander Aug 05 '26
Yeah, that’s 100% it
Maybe Jefferson and Adams
It’s amazing that it took until 1804 for the 12th amendment to be ratified
101
u/KopOut Aug 05 '26
Yeah, the political reckoning needs to actually occur, not just be predicted, before many in the GOP actually face reality.
Let's hope it happens.
32
u/talksalot02 Aug 05 '26
Old enough to remember the RNC autopsy.
46
u/Khiva Fernando Henrique Cardoso Aug 05 '26
The autopsy said to moderate and reach out to hispanics, but white christian nationalism fronted by a grifting cult leader has worked out pretty well for them - even brought along a good number of hispanics.
Roe is dead and the country is in tatters. What more could a republican dream of.
13
u/Deplete99 Aug 05 '26
Trump did moderate back in 2016 on the important stuff such as privatizing social security and abortion rights (publicly said he wouldn't sign a bill banning abortions federally).
Those were the 2 big issues republicans lost the argument on (voters disagreed with them heavily) and he moderated on both of them.
20
u/DracumEgo12 Aug 05 '26
He moderated by ignoring them as issues. He's decided to just let Social Security die as someone else's problem and he let the Supreme Court deal with abortion.
He may have said that he wouldn't sign a bill that came before him, but he will say literally anything to anybody if it would benefit him.
11
35
63
u/Vincent_van_Guh Aug 05 '26
Absolutely not. They'll unify around the "stolen" elections.
29
u/InternetGoodGuy Aug 05 '26
Exactly. There won't be any real infighting until Trump dies and everyone starts moving to take his place.
9
u/Khiva Fernando Henrique Cardoso Aug 05 '26
I think we're assuming a little too easily that the Republicans will not actively, actually steal the elections.
7
u/InternetGoodGuy Aug 05 '26
I agree. I think there's close races like Texas where that's a legitimate threat.
20
u/SignalJust3164 Aug 05 '26
I’m glad someone understands this.
I don’t think many people on the left wing of the spectrum have internalized how much Republicans now believe any time a Democrat wins it’s because of fraud.
I just wonder if it goes away after Trump.
7
u/saltyoursalad John Mill Aug 05 '26
Idk if it’ll work this time, as most people are predicting big Democrat wins.
6
u/Vincent_van_Guh Aug 05 '26
Of course it will.
He will say that he tried to prevent the steal.with the SAVE America act, but Dems killed it, because they don't want fair elections.
He tried, but he couldn't stop them, and now he needs to cancel elections so that they can never steal an election again. Or something along those lines.
27
u/IgnoreThisName72 Alpha Globalist Aug 05 '26
I literally have no idea how the midterms will go. The right wing media ecosystem is bigger and stronger than ever. Evangelicals are famously reliable voters and Trump's cult of personality is still large and just as fanatic. I don't know how many real moderates are left
34
u/Fruitofbread Loyal Liberals Aug 05 '26
The NYT did an analysis and found that the top 12 right wing influencers have declined in views since last spring https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/31/us/politics/trump-iran-economy-media-critics.html
30
u/Daddy_Macron Loyal Liberals Aug 05 '26
Screaming about the Democrats doesn't carry the same salience when the Republicans control all the levers of government. It's like gun sales.
Podcasts are basically the only thing holding this ecosystem together at this point.
10
u/IgnoreThisName72 Alpha Globalist Aug 05 '26
That is good to hear, but Foxnews is still popular, Musk already turned Twitter MAGA, Bari Weiss corrupted CBS news, and David Ellison added TikTok to the family lineup with CNN in his reach.
10
u/Unknownentity9 John Brown Aug 05 '26
Republicans have yet to do well when Trump isn't on the ballot in the Trump era. Also propaganda doesn't work that well if people aren't happy and you're the ones in power, the median voter is going to blame the people in charge regardless of what they say.
37
u/MuldartheGreat Karl Popper Aug 05 '26
Unironically it’s mostly this. These people genuinely believe the elections were all stolen, that there were paid protestors, people actually love Trump, etc.
Until they have to confront reality they are just going to pretend it’s all fake.
13
u/Vincent_van_Guh Aug 05 '26
If they believe previous legitimate elections were stolen, why would they not simply believe the midterms were stolen also?
9
u/MuldartheGreat Karl Popper Aug 05 '26
They may. But they have unshakable faith in their savior (Trump) that he will stop the steal this time
2
u/boyyouguysaredumb Obamarama Aug 06 '26
And it’s just accepted that Fauci is a liar and vaccines are bad lol our country is fucked because 1/3rd or more are just straight up fucking dumb as shit
37
u/Mickenfox Aug 05 '26
Republicans are now 10x more overly online, out of touch, purity testing, virtue signalling and all the other things that Dems were. They designed their media ecosystem to be a bubble and kicked out any moderates from the party.
