5 ms·

> The election seems to be heading to a never-Trumper Republican's dream: Biden wins by about 1 electoral vote. Trump rides into the sunset. (Starts a new show

> The election seems to be heading to a never-Trumper Republican's dream: Biden wins by about 1 electoral vote. Trump rides into the sunset. (Starts a new show on Fox?) The Senate stays Republican. Republicans pick up a good number of seats in the House. The Senate says no no no to anything but reasonable governance for four years. The Supreme Court looks askance at ambitious executive orders. The New York Times editorial page and lots of Very Annoying People fume about the Senate "resistance." Umm, they will have to pick another word. > More broadly, the big news of the election seems a clear rejection of the far-left agenda. 100% agree with this conclusion. I think the Biden administration will have a lot of problems in the next four years and set a massive red carpet for a huge Republican victory in 2024. They will have to pick up an economic crisis post COVID-19 and struggle with the senate. Additionally Biden has been so long in politics that he's not going to look at things with fresh eyes and question the system. He's quickly going to fall back to status quo and alienate a lot of his reluctant supporters. Trump had 50% of the country hating him, but he also had 50% of the country absolutely loving him. It's the hate for Trump which secured Biden a narrow margin, but let's be absolutely clear, nobody voted for Biden because they liked him. In some ways the Biden administration will have less support, less enthusiasm and less success that the Trump administration before him, which is kind of ironic when you think about it. Anyway, that's just my perspective as an outsider looking across the pond from Europe.

joaomacp 6y ago
Maybe it's better to look at politicians in a critical, rational way instead of an emotional, love/hate type of way.
lotsofpulp 6y ago
> The Senate says no no no to anything but reasonable governance for four years. I consider providing people with PTO, parental leave, healthcare, education, and environmental reforms to be reasonable. Apparently, according to this writer, those are part of the far-left agenda.
- chrisseaton 6y ago
  > Apparently, according to this writer, those are part of the far-left agenda. I think in US political terms, these are pretty far-left aren't they? It's not a comment on whether any individual person such as you, I, or the author think they're reasonable. The author isn't giving a personal opinion. It's about what the people would support. I think there's probably little support for these things across the broader US, for many complex historical reasons.
  - lotsofpulp 6y ago
    I wouldn’t consider them far left in US political terms. West Coast and Northeast states and IL (i.e. strong Democrat states) do have parental leave and sick leave and better healthcare programs. These are also the more populous states, so nationwide, I can easily imagine a significant portion, if not majority support these basic standards of living for their fellow countrymen.
    - chrisseaton 6y ago
      Right... so only the most far-left states do it? And you're saying that this is an argument that it's not a far-left thing? Nobody's saying it's as far-left as it's possible to go. But in US terms, it's about far-left as it goes.
      - lotsofpulp 6y ago
        To me, a useful definition of the "far"- prefix would mean that a small portion of the population supports it. I think it's clear that a very large, if not majority, portion of the US population supports the above mentioned measures, however, their federal votes are gerrymandered so that it's not actionable on the federal level. Legalizing marijuana most definitely has majority support in the US, but few states have done it. But I wouldn't classify legalizing marijuana as a far left position.
  - CurtHagenlocher 6y ago
    The candidate of the party supporting these things is likely to have gotten 3.5 million more votes than the candidate of the party opposing them. In that context, what do you mean by "little support"?
pessimizer 6y ago
> set a massive red carpet for a huge Republican victory in 2024. You're forgetting about the blinding red wave coming in 2022. Whatever actual fascist gets elected in 2024 is going to have a Republican House and Senate, and won't squander it like Obama did.
getlawgdon 6y ago
There is no "far-left agenda rejection" occurring and this article has an obvious agenda of its own. The only thing occurring is the death of and American era bright on by a radical right wing minority and morally weak Républicains that failed to reject a menace. end of story.
bryal 6y ago
> > More broadly, the big news of the election seems a clear rejection of the far-left agenda. > 100% agree with this conclusion. Except the reason that Biden isn't doing as great as he could be is because he's too centrist. He isn't getting enough of the far-left vote because of their apathy towards his agenda, which does not reach far enough by far. As an example, Florida did not vote for Biden. Not because he's too left, but because he's not left enough. The proof for this is that they also just voted to increase the minimum wage to $15. The democrats wanted a candidate with broader appeal than Bernie, but they only succeeded in alienating the social-conservatives even further.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- lotsofpulp 6y ago
  >As an example, Florida did not vote for Biden. Not because he's too left, but because he's not left enough. If this were true, then Florida's state laws wouldn't so conservative. Passing one minimum wage law, which is long overdue and lags behind any "left" state, does not lead to the conclusion that Florida would have voted for someone such as Bernie Sanders. Even the minimum wage law FL passed is very weak. It's $1 per year, starting at $10 per hour, starting Sep 1, 2021.

