Were it facing a more pragmatic opposition leader, I'd wager the fractures within the party alluded to by the author would have kept it in a totally subdued state after November 2024. However, the unusually extreme nature of Trump's attacks on it in his second term, the unusually vast scale of his overreach, and the Orbanian bent of his governance, have galvanized the party to such a degree that, despite factional backbiting, it has remained somewhat (though not completely) unified in Congress, and its base has turned out at unprecedented levels, despite the discontent with the party as a whole it expresses in polling.
Meanwhile, Trump's failure to focus on the task he promised he'd finish on 'day one'--lower the cost of living--and the economy's stagflationary funk, have made the public more receptive to the party's criticisms, despite the dissonance of their delivery.
That won't work forever--the Democrats need a leader with a positive vision who is nimble enough to keep the party factions together, however uncomfortably, without Trump--but it may work *just* long enough to allow it to regain a decent amount of power so that it actually has the capacity to, well, *do* things. Which is the most important thing--no party can gain the approval of the public, ultimately, without the capacity to actually implement an agenda. (Whether that power will include the presidency, of course, will depend entirely on the economy in '28.)
Perhaps the worst outcome for Dems today is a win in a deep Red Tenn, with Ms. Behn. She is the ultimate Karen, straight out of central casting. Ms. Behn doesn't want to just defund the police, she wants to burn police stations to the ground. Aftyn is not just an Agnostic or Atheist, she hates Christians. Ditto for everything that makes Nashville, Nashville. The only thing missing are the Mao pajamas.
Dem wins in NJ and VA were decisive, but hardly determinative. Both are Blue States. A win in Red Tenn would convince Dems they should be looking for an army of Ms. Behns, led by General AOC. In reality, Ms Behn and her ilk, are not propelling Dems. Reps are self emolliating.
Reps should be speaking Math, not playground taunts. Dems have somehow successfully laid the blame for Biden's 4 year inflation orgy at Trump's feet, while saddling him with soaring healthcare and energy costs resulting from Dem expiring healthcare subsidies and insane Green policies. All, while insisting interior enforcement of US Immigration law is akin to 1930s Germany.
If Reps do not address the unholy trinity, Trump and his Cabinet will spend their last 2 years of his term facing impeachments and investigations, before Gavin Newsom morphs the entire US into CA.
The reality is Dems have not even tweaked a single Dem policy that elected Trump. Dems still believe in unbridled spending and immigration. Dems still desire child social engineering and unlimited Green spending and ever more govt control of American life. Dems are just smart enough to have moderated the messaging. Reps refuse to alter their language. A Behn win is exactly want Reps need, and Dems don't. Go Aftyn!
We are a long way from the midterms, and when they get here I doubt they'll be predictive of the general. The Democratic Party will probably take back the house, but not get the senate. Unless there is a huge landslide of a win the size of 2018 (40) or more it really can't be indicative of much of anything. The Democratic Party will have a big celebration, but nothing will get done anyway. Investigative hearings which I wouldn't mind but they won't do much to make America better.
There is a ton of opportunity if the Democrats stole some policy from the Republicans but the 10% of the whacky left can't let that happen and most politicians are on the record supporting crazy. Trump is making huge mistakes left and right, but he's still thought better than the alternative by quite a few.
Up until after the 28 primaries I'm more interested in issue polls, where American electorate is headed tells me more than most other things.
Everything except those pesky voter registrations, which are still going the opposite direction. Yesterday's drop saw a net gain for FL GOP of another 10,000 (Rs already leading by 1.4 million); in NC a net total GOP gain of another 6,000, which should put them over the top now, making NC a red state (active voter lead there is GOP +100,000) in a state where Democrats had a 175,000 lead just a couple of years ago; and continued net GOP gains in LA (net +3300). The only exception is PA, where Ds got a 250 gain---but months ago there was a short burst in PA during a primary. Otherwise, with those 2 exceptions and 1 mo for NV, the shifts have been UNRELENTING for now over a year in every state where we can measure: AZ, NM, NV, PA, LA, FL, DE, RI, even CA and CO.
On top of that, now it looks like both FL and IN will redistrict to the tune of 4-6 more GOP House seats.
>>>in NC a net total GOP gain of another 6,000, which should put them over the top now, making NC a red state (active voter lead there is GOP +100,000) in a state where Democrats had a 175,000 lead just a couple of years ago;<<<
As of 11/29/2025, there are more registered Democrats in NC than registered Republicans, (2,310,019 vs 2,306,897) and the stock of unaffiliated voters dwarfs either group in size. (2,952,261).
Whatever that is, it's not the proportional partisan distribution of a 'red state', unless you want to abuse the definition of that term.
That rotten activist media, always reporting on the negative effects of Trump's decisions...if only they'd stop mentioning those, he'd be the most popular president ever...
