Top things to keep an eye on going into a Biden presidency

Author: Imabench

Posts

Total: 22
Topic's author
#1
Imabench
Imabench's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 934
3
4
9
Imabench's avatar
Imabench
3
4
9
I know I dont post much in here since 92% of this forum is a right-wing circle jerk but I wanted to kind of just put my thoughts into one place to refer back to them should I choose to keep lingering around this website. Biden has been declared the winner and barring death will be president for the next 4 years, here's what I'm keeping my eyes on 

1) Polling is, and for quite some time into the future will continue to be, completely fucked. 

Following the misread of 2016 it looked like polls made a simple mistake that threw off projections, that undereducated or rural voters were undercounted and Trump managed to get voters that dont normally vote to turn out in beefy numbers. The solution for polls therefore looked pretty simple, try to get those demographics to be more accounted for in future polling...... Yet polls fucked up this time around arguably more than they did in 2016. 

CNBC, NBC, Marist, and even Rasmussen had Biden winning Pennsylvania by 3 to 5 points yet hes currently ahead by about 0.5%..... A miss of about 2.5 points just like in 2016 when polls in the state missed by almost the same margin 
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/pa/pennsylvania_trump_vs_biden-6861.html

Quinnipac, Rasmussen, and CNBC had Biden winning Florida by 1 to 5 points yet Trump carried the state by 3.4%.... Thats a 4 point swing that is TWIE as worse as the miss in 2016 when Trump outperformed by just 1 point 
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/fl/florida_trump_vs_biden-6841.html

In Wisconsin damn near EVERY POLL THAT WAS HELD IN THE STATE had Biden up by an average of 6.5% yet Biden only won by a margin of about 0.7%..... A 6 point gap that is only slightly better than the horrid 7 point gap that was uncovered in 2016. 

Unless all of this is somehow just unique to Trump and his base, and not actually reflective of the Republican base as a whole, then polls going into future elections are going to be just as similar of a crapshoot as theyve been for the last two elections.... That actually leads me a bit into my second point: 



2) Future GOP nominees will copy Trump's political playbook

After the GOP missed in 2012 with Romney, an 'autopsy' on the election led them to conclude they need to reach out to younger, black, and hispanic voters otherwise the GOP as a party will be left behind.... Trump now has TWICE shown that just appealing to their base as hard as fucking possible and relying on rural turnout to overcome bad polling is a strategy that can work since it worked once and damn near almost worked a second time. Romney and McCain when they were nominees were ale to position themselves as somewhat moderate and could appeal to independent voters, but Trump on the other hand made the GOP reflective of himself and still came closer to winning than either of the two previous nominees..... Whoever runs for the GOP in 2024, 2028, and even 2032 are going to be more inclined to try to rally the GOP base as hard as fucking possible the way Trump has rather than try to be a moderate centrist that tries to woo independents to come to their side. 

Even the Democrats might start doing the same because their strategy of picking a moderate leftist has barely worked as well. Both Hillary and Biden have relied on being moderate democrats whose extensive time in politics make them good candidates for the job, and both times the strategy has left little distance between them and Trump's scorched-earth way of campaigning. Could the next Dem candidate after Biden tell conservatives to suck a fat dick and just try to rally liberal voters as hard as possible? It sure seems possible that it would lead to a better outcome since playing it safe and being a bit centrist cost them one election and damn near lost them another. 




3) Dems will not get the Senate within Biden's first term

If Democrats cant win a senate race in fucking MAINE against a Senator who is not even that conservative yet still has largely sided with Trump a vast majority of the time, then theres not going to be enough chances for Dems to reclaim any other seats in the midterm 2022 elections barring any monumental fuckup by the sitting senator themselves.... Florida and Ohio are squarely in the GOP column now (Rubio is especially safe in Florida since he is already hispanic and can rally cuban voters to support him), leaving Pennsylvania as the only spot where Dems really have a chance to flip a seat.... Georgia is going blue in 2020 but unless Stacey Abrahms runs for senate again and manages to win this time, I dont see how Democrats flip that seat either