joaomacp 6y ago

Maybe it's better to look at politicians in a critical, rational way instead of an emotional, love/hate type of way.

lotsofpulp 6y ago

> The Senate says no no no to anything but reasonable governance for four years. I consider providing people with PTO, parental leave, healthcare, education, and environmental reforms to be reasonable. Apparently, according to this writer, those are part of the far-left agenda.

chrisseaton 6y ago
> Apparently, according to this writer, those are part of the far-left agenda. I think in US political terms, these are pretty far-left aren't they? It's not a comment on whether any individual person such as you, I, or the author think they're reasonable. The author isn't giving a personal opinion. It's about what the people would support. I think there's probably little support for these things across the broader US, for many complex historical reasons.
- lotsofpulp 6y ago
  I wouldn’t consider them far left in US political terms. West Coast and Northeast states and IL (i.e. strong Democrat states) do have parental leave and sick leave and better healthcare programs. These are also the more populous states, so nationwide, I can easily imagine a significant portion, if not majority support these basic standards of living for their fellow countrymen.
  - chrisseaton 6y ago
    Right... so only the most far-left states do it? And you're saying that this is an argument that it's not a far-left thing? Nobody's saying it's as far-left as it's possible to go. But in US terms, it's about far-left as it goes.
    - lotsofpulp 6y ago
      To me, a useful definition of the "far"- prefix would mean that a small portion of the population supports it. I think it's clear that a very large, if not majority, portion of the US population supports the above mentioned measures, however, their federal votes are gerrymandered so that it's not actionable on the federal level. Legalizing marijuana most definitely has majority support in the US, but few states have done it. But I wouldn't classify legalizing marijuana as a far left position.
- CurtHagenlocher 6y ago
  The candidate of the party supporting these things is likely to have gotten 3.5 million more votes than the candidate of the party opposing them. In that context, what do you mean by "little support"?

pessimizer 6y ago

> set a massive red carpet for a huge Republican victory in 2024. You're forgetting about the blinding red wave coming in 2022. Whatever actual fascist gets elected in 2024 is going to have a Republican House and Senate, and won't squander it like Obama did.

getlawgdon 6y ago

There is no "far-left agenda rejection" occurring and this article has an obvious agenda of its own. The only thing occurring is the death of and American era bright on by a radical right wing minority and morally weak Républicains that failed to reject a menace. end of story.

bryal 6y ago

> > More broadly, the big news of the election seems a clear rejection of the far-left agenda. > 100% agree with this conclusion. Except the reason that Biden isn't doing as great as he could be is because he's too centrist. He isn't getting enough of the far-left vote because of their apathy towards his agenda, which does not reach far enough by far. As an example, Florida did not vote for Biden. Not because he's too left, but because he's not left enough. The proof for this is that they also just voted to increase the minimum wage to $15. The democrats wanted a candidate with broader appeal than Bernie, but they only succeeded in alienating the social-conservatives even further.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
lotsofpulp 6y ago
>As an example, Florida did not vote for Biden. Not because he's too left, but because he's not left enough. If this were true, then Florida's state laws wouldn't so conservative. Passing one minimum wage law, which is long overdue and lags behind any "left" state, does not lead to the conclusion that Florida would have voted for someone such as Bernie Sanders. Even the minimum wage law FL passed is very weak. It's $1 per year, starting at $10 per hour, starting Sep 1, 2021.