This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Let's talk midterms. I haven't been keeping up with the races too much, but some quick research shows that Polymarket has odds for Democrats to take the House at ninety four percent and Democrats to take the Senate at seventy two percent (House market, Senate market). Apparently, the odds of a Republican sweep are down to five to seven percent (Balance of Power market).
Obviously, we can't really trust polls entirely. But I do trust the markets to be at least somewhat accurate, and so things are looking pretty horribly bad for Republicans. What are the actual implications if this happens? Because like I don't know, the second Trump term after Doge flopped, or rather, after Trump pulled back on Doge and was afraid to actually back them when it mattered. This whole term feels like kind of a mess.
What actual goals are going to be blocked by the Trump administration if the Democrats win a sweep? And I guess how much can they get done if they don't control the presidency? Or is it mainly, like, if they win the presidency in 2028 that things are gonna be bad? Walk me through the real ramifications of midterms flipping for the Democrats.
If the Democrats win the Senate, which I am hopeful they will not, then they will likely refuse to confirm all of Trump's judicial nominees, which will start a constitutional crisis whereby judges will only be confirmed when the same party controls both the Presidency and Senate.
Democratic control of the House, which is likely, will just become a circus of hearings and impeachments. Very little legislation is passed these days with executive action being much more important. Where was the law that allowed Biden to let in 15 million illegals?
It's really not a constitutional crisis. McConnell blocked Obama's SC nominees. The constitution didn't catch fire despite all the screaming the left did. Dems blocking Trumps Fed judge nominees is predictable escalation of norms. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Whether or not this is a productive state of affairs is besides the point.
Democratic control of the House and Senate, which seems likely will probably result in Trump's actual impeachment. The interesting question is will they pull that trigger. There are enough "reasons" to make it on its face justified but almost everyone knows that the real reason is they hate him. That would be a significant escalation of degrading norms. Leading to situations where having the presidency and failing to maintain one of the legislature chambers is fatal. Also President Vance is likely more competent and less of a situation to be milked going into the 2028 election. The political calculus will be interesting.
I'd note that the last time Dems went with a political calculus approach, RGB's retiring under Clinton instead of Obama, it blew up in their faces in a massively bad way. Are Dem voters willing to stomach another round of Dem establishment fuckups as they try 4D chutes and Ladders instead of actually delivering wins the voters want. Might be interesting to see normie Dems string the representatives up by their toes and vote DSA-version Trump into office in 2032.
Surely you are aware that it requires 2/3rds of the Senate to convict.
There are about 12 GOP Senators who are waiting around for some excuse to vote to impeach and remove Trump so they can blame all their failures on Trump and get back to the real GOP values represented by people like Mitt Romney. It all depends on what deal they can strike with JD Vance, but after Trump's behavior towards Vance over the last couple years it may not be too difficult.
And sadly, there are any number of real scandals which could be used as the excuse in the context of a horribly unpopular president. If we're in 50 or 51 territory, this is out of reach absent one of the scandals catching fire. However, as we climb up much past 52 this becomes within reach for far lesser scandals. And the media will be throwing those scandals balls hoping for one to connect regularly and they won't even need to completely make them up this time.
I'm not saying it will happen because the smartest move would be do something to Trump to placate their voters/supporters, but also keep horribly unpopular Trump in office until they can capitalize on this in 2028. And so I think their targets will be people in the Trump administration and leave Trump on top.
Who? Name them.
Mitch McConnell - Retiring in January
Bill Cassidy - BTFO by MAGA in the primary
John Cornyn - BTFO by MAGA in the primary
Susan Collins - Will be gone in the event of a blue wave. Don’t double-count her seat.
Thune, Lankford, Wicker, Risch, Moran, Fischer, Rounds, Moore Capito, Young, Cramer, Armstrong, Curtis, McCormick, Justice. If things are really dire he could also lose Kennedy, Paul, Scott and Scott, though they certainly aren't "moderates waiting for an excuse" but rather "conservatives who could flip depending on the circumstances"
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link