Topic's author
#2
Imabench
Imabench's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 934
3
4
9
Imabench's avatar
Imabench
3
4
9
my fucking internet keeps cutting out so let me keep this part brief 

4) Harris will not be the future of the Dem party.... She won the first debate and still couldnt even stay in the race long enough to make it to Iowa when voting started happening, I dont see her taking up the mantle of the Dem party once Biden steps aside.... My money is on AOC or Stacey Abrams 



5) Barring foreign policy fuckups or domestic crises, future elections will depend on who is hardest on China.....  Economics still remains king when it comes to what American voters care most about. All the social justice ideas, trust in police, stance against abortion, etc wont matter to anyone the way economic performance does. Since China is clearly our biggest economic foe, whichever candidate can most successfully position themselves as the person who will be better against China will carry the election



6) Marijuana and the Minimum Wage are no longer national issues..... if you glance at state amendments and ballot initiatives, marijuana and the minimum wage are getting handled all over the nation..... Florida went hard for Trump due to fears of 'socialism' that a Biden presidency would bring, yet voters within Florida still approved a plan to raise the minimum wage up to $15 an hour 61% to 39%..... If FLORIDA of all places can beat a 60-40 margin to damn near double the minimum wage, then other states will move to alter their own minimum wages long before the national government steps in to require it...... As for marijuana, both Montana and South Dakota opted to fully legalize marijuana, and those states are redder than Texas which has drifted a bit to the center but is still solidly a GOP state





#3
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,255
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Imabench
What are your thoughts on the future of the House?
Topic's author
#4
Imabench
Imabench's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 934
3
4
9
Imabench's avatar
Imabench
3
4
9
-->
@Greyparrot
Every modern president has had the house lose seats during midterms compared to what they walked into office with, so the GOP will manage to reclaim some seats. That part i a certainty. How many  seats the GOP gain back depends on two two things: 

1 - How Biden handles the Pandemic (if shit keeps getting worse or doesnt really change, than the GOP can regain more seats by proving that it wasnt necessarily Trump's fault it got so bad in the first place) 

2 - How hard Biden tries to push really leftist policies (if he goes full Warren or full Sanders, then you can be sure the GOP rally their base to oppose it)

If Biden can handle the pandemic at least somewhat better than Trump and he doesnt go apeshit with ideas like packing the Supreme Court or government healthcare for everyone, he will STILL lose seats cause historically every president has, but probably not enough to lose control of the House barring some sort other sort of fuckening 
#5
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,255
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Imabench
It probably depends more on Trump than Biden though. If Trump does not transfer power peacefully, the electorate might take it out on the house elections.
#6
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,698
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@Imabench
good anaylisis if result stays the same
#7
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Imabench
If Biden can handle the pandemic at least somewhat better than Trump and he doesnt go apeshit with ideas like packing the Supreme Court or government healthcare for everyone,
I can't understand how anyone could think this argument makes sense. You are arguing that as long as he doesn't do something extremely popular, that he will do well. If does something extremely popular (like providing healthcare) then he would lose. 

Obama campaigned on hope and change. He promised universal healthcare. In the end, he picked a republican healthcare plan and struggled to even implement that. He then steadily declined in popularity. You don't lose by going for healthcare reform. You lose by failing to deliver it. 

#8
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@Imabench
5) Barring foreign policy fuckups or domestic crises, future elections will depend on who is hardest on China..... 
You hit the point that protectionism is going to be much more popular going forward, but I disagree that this specific point is as powerful as you mention.

Throughout Biden's entire political career, he has supported China. Permanent Normal Trade Relations, supported them going into the WTO, said that China succeeding is good for us.

That seems to have not really hurt him in the rust belt. Meanwhile, Trump has been the hardest on China of any president in decades, potentially ever, and it doesn't seem to have helped him that much.

So, while protectionism will gain presidents some points like being hard on China, I don't see this issue being particularly that big for at least another decade or two when they would surpass our GDP and take more aggressive measures globally.