No, but I don't do what a vast proportion of MAGA-world does and use the existence of bias in certain media outlets as an excuse to choose my own reality and call inconvenient facts 'fake news'. For the reporting of basic news items I wait to hear it from outlets in the financial press and/or international publications that have a long history of avoiding yellow journalism and diverse, numbers-focused readerships that don't reward it: the Financial Times, The Economist, Foreign Policy. (for economic news add in Bloomberg Businessweek) I seek out primary sources wherever I can, because those can't be faked--court proceedings for legal battles or reports on controversial incidents and situations, CPI/PPI/U6 updates for economic developments. For commentary I prefer straightforwardly (small l) liberal outlets like TLP, but I use it as food for thought, not as gospel to regurgitate. To get a taste of intelligent conservative takes that I respect but usually don't agree with I like outlets like the Claremont Review of Books. And I dabble in the swamp of Taibbiverse to understand the alternate universe MAGA inhabits, because I know the ones who aren't lost to tabloids like the Epoch Times are busy consuming corrupted former (small l) liberals like Taibbi, who judiciously ignore all the nastiest things Trump does so they can write the bazillionth article on Russiagate or how obnoxious Katie Porter is.
What do you do, praytell, and why does it lead you to cast doubt on stuff that indisputably happened, like the murder of those Minnesota State Legislators?
It's pointless to even have a discussion with your "why does it lead you to cast doubt on stuff that indisputably happened, like the murder of those Minnesota State Legislators?" when I never said any such thing. You go ahead and believe in the pee tape and Russia-gate....have at it.
As if there was some manner of doubt that said shootings happened--thus falsifying the claim that only the right gets targeted for violence--because, I don't know, the TDS MSM and the libs of wikipedia made the whole thing up?
I'm posting a free link to some of the competition. I hope the powers that be don't mind.
It's to Nate Cohns article today about the midterm chances and where things are at. Nate put things in perspective that I hadn't thought of, mainly how common it is for the newly elected president to be disliked.
Were it facing a more pragmatic opposition leader, I'd wager the fractures within the party alluded to by the author would have kept it in a totally subdued state after November 2024. However, the unusually extreme nature of Trump's attacks on it in his second term, the unusually vast scale of his overreach, and the Orbanian bent of his governance, have galvanized the party to such a degree that, despite factional backbiting, it has remained somewhat (though not completely) unified in Congress, and its base has turned out at unprecedented levels, despite the discontent with the party as a whole it expresses in polling.
Meanwhile, Trump's failure to focus on the task he promised he'd finish on 'day one'--lower the cost of living--and the economy's stagflationary funk, have made the public more receptive to the party's criticisms, despite the dissonance of their delivery.
That won't work forever--the Democrats need a leader with a positive vision who is nimble enough to keep the party factions together, however uncomfortably, without Trump--but it may work *just* long enough to allow it to regain a decent amount of power so that it actually has the capacity to, well, *do* things. Which is the most important thing--no party can gain the approval of the public, ultimately, without the capacity to actually implement an agenda. (Whether that power will include the presidency, of course, will depend entirely on the economy in '28.)
Perhaps the worst outcome for Dems today is a win in a deep Red Tenn, with Ms. Behn. She is the ultimate Karen, straight out of central casting. Ms. Behn doesn't want to just defund the police, she wants to burn police stations to the ground. Aftyn is not just an Agnostic or Atheist, she hates Christians. Ditto for everything that makes Nashville, Nashville. The only thing missing are the Mao pajamas.
Dem wins in NJ and VA were decisive, but hardly determinative. Both are Blue States. A win in Red Tenn would convince Dems they should be looking for an army of Ms. Behns, led by General AOC. In reality, Ms Behn and her ilk, are not propelling Dems. Reps are self emolliating.
Reps should be speaking Math, not playground taunts. Dems have somehow successfully laid the blame for Biden's 4 year inflation orgy at Trump's feet, while saddling him with soaring healthcare and energy costs resulting from Dem expiring healthcare subsidies and insane Green policies. All, while insisting interior enforcement of US Immigration law is akin to 1930s Germany.
If Reps do not address the unholy trinity, Trump and his Cabinet will spend their last 2 years of his term facing impeachments and investigations, before Gavin Newsom morphs the entire US into CA.
The reality is Dems have not even tweaked a single Dem policy that elected Trump. Dems still believe in unbridled spending and immigration. Dems still desire child social engineering and unlimited Green spending and ever more govt control of American life. Dems are just smart enough to have moderated the messaging. Reps refuse to alter their language. A Behn win is exactly want Reps need, and Dems don't. Go Aftyn!
We are a long way from the midterms, and when they get here I doubt they'll be predictive of the general. The Democratic Party will probably take back the house, but not get the senate. Unless there is a huge landslide of a win the size of 2018 (40) or more it really can't be indicative of much of anything. The Democratic Party will have a big celebration, but nothing will get done anyway. Investigative hearings which I wouldn't mind but they won't do much to make America better.
There is a ton of opportunity if the Democrats stole some policy from the Republicans but the 10% of the whacky left can't let that happen and most politicians are on the record supporting crazy. Trump is making huge mistakes left and right, but he's still thought better than the alternative by quite a few.
