I support you in this, asahi (aside from the occasional misstep — we’re all human here). Your eloquent observations shouldn’t demoralize anyone. On the contrary, they should help prod some people to GO VOTE (for starters), who might not have otherwise.
I don’t believe you’ve ever said the United States is inevitably doomed to becoming an utter political-social-cultural hellscape. You always leave a little space for hope that it can at least stop getting worse, and maybe even bounce back a little.
To the extent you do point out the overall picture of US decline, I think that’s fine. Those who dislike you for this are under the impression that the US is somehow special, immune from the unavoidable cycles of history. (I know I’m mixing up geopolitical dominance with democratic political systems and empathetic societies here).
As for asahi’s specific post, about the Trump impeachment related facts not mattering but only the economy, I hope most of can agree that:
Yes, there will likely be more damning evidence made public and formally introduced between now and the Senate trial;
Maybe this will be enough to sway one or two Republican senators to vote for removal, but the chances of actual removal from office will never be greater than, say, 20%. It ain’t gonna happen.
The 2020 election will be closely contested — rather than being a slam dunk for the Democratic candidate, which it would have been in a world with all the same impeachment-inquiry circumstances, PLUS a stumbling economy.
Most of us here respect Nate Silver. Must we remind ourselves that, when he develops and launches the mathematical model for predicting the 2020 election (around July?), a big factor built into it will be the economy? (And remind yourself that Nate was “right” about 2016, in that his model forecast a much higher chance of a Trump electoral victory than almost anyone else was predicting).
There’s a reason he keeps being likened to Chicken Little, and it’s not just because he’s expressing pessimism. It’s because he expresses pessimism in the service of negating those who want light shone on the administration’s corruption.
Of course they should investigate, and they’re going to investigate whether I think they should or not. I’m making the rather sobering observation that, ultimately, most people are not like Straight Dope Message Board armchair pundits. There is a fundamental disconnect between the average person and their role in a democratic society. Democracy is hard work, and I am beginning to doubt that we are up to the task.
But on that note, who cares if I’m “helping” or not helping? Really?! It’s a damn message board. I’m expressing my thoughts just like anyone else. I’m expressing my shock, my horror, my outrage, and I will keep doing it. So no, I won’t shut up. And I will probably double or even triple down anytime someone asks me to.
Really, I think some of you are giving me way too much power and influence here - have been for a long time.
We’re both right. He had two models going on simultaneously: “polls only” and “polls plus.” As I recall, they never diverged much, mainly because the economy was doing well but not great, so it didn’t tend to push things much one way or the other (simply because of where we happened to be in the economic cycle, NOT because the economy is a poor predictor of elections in general. It isn’t perfect, of course.)
I’m wondering what will happen when Republicans in the Senate start subpoenaing witnesses for the trial. Do they expect Hunter Biden to testify? If I were him, I would just claim “absolute immunity”. If questioned about it, I would simply say it means whatever I want it to mean, per Trump v. Schiff.
The Republicans goal is to turn Joe Biden 2020 into the Hillary 2016 candidate, and why wouldn’t they adopt that strategy? It worked, after all.
Assuming Biden wins, they will weaken him as he hobbles across the finish line into the convention. They’ll assert that the Bidens are corrupt and rotten to their core, and that they’ll do anything to win a nomination, which will probably cause some Bernistas to sour on him. The GOP is using whatever power they have left to cast doubt on democracy, and they’re just getting started. This will go on for months.
That wasn’t the claim. They were claiming the Republicans did well in 2018 in terms of House and Senate seats compared to past Presidents’ first midterm elections. I am too lazy to create a spreadsheet. I will do 2018 and 2010 (according to Wikipedia data):
Republican president:
2018 Senate: Republicans +2 seats, Democrats -2 seats
2018 House of Representatives: Republicans -42 seats, Democrats +41 seats
Democrat president:
2010 Senate: Republicans +6 seats, Democrats -6 seats
2010 House of Representatives: Republicans +63 seats, Democrats -63 seats
The claim we were arguing was about the “walk away” movement. If it was successful in any way, then we’d be seeing fewer Americans vote Democratic. The numbers show the opposite, thus there is no significant “walk away” movement.