2) Future GOP nominees will copy Trump's political playbook

I  think that this could be a tossup. They might point to Trump's probable loss this year as evidence that his way won't work. They are touting his much larger GOP support among minorities.... They are ignoring that Trump won by a huge margin with tiny minority support and huge White turnout. Bragging about Black unemployment and not once mentioning White unemployment alienated the White rural base, which is something I think they will refuse to learn. They will continuously whore themselves out for small gains in minority votes at the expense of their base. While gaining more minority support should be part of a long-term strategy, they need to do so without alienating their base.

I have also unfortunately seen a lot of support for Nikki Haley, who is by no means a Trumpian and who will not fire up the base. 

At the same time, I think the record turnout for Trump all around is promising. Hopefully there can be future candidates who can adopt Trump's policies but be able to communicate them in a more mature manner. Keep the fire, but act like an adult. I'm hoping very hard for a Tucker Carlson-type for that position.





Other than that, I think this was a pretty good analysis. Don't leave the website, bro!

I think that something you might have missed was how much more distrust people will have in the media, especially left-wing media, going forward. They damaged their credibility horrendously by pursuing the "Russian collusion" narrative that never panned out. They got emotional and clearly conveyed information in a very skewed lens. The "fake news" slogan has penetrated the American political realm, and I think that this will be around for years to come. 

Tucker Carlson, on the other hand, is making huge gains in his program. If he is on an opposition news network, I assume that those numbers will only continue to grow. A new right-wing populist/nationalist working class movement is gaining a lot of ground in the GOP, and I couldn't be happier.
#9
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,255
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Imabench
Other than that, I think this was a pretty good analysis. Don't leave the website, bro!

Ditto. I know you don't think much of me, but your contributions are gold here.
Topic's author
#10
Imabench
Imabench's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 934
3
4
9
Imabench's avatar
Imabench
3
4
9
-->
@HistoryBuff
" You are arguing that as long as he doesn't do something extremely popular, that he will do well. If does something extremely popular (like providing healthcare) then he would lose. "

Polling on healthcare is borderline incomprehensible to obtain because the questions are either worded without proper context or because polling sites clearly dont know how to sample the American population..... People like having their own healthcare plans that come from their employer, people dont like the idea of the US government being in charge of all heealthcare.... If Biden pushes for a Public Option, that would be about as far as he could go to the left on healthcare without really rallying the GOP against him and the Dems in subsequent elections. Anything beyond that becomes a campaign slogan that the GOP will be able to flog hard. 

"He promised universal healthcare. In the end, he picked a republican healthcare plan and struggled to even implement that. He then steadily declined in popularity"

2 things, 1) Obama never promised universal healthcare he only wanted to improve access and quality of it  since the last time major changes to healthcare was back in the 1960's, and 2) The healthcare reforms we got were different than the ones initially promised because part of passing legislation in this country involves COMPROMISING WITH THE OTHER SIDE which seems to be an increasingly foreign concept to some people..... 

Topic's author
#11
Imabench
Imabench's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 934
3
4
9
Imabench's avatar
Imabench
3
4
9
Summarizing previous points from before 

1) Polling is, and for quite some time into the future will continue to be, completely fucked. 
2) Future GOP nominees will copy Trump's political playbook
3) Dems will not get the Senate within Biden's first term
4) Harris will not be the future of the Dem party
5) Barring foreign policy fuckups or domestic crises, future elections will depend on who is hardest on China....
6) Marijuana and the Minimum Wage are no longer national issues....

New ones Im adding 

7) Mitch McConnel will decide how much healthcare reform is made.... If he chooses to be relentlessly obstructionist or a careful compromiser, enough of the GOP will fall in line behind him and follow his lead since he is one of the few GOP politicians to actually survive from 2012 to beyond 2020. 