Up until after the 28 primaries I'm more interested in issue polls, where American electorate is headed tells me more than most other things.
I'll admit it, I didn't read the article. I have become
consumed by a question that no one, especially the Dems, will address.
They have no problem making predictions about the future elections of
the Dems. They predict they will win the House.
My questions are simple. What then? What can we expect from the Dems if
they win House? What can we expect if they win the House and Senate?
My expectations are the Dems won't touch these questions because 1) they have
no realistic ideas and 2) they ideas they have are so off base no one, except the
radical base of the Dems, will vote for them. If the Raskins and Greens
are still around, I'll guarantee one thing, there will be impeachment
hearings.
So, what are the answers?
Everything except those pesky voter registrations, which are still going the opposite direction. Yesterday's drop saw a net gain for FL GOP of another 10,000 (Rs already leading by 1.4 million); in NC a net total GOP gain of another 6,000, which should put them over the top now, making NC a red state (active voter lead there is GOP +100,000) in a state where Democrats had a 175,000 lead just a couple of years ago; and continued net GOP gains in LA (net +3300). The only exception is PA, where Ds got a 250 gain---but months ago there was a short burst in PA during a primary. Otherwise, with those 2 exceptions and 1 mo for NV, the shifts have been UNRELENTING for now over a year in every state where we can measure: AZ, NM, NV, PA, LA, FL, DE, RI, even CA and CO.
On top of that, now it looks like both FL and IN will redistrict to the tune of 4-6 more GOP House seats.
>>>in NC a net total GOP gain of another 6,000, which should put them over the top now, making NC a red state (active voter lead there is GOP +100,000) in a state where Democrats had a 175,000 lead just a couple of years ago;<<<
As of 11/29/2025, there are more registered Democrats in NC than registered Republicans, (2,310,019 vs 2,306,897) and the stock of unaffiliated voters dwarfs either group in size. (2,952,261).
Whatever that is, it's not the proportional partisan distribution of a 'red state', unless you want to abuse the definition of that term.
https://vt.ncsbe.gov/RegStat/Results/?date=11%2F29%2F2025
When the other guy is digging a hole, let him.
The activist media has done its job. Congrats.
That rotten activist media, always reporting on the negative effects of Trump's decisions...if only they'd stop mentioning those, he'd be the most popular president ever...
Read the Liberal Patriot Substack today. I guess you're in the growing minority who laps up anythng the MSM says.
No, but I don't do what a vast proportion of MAGA-world does and use the existence of bias in certain media outlets as an excuse to choose my own reality and call inconvenient facts 'fake news'. For the reporting of basic news items I wait to hear it from outlets in the financial press and/or international publications that have a long history of avoiding yellow journalism and diverse, numbers-focused readerships that don't reward it: the Financial Times, The Economist, Foreign Policy. (for economic news add in Bloomberg Businessweek) I seek out primary sources wherever I can, because those can't be faked--court proceedings for legal battles or reports on controversial incidents and situations, CPI/PPI/U6 updates for economic developments. For commentary I prefer straightforwardly (small l) liberal outlets like TLP, but I use it as food for thought, not as gospel to regurgitate. To get a taste of intelligent conservative takes that I respect but usually don't agree with I like outlets like the Claremont Review of Books. And I dabble in the swamp of Taibbiverse to understand the alternate universe MAGA inhabits, because I know the ones who aren't lost to tabloids like the Epoch Times are busy consuming corrupted former (small l) liberals like Taibbi, who judiciously ignore all the nastiest things Trump does so they can write the bazillionth article on Russiagate or how obnoxious Katie Porter is.
What do you do, praytell, and why does it lead you to cast doubt on stuff that indisputably happened, like the murder of those Minnesota State Legislators?
It's pointless to even have a discussion with your "why does it lead you to cast doubt on stuff that indisputably happened, like the murder of those Minnesota State Legislators?" when I never said any such thing. You go ahead and believe in the pee tape and Russia-gate....have at it.
I brought those shootings up in relation to the Charlie Kirk assassination (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_shootings_of_Minnesota_legislators) and your response was "who uses Wikipedia?"
As if there was some manner of doubt that said shootings happened--thus falsifying the claim that only the right gets targeted for violence--because, I don't know, the TDS MSM and the libs of wikipedia made the whole thing up?
Oh bull. You keep telling me about your stellar sources then post links to Wikipedia and Reddit. Another one of your tactics. Lame.
Trump can be his own worst enemy, BUT who trusts Democrats other than hard core Dems???
I'm posting a free link to some of the competition. I hope the powers that be don't mind.
It's to Nate Cohns article today about the midterm chances and where things are at. Nate put things in perspective that I hadn't thought of, mainly how common it is for the newly elected president to be disliked.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/02/upshot/election-tennessee-republicans-democrats.html?unlocked_article_code=1.508.wb8E.W-gPwPJVmy5a&smid=url-share