On the specific point you mentioned in the footnotes about Democrats not being rewarded for expanding the safety net, correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think there’s ever been a time where that happened. Democrats did poorly in the midterms after creating Medicare and Medicaid and again after creating the ACA.
Republicans were never rewarded for tax cuts either. People don’t vote to say thank you but they do vote to say screw you.
Regarding non-expansion states electing Republicans, it’s one thing to deny people something they’ve never had. Taking something away like this bill does is a different story. That’s particularly true now given how many Medicaid beneficiaries voted for Trump.
I can't believe I am saying this, but I think Democrats' response to the OBBB should be to lie about it.
Seriously. Just blame every health care problem on the OBBB, and let Republicans spend time and lung-power explaining why that is wrong. Most Republican congresspeople won't be able to make such explanations--the bill was rushed through Congress and they didn't really understand what they voted for--and as has been said, when you are explaining, you're losing. Voters will mostly tune out explanations anyway, so what's the downside? George Will might get angry? The Wall Street Journal will run a scathing op-ed?
Ten years ago I would never have considered endorsing outright dishonesty from politicians, but it's been a LONG ten years. Republicans smeared Democrats by lying about the ACA, so now I think it is time Democrats returned the favor.
I think these are good points and I wish this kind of political analysis was more common. Two glaring omissions:
1) The budget for border enforcement has been hugely expanded. It's hard to see this as anything but an attempt to create a paramilitary force under the control of the presidency. ICE's activities in the past few months have been unpopular and given that they're walking through the authoritarian playbook step-by-step--overreach->protests->violent suppression of protest->curfews/disappearances/fear/control--I doubt they'll suddenly become teddy bears with more money. ICE is going to be used as a paramilitary force in areas that look less and less like border enforcement. They'll be very unpopular, but also a populace in fear will likely not resist. I expect political violence to ramp up both in terms of who is committing the violence and who are victims. Policy popularity may not be very important under those conditions., e.g. I suspect Thais if freely polled would not be strong supporters of lèse-majesté.
2) Tariffs. Nothing this year has surprised me more than Trump's dogged pursuit of tariffs. It's an unforced error that will only destabilize his efforts to exert control. Tariffs and the deficit will cause rampant inflation and shortages. Maybe economic turmoil is to the benefit of authoritarian takeover? We'll see. I do think billionaires are going to be surprised how much power comes from wielding an army and how little a billion dollars will buy you wrt geopolitics.
Mass deportation looks bad on film, at least to most non-MAGA types. Imagine how unpopular it might be when even MAGAs find that the people who cut their grass, trim their trees, and replace their roofs have been sent to South Sudan.
Didn't we learn in 2024 that the electorate's understanding of the economic state of the country is mostly based on vibes? As in "Yeah, all of my kids now finally have good jobs and my retirement account is actually doing quite well - so well that I bought a new Tesla that is saving me a bundle at the pump - and with Medicare and Social Security my aging parents are not breaking the bank for me but WOW did you see the price of Schlitz at the Wawa? This economy is the WORST! MAGA!"
I can't imagine the economic vibes are going to be great in 2026 for a host of reasons, which gives Democrats a grab bag of issues to campaign on. The OBBB is just one - and one that works well as a soundbite. "Republicans LIED when they said they wouldn't touch Medicaid" is a possibility. I'd suspect that midterm voters are generally not on Medicaid themselves, but care about it, so whether those cuts kick in before the election is kinda irrelevant. The trick is going to be crafting a message that defuses the Republican's refrain that they didn't actually make cuts at all. Maybe "Republicans claim their money-grabbing bill doesn't cut Medicare and Medicaid, but also brag that the bill cuts billions from Medicare and Medicaid. So which is it, Senator Ernst?"
That could be, but it only really matters if that issue rises above more emotionally-salient ones, like culture war stuff. I think the shift of lower-income voters towards the right and affluent professionals to the left suggests that the culture war issues matter more in the minds of the electorate.
Or... more educated people are more likely to bet on broad prosperity as a recipe for their own success. The problem with destabilizing a system, even to favor the rich, is that it's hard to predict the outcomes. I'd rather be rich in a world where everyone is happy and content than in a world where I have to step on corpses to walk up the pier to my yacht.
Income wasn't a big factor in 2024 elections. Education is a huge one and a gap that has increased significantly over the past 3-4 elections, but high and low income voters split about evenly in 2024.
On the specific point you mentioned in the footnotes about Democrats not being rewarded for expanding the safety net, correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think there’s ever been a time where that happened. Democrats did poorly in the midterms after creating Medicare and Medicaid and again after creating the ACA.
Republicans were never rewarded for tax cuts either. People don’t vote to say thank you but they do vote to say screw you.