8) Trump wont get prosecuted for anything..... Federally.....  The vote margin being this close makes it really risky to try to really go after Trump for shit he did/allegedly did while in office, I dont see someone like Biden going out of his way to really bring Trump down to the ground. By February of 2021 Trump will officially be in the past, most Americans will  probably want to leave him there. So federally I think Trump is safe, he'll just have to look out for any state attorney that files charges against him (New York) 

9) Tom Cotton will run for president in 2024...... I can see this coming from a fucking mile away, no Senator goes to fuck around in New Hampshire of all places just to help out candidates who are further down on the ballot and not part of the actual presidential ticket itself unless they have long term plans and want to show off their face in the state. Cotton is going to try to model himself as the next Trumpian version of Trump and will absolutely try to run in 2024 https://www.businessinsider.com/tom-cotton-laying-groundwork-2024-presidential-run-new-hampshire-2020-10

10) Biden might actually choose to serve only one term..... The thing im most curious about, more than anything else right now, is whether or not Biden will try to run for reelection in 2024.... He knows damn well that the biggest reason he won the Dem nomination was because people thought he could beat Trump, and that the biggest reason he ultimately won was because he wasnt Trump. If Biden handles the Coronavirus and attempts to pass some healthcare legislation, he might just choose to walk away with whatever accomplishes he has at that point and let other Dems have a shot at the presidency. Hes 77 now, will be 81 in 2024, even RBG only lasted until 87, I could see Biden walking away from running for president at the end of this term on his own accord. 

11) Police Reform is way too fucking toxic for Dems to campaign on..... The way national elections go in today's America, police reform is going to have to be something handled at the state/governor level. There's no fucking way Dems can include police reforms as a main part of their platform and be able to run on it + win with it. The recent shootings/killings and subsequent protests against them was far more of a liability to Democrats than it was any sort of rallying cry, that will likely keep being the case going forward. 

12) We have even fewer swing states than before...... Traditionally a swing state was any state where the margin of vote between both candidate was less than 5%, I think its safe to say its now lower then that considering how polarized both sides are. VA, CO, NH, and NM are definitely blue states, FL, OH and IA are now red states..... The biggest swing states right now are Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona, and maybe Nevada..... Thats it, those are the only states.... Theyre worth 79 electoral votes combines while the others are split damn near evenly at 227 to 232 for the GOP..... We'll see where Texas is at in another 8 years 

Yes I know Florida is very swing-state-ish but Ive lived in this state for damn near 30 years now and if it went for 400,000 votes in favor of the GOP under THESE circumstances then I struggle to think what would have to happen for the state to change its mind and start voting for Dems again. 

#12
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,255
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Imabench
I struggle to think what would have to happen for the state to change its mind and start voting for Dems again. 

How can Florida Dems court the Hispanic vote?
#13
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Imabench
 1) Obama never promised universal healthcare he only wanted to improve access and quality of it  since the last time major changes to healthcare was back in the 1960's
Obama literally said the words "We can have universal health care by the end of the next president’s first term". Here is a link. I agree he didn't actually mean it. but he did say it. 

2) The healthcare reforms we got were different than the ones initially promised because part of passing legislation in this country involves COMPROMISING WITH THE OTHER SIDE which seems to be an increasingly foreign concept to some people..... 
Obama had control of congress, the senate and the presidency. He had the ability to pass what he wanted. The plan he picked was RomneyCare with a few tweaks. 



Topic's author
#14
Imabench
Imabench's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 934
3
4
9
Imabench's avatar
Imabench
3
4
9
-->
@Greyparrot
How can Florida Dems court the Hispanic vote?
The easiest ways would be for the next nominee to openly be a dick to Cuba and Venezuela to appeal to the older generation of hispanic Americans who first fled those countries decades ago,  or for the Vice President pick to be a Cuban American (Miami Mayor Francis Suarez is registered as a Republican, but won his most recent re-election with fucking 86% of the total vote) 

The more difficult path would be for future Dem nominees to somehow explain how whatever 'socialist' policies that are part of the Dem platform are different then the socialist policies that Cuban and Venezuelan dictators promised when they made moves to clinch power. Thats really difficult to do though and will only continue to become more difficult to do since the Dem party is likely going to drift more to the left in subsequent elections. 



