Good @EricLevitz look at the agony of progressivism, to which I would append one thought:https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/11/2020-election-results-biden-won-democrats-senate-loss.html …
-
-
The major eras of ideological legislation -- New Deal, Great Society, and to a lesser extent Reaganism -- all depended on larger presidential majorities. Presidents who sought big change on smaller majorities (Bush after '04, for instance) have been quickly rebuked.
Show this thread -
So if you just looked at the last century of U.S. history, you would assume that progressive goals needed a big-Democratic-majority "moment," not just "winning a series of presidential popular votes super-narrowly."
Show this thread -
The same goes for my populist friends on the right: The problem with Trump as a vehicle for a new populism *as an agenda* was always that his support had (yes) a ceiling, that he probably wasn't ever going to match even Dubya in '04.
Show this thread -
Now maybe under polarization there's just no possibility of landslides so you simply have to force any reform agenda through 51-49. But if so that represents a big change in how US politics works, w/no clear precedent, and it shouldn't be surprising that it's tough to pull off.
Show this thread -
My own view is that the (hopefully) post-decadence American future belongs to the first statesman who can be a 55-45 president for more than Obama's six months. But admittedly he or she has not yet made their appearance.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Supreme Court.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It’s hilarious that the piece doesn’t account for the complete ratfucking of the mail-in ballots by the head of the post office
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
would you call the Iraq War sweeping legislative change?
-
Is the pandemic, like 9/11, enough impetus for wide ranging change?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
LOL, if you mean putting a stake through the heart of judicial legislating with a living constitution, good. Shame it hadn't happened sooner.
- Show replies
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.