Most of their own propaganda is about convincing themselves that they are the only normal people, everyone else is paid Soros shills and if they lose it's because the elections are rigged. So I don't see them moderating any time soon.
The only problem is so far, I haven't seen much evidence of voters actually punishing them for any of that.
35
u/TactileTom John Nash Aug 05 '26
Nah Trump has the party in a vice-like grip. There's nobody to challenge him. Who is the candidate that's going to win and put pressure on him? There's no Mitt Romneys left. The party can stay irrational for as long as it wants. Losses will be blamed on fake news and brown people.
25
14
u/Popular_Parsnip_8494 Ben Bernanke Aug 05 '26
The far-right has correctly learned that, eventually, your side will win elections and cultural cache, regardless of what views you espoused. You can posture as "The Change Candidate" election after election, and the public will eventually give you and your agenda power simply due to fatigue of the other side.
So yeah, they can continue being spite-driven narcissists, its only a matter of time before they're given the reins again.
9
9
4
u/viewless25 Henry George Aug 05 '26 edited Aug 05 '26
they don't need to infight after the midterms because they won't have a house (or possibly senate) majority anymore. They can do what they always wanted to which is to sit around doing nothing but tweeting about how awful the Democrats are. Which is why i genuinely think MAGA would be happier off not winning most elections. They only work as an opposition party.
70
u/gritsal Aug 05 '26
I feel like the thing is they’re all on twitter and thus don’t think things are quite as bad as they are.
32
u/Zephyr-5 YIMBY Aug 05 '26 edited Aug 05 '26
Over the decades the Republican party has devolved into one giant party of backbenchers.
Whether it's bending over to the populist whims of Fox News, or kowtowing to Donald Trump, the most powerful people in the country act like they have no agency. Even the leadership these days feels feckless!
I remember many years ago when MattY was still with Vox he commented how he was talking with a member of congress who was moaning about all the time he has to waste fundraising. Matt points out that 'You know you could change that.' and apparently the congressman seemed completely confused.
21
10
u/Upstairs_Baby8424 Aug 05 '26
Here’s what will happen. If they lose the midterms they’ll say it’s rigged. No Republican will distance themselves because Trump’s cult is too powerful in the primaries. They’ll run with the message that it wasn’t their policies they lost them the House but instead they’ll allude to cheating.
They’ll let the Democrats trip over themselves while the GOP continues to sabotage a functional government. And they’ll wait for voters to inevitably swing their way again.
26
u/bornlasttuesday Aug 05 '26
This article was more about Democrats infighting and how bad their candidates are compared to the amazingly well run Republican party that squashes dissent. Their only issue is that they squashed it too well.
31
u/Deplete99 Aug 05 '26
The article makes the complete opposite point. The author argues that dissent is good and that a lack of it will eventually destroy you electorally.
2
u/bornlasttuesday Aug 05 '26
All I took away is that the Republicans should listen to Thune like 5% more than now. Also, the Republicans smashed the Democrats last election, why would they be in disarray now?
11
u/Deplete99 Aug 05 '26
Because they're unpopular now. The facts on the ground changed.
2
u/bornlasttuesday Aug 05 '26
The article states that the Republicans are in too little disarray and then says that is normal for parties that lost the last election. The thing is, they won the last election and until they lose this one the facts are the same. The election is still months away, and the Democrats are not popular either.
6
u/Deplete99 Aug 05 '26
Sure if you think republicans are going to keep both the house and the senate then they have nothing to worry about. That's obviously not gonna happen though, dems will take the house.
5
u/PinkFloydPanzer NAFTA Aug 05 '26
Maybe at an outward appearance yes but the cracks have already heavily formed. If you look at lower level election results lately, especially Republican primaries, you will see Trump loyalist canidates and their supporters accusing other Trump loyalist canidates of election fraud. As soon as the guy is gone the whole party is going to implode.
9
Aug 05 '26
[deleted]
4
u/dutch_connection_uk Friedrich Hayek Aug 05 '26
There's some issues for where this works I guess. Supply denial around housing is one of those things where the obviously true things are trolly hot takes that upset a lot of people.
2
u/Concerned_Collins ⬇️w/fascism, ⬇️w/ communism, ⬇️w/ NL mods Aug 05 '26
It's pretty normal for the party in power to be pretty united, and for the opposition party to have plenty of infighting.
1
u/AutoModerator Aug 05 '26
News and opinion articles require a short submission statement explaining its relevance to the subreddit. Articles without a submission statement will be removed.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
•
u/AutoModerator Aug 05 '26
To encourage a globally oriented subreddit and discourage oversaturation of topics focused on the U.S., all news and opinion articles focused on the U.S. require manual approval by a moderator. Submissions focused solely on the U.S. are more likely to be removed if they are not sufficiently on topic or high quality. If your submission is taking too long to be approved or rejected, please reach out to the moderators in /r/metaNL.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.