#15
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,255
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Imabench
That's really difficult to do though and will only continue to become more difficult to do since the Dem party is likely going to drift more to the left in subsequent elections. 
Do you see a scenario where the Dems purge the extreme socialists out of the party? What would that look like?
Can they do it without losing too much relative support?

Topic's author
#16
Imabench
Imabench's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 934
3
4
9
Imabench's avatar
Imabench
3
4
9
Obama had control of congress, the senate and the presidency
The senate 'control' was a farce.... After 2008 the Dems had a 59-41 majority which was 1 short of a super majority, but two of those senators were independent and 7 other senators were from super republican states such as Alaska, Montana. South Dakota, Iowa, Arkansas, Louisiana, and West Virginia..... Senators from those states were never going to give Obama a free pass to pass anything he wanted, especially since only one of them were actually elected in 2008 and all the others were already in office before Obama was even on the map. 

So Obama had to water down his plans a little bit to get support from his party in order to get it passed. 

After the Finance Committee vote on October 15, negotiations turned to moderate Democrats. Majority leader Harry Reid focused on satisfying centrists. The holdouts came down to Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, an independent who caucused with Democrats, and conservative Nebraska Democrat Ben Nelson. Lieberman's demand that the bill not include a public option[147][161] was met,[162] although supporters won various concessions, including allowing state-based public options such as Vermont's failed Green Mountain Care.[162][163]

The White House and Reid addressed Nelson's concerns[164] during a 13-hour negotiation with two concessions: a compromise on abortion, modifying the language of the bill "to give states the right to prohibit coverage of abortion within their own insurance exchanges", which would require consumers to pay for the procedure out of pocket if the state so decided

On December 23, the Senate voted 60–39 to end debate on the bill: a cloture vote to end the filibuster.[167] The bill then passed, also 60–39, on December 24, 2009, with all Democrats and two independents voting for it, and all Republicans against
Topic's author
#17
Imabench
Imabench's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 934
3
4
9
Imabench's avatar
Imabench
3
4
9
-->
@Greyparrot
Do you see a scenario where the Dems purge the extreme socialists out of the party? What would that look like?
Funny enough, theres a way where it could happen almost naturally....

If Bernie dies or retires (he's 79 and already had a heart attack),  and if Warren retires (She's 71 and her term ends in 2024) and AOC decides to leave politics (which she is already considering https://www.businessinsider.com/aoc-says-she-may-quit-politics-dems-blame-progressives-losses-2020-11) then who does that leave to carry the torch for the super left-wing in the Dem party? 

Right now theres only 3 Democrats that Americans really know about that represent the far left. Two of them are damn near the end of their careers while the other has barely started. If the elder two leave the picture via death or retirement, and AOC doesnt feel like being the face of the next wave of far left voters, then the Dem Party can drift back closer to to the center with only small repercussions.... If the GOP also continues to pull to the right and embrace Trump's methods for just about everything while this happens, then I think Dems could strengthen their position in elections without pissing off progressives since they will be more outraged at where the GOP is going than where the DEMs are going. 
#18
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Imabench
You are very wrong about point 4.
#19
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,255
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Imabench
Do you think Pelosi maintains the second most powerful position in the government despite the 9+ seat loss of House seats?

Who do you think might replace her and what would it mean for the direction of the party policywise?
Topic's author
#20
Imabench
Imabench's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 934
3
4
9
Imabench's avatar
Imabench
3
4
9
Do you think Pelosi maintains the second most powerful position in the government
Nah Pelosi is third behind McConnell since the GOP maintain control of the Senate (for now at least).... McConnell will also be the one to decide if Biden gets anything done these next four years, whereas Pelosi will fall in line with what Biden thinks should be the course of action. 

