That's putting it mildly. When it comes to ringing alarm bells and getting the public to turn against Trump, Rs play an essential role. Ds ringing the alarm bells won't do diddly. I saw an Atlantic article entitled, "Where is Obama?" The question should be, "Where is GW Bush?" Bush or other prominent Rs would carry so much more weight.
The relative ineffectiveness of Dick Cheney, and other prominent RS, speaking out has more to do with the, isolated, one-off nature of their pronouncements, in my view. What's needed is a *group* of prominent Rs making a *sustained* PR campaign against Trump. I understand the fear that Rs have, but I'm still sad and disappointed that there isn't a prominent R leading this sort of effort.
Democrats must win big in 2026. Not by a whisker. Not just in districts with strong Democratic leadership. It has to be a serious and substantial change in the ideological population of the the whole of government. Even then, Trump (or Vance) will be in the White House until 2028. The Supreme Court will still be far right. Violent MAGA will still be there, even if weakened.
Caution is warranted. We must elect substantive, unselfish, smart, patriotic, experienced candidates. See governors, state legislators, business leaders. If we elect firebrands or egoists it will be harder to right the ship.
To win big (i.e., "not by a whisker) they'll likely have to win many of people who are merely casual news consumers. How do you reach and convince them to vote for Ds? To me, it's prominent Rs/Conservatives speaking out against Trump.
The other route involves a very bad economy, inflation, or maybe some catastrophic event--this likely could draw a lot of these Americans. But I wish I were more confident. The fractured media environment gives me pause.
The thing that can break through, in my view, are prominent Rs and Conservatives basically criticizing Trump in a sustained way.
I agree that Republicans would add value, just don't think they will.
"I agree that Republicans would add value..."
That's putting it mildly. When it comes to ringing alarm bells and getting the public to turn against Trump, Rs play an essential role. Ds ringing the alarm bells won't do diddly. I saw an Atlantic article entitled, "Where is Obama?" The question should be, "Where is GW Bush?" Bush or other prominent Rs would carry so much more weight.
Well, he's kept quiet for 10 years. At this point, his clout is limited. Look how effective Dick Cheney was.
The relative ineffectiveness of Dick Cheney, and other prominent RS, speaking out has more to do with the, isolated, one-off nature of their pronouncements, in my view. What's needed is a *group* of prominent Rs making a *sustained* PR campaign against Trump. I understand the fear that Rs have, but I'm still sad and disappointed that there isn't a prominent R leading this sort of effort.
Democrats must win big in 2026. Not by a whisker. Not just in districts with strong Democratic leadership. It has to be a serious and substantial change in the ideological population of the the whole of government. Even then, Trump (or Vance) will be in the White House until 2028. The Supreme Court will still be far right. Violent MAGA will still be there, even if weakened.
Caution is warranted. We must elect substantive, unselfish, smart, patriotic, experienced candidates. See governors, state legislators, business leaders. If we elect firebrands or egoists it will be harder to right the ship.
To win big (i.e., "not by a whisker) they'll likely have to win many of people who are merely casual news consumers. How do you reach and convince them to vote for Ds? To me, it's prominent Rs/Conservatives speaking out against Trump.
The other route involves a very bad economy, inflation, or maybe some catastrophic event--this likely could draw a lot of these Americans. But I wish I were more confident. The fractured media environment gives me pause.
The thing that can break through, in my view, are prominent Rs and Conservatives basically criticizing Trump in a sustained way.