Regarding non-expansion states electing Republicans, it’s one thing to deny people something they’ve never had. Taking something away like this bill does is a different story. That’s particularly true now given how many Medicaid beneficiaries voted for Trump.
I can't believe I am saying this, but I think Democrats' response to the OBBB should be to lie about it.
Seriously. Just blame every health care problem on the OBBB, and let Republicans spend time and lung-power explaining why that is wrong. Most Republican congresspeople won't be able to make such explanations--the bill was rushed through Congress and they didn't really understand what they voted for--and as has been said, when you are explaining, you're losing. Voters will mostly tune out explanations anyway, so what's the downside? George Will might get angry? The Wall Street Journal will run a scathing op-ed?
Ten years ago I would never have considered endorsing outright dishonesty from politicians, but it's been a LONG ten years. Republicans smeared Democrats by lying about the ACA, so now I think it is time Democrats returned the favor.
When asked why he lied about Romney cheating on his taxes, Harry Reid said "well he's not President, is he?"
I think these are good points and I wish this kind of political analysis was more common. Two glaring omissions:
1) The budget for border enforcement has been hugely expanded. It's hard to see this as anything but an attempt to create a paramilitary force under the control of the presidency. ICE's activities in the past few months have been unpopular and given that they're walking through the authoritarian playbook step-by-step--overreach->protests->violent suppression of protest->curfews/disappearances/fear/control--I doubt they'll suddenly become teddy bears with more money. ICE is going to be used as a paramilitary force in areas that look less and less like border enforcement. They'll be very unpopular, but also a populace in fear will likely not resist. I expect political violence to ramp up both in terms of who is committing the violence and who are victims. Policy popularity may not be very important under those conditions., e.g. I suspect Thais if freely polled would not be strong supporters of lèse-majesté.
2) Tariffs. Nothing this year has surprised me more than Trump's dogged pursuit of tariffs. It's an unforced error that will only destabilize his efforts to exert control. Tariffs and the deficit will cause rampant inflation and shortages. Maybe economic turmoil is to the benefit of authoritarian takeover? We'll see. I do think billionaires are going to be surprised how much power comes from wielding an army and how little a billion dollars will buy you wrt geopolitics.
Mass deportation looks bad on film, at least to most non-MAGA types. Imagine how unpopular it might be when even MAGAs find that the people who cut their grass, trim their trees, and replace their roofs have been sent to South Sudan.
Didn't we learn in 2024 that the electorate's understanding of the economic state of the country is mostly based on vibes? As in "Yeah, all of my kids now finally have good jobs and my retirement account is actually doing quite well - so well that I bought a new Tesla that is saving me a bundle at the pump - and with Medicare and Social Security my aging parents are not breaking the bank for me but WOW did you see the price of Schlitz at the Wawa? This economy is the WORST! MAGA!"
I can't imagine the economic vibes are going to be great in 2026 for a host of reasons, which gives Democrats a grab bag of issues to campaign on. The OBBB is just one - and one that works well as a soundbite. "Republicans LIED when they said they wouldn't touch Medicaid" is a possibility. I'd suspect that midterm voters are generally not on Medicaid themselves, but care about it, so whether those cuts kick in before the election is kinda irrelevant. The trick is going to be crafting a message that defuses the Republican's refrain that they didn't actually make cuts at all. Maybe "Republicans claim their money-grabbing bill doesn't cut Medicare and Medicaid, but also brag that the bill cuts billions from Medicare and Medicaid. So which is it, Senator Ernst?"
I think both parties have been slow to realize that most people on Medicaid vote Republican.
That could be, but it only really matters if that issue rises above more emotionally-salient ones, like culture war stuff. I think the shift of lower-income voters towards the right and affluent professionals to the left suggests that the culture war issues matter more in the minds of the electorate.
as we become more well-off, politics becomes less materialist and more expressive
Or... more educated people are more likely to bet on broad prosperity as a recipe for their own success. The problem with destabilizing a system, even to favor the rich, is that it's hard to predict the outcomes. I'd rather be rich in a world where everyone is happy and content than in a world where I have to step on corpses to walk up the pier to my yacht.
As people have more wealth and climb up Maslow's hierarchy they decide to spend some of their wealth on self-actualization.
Grandpa nearly died in the war and considered getting home alive a great success.
Dad was born in a barn but saw accumulating a million bucks as a great success.
What do *I* do for a success? I know, I'll call for the independence of my region. Sure, it'll cost some bucks, but life needs to have mEaNiNg, man!
(I don't like this but it just looks true every time I look at society.)
Income wasn't a big factor in 2024 elections. Education is a huge one and a gap that has increased significantly over the past 3-4 elections, but high and low income voters split about evenly in 2024.
Thanks for the correction. That's what I meant in my head, but didn't state correctly.
I was probably subconsciously overlooking the barista socialist class with college degrees, lol.