Who do you think might replace her and what would it mean for the direction of the party policywise?
I havent the faintest fuckin idea tbh.... Since Pelosi has decided to step down in 2022 ( https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/lissandravilla/nancy-pelosi-has-agreed-to-step-down-by-2022-to-secure-the ) whoever the house votes to replace her will be the one who could really influence policy in the house. Theres just two/three issues with that 

#1 - Because the win over Trump was narrow and not as big as some anticipated, Dem House members may vote for the next speaker to be someone who is fairly centrist to try to preserve the slim majority they have in the country, rather than nominating someone that will pull the party further to the left and piss off enough centrists back to the GOP and tip things back in their direction. 

#2 - Because Biden is still the one who ultimately beat Trump and is now President, the Speaker of the House will likely follow his lead on things since he does pull rank on them.... UNLESS: 

#2A - If Biden decides to only serve 1 term, then the new Speaker of the House in 2022 will will have to wait two more years to see what happens with the Dem nomination in 2024 and see if a moderate centrist candidate wins or if someone further towards the left takes the mantle. Whoever the nominee is in 2024 will be the one to dictate Dem party policy, and the Speaker of the House will follow suit. 

Whatever the fuck happens, I dont see the Speaker of the House trying to position themselves to dictate/reform/revamp/alter Democratic Party Policy stances going into the future. The political climate is too hot for them to move further to the left, while Biden and the next nominee for the party in either 2024 or 2028 will likely dictate which direction the party chooses to go to begin with..... Hell whoever does become Speaker will probably be someone with a national profile so low that they wouldnt have the gravitas to move the Dem party one way or another even if they wanted to. Can any average person name any Democrats in the House of representatives who is not or in a squad that consists of AOC? 
 
Topic's author
#21
Imabench
Imabench's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 934
3
4
9
Imabench's avatar
Imabench
3
4
9
If I had to guess who could replace Pelosi though, I think it would be James Clyburn for the following reasons: 

1 - Hes Black, and everyone knows that Dems put a lot of stock into showcasing diversity or making historical 'firsts' when it comes to race ("Democrats elect first African American Speaker of the House" is a headline I can immediately see something Dems would like to see happen) 

2 - Hes from South Carolina, arguably the only state even more fucked up than Florida..... If Dems want to try to make gains into centrist and GOP territory, making their leader a guy who has to survive as a Democrat in South Carolina would be a solid start compared to electing someone who comes from the super-liberal Northeast or the West coast....

3 - He's already publicly shit on the 'Defund the Police' movement (
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/james-clyburn-john-lewis-defund-the-police-messages-black-lives-matter/ ) If you want the next Speaker to not be someone that cannot be easily accused of being an extreme leftist, then choosing a black guy who himself thinks that defunding the police is a stupid idea is a pretty solid start. Dems will want to reclaim the middle since they havent done so as much as they think they have, so electing someone who is already openly critical of some of the more leftist policy ideas would be a good move to make. 

4 - Hes already the number 3 Democrat in the House of Representatives...... 
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/who-could-become-speaker-of-the-house-if-pelosi-doesnt/  Clyburn isnt coming from out of nowhere, hes the 3rd highest ranking member of the Democratic Party in the House, with Pelosi being first and old ass unremarkable white guy Steny Hoyer from Maryland coming in at number 2. No other Dem House politician has a heavy amount of leadership experience apart from those 3 I just mentioned, and I dont think House Dems would be ballsy enough to elect someone who is pretty new to politics in general as their next leader for perhaps a decade

#22
Danielle
Danielle's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 2,049
3
3
4
Danielle's avatar
Danielle
3
3
4
New Jersey also legalized marijuana which is excellent news. All states should legalize ASAP. 

It's interesting that both you and thett have suggested Dems should move left while simultaneously acknowledging that moving left would cost them to lose. 

I also think it's interesting that the party which claims to hate identity politics indeed banks on identity politics helping their candidates as well, i.e. Rubio. 

I don't think anyone has any idea what will happen in 2022 yet. It depends on who's more motivated to show up to the polls when Trump isn't on the ballot.