Underlining this. Democrats can't fix the GOP. And it's hard to see what can.
My item this morning is why Trump is only a minor part of this.

(Plus all the links)
Let's try that again: The dynamics that make the GOP sink even further into dysfunction.

Plus all the links.

And you can find it at bloomberg.com/opinion/articl…
OK, let's play what-could-fix-the-GOP.

They could accidentally nominate and elect a president who has, let's say, Romney/Cheney values and uses the presidency to push hard and effectively against the yahoos.

That could work. But it's unlikely to happen for lots of reasons.
What else? The Romney/Cheney wing could split and form a separate party, and become so successful that the Republicans wind up as a fringe.

That would work, but seems even more unlikely to me.
What about: For whatever reasons - probably good economic timing - Democrats manage to win in 2024 and 2028, and also hold Congress during most of that time.

That's certainly plausible...but I very much doubt it will work....
....because a big part of the problem is Republicans ignoring electoral incentives, in large part because they're dominated by party-aligned media and others who do better when the party loses.
That's it. I have nothing else. And no, I don't think eliminating the electoral college, ending gerrymandering, and ensuring voting rights, etc. will solve the problem at all (whatever merits those things have for other reasons). Sorry.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Jonathan Bernstein

Jonathan Bernstein Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @jbview

22 Apr
Hmmm.....I've always agreed with the view that political arguments naturally turn to larger principles, and that's good even if the "real" motive is self-interest; having to express oneself in larger principles produces better arguments, better politics.
It's not that it removes self-interest from politics entirely - nor should it. But it means that politics isn't only self-interest. If you can't come up with a plausible argument, then that will tend to hurt your cause. Not destroy, of course, but tend to hurt.
It's healthier for everyone, the argument goes, if when we step into the public sphere we have to at least pretend that we are arguing the public good. It's a healthy hypocrisy, helping us achieve the benefits of mutual negotiation and engagement.
Read 6 tweets
31 Jan
The very worst thing about this is that as far as I can tell the demand for more than WS/LCS has always been small - and the current round(s) of postseason expansion are only viable because of TV market oddities involving the network sports channels and, soon, streamers.
Just saying...if it was just that people really wanted 3 or 4 or 5 tiers of playoffs, and I didn't? I couldn't blame MLB for exploiting that. Tough luck for me, but such is life. But that's not what's going on!
If Fox wants another round so they can use it to leverage FS2 onto a few more systems? That's money MLB should leave on the table because it's risking the long-term product for a quick payday.
Read 4 tweets
7 Jan
ER I called for immediate impeachment and removal. (Plus @dandrezner @kdtenpas @TimOBrien @marcambinder etc.) bloomberg.com/opinion/articl…

But just to add to that a bit...
I think this is a rare situation in which impeachment even knowing removal is unlikely/impossible would still be appropriate.

I've argued in the past that partisan impeachments have a number of drawbacks. But in this situation, most of those drawbacks would be null or limited.
e.g. impeachment has public opinion problems because instead of priming on an improper act, it focuses on removing the president - and normally that tends to push people who voted for the president to rally to him. But with no election coming, that's not so important. Meanwhile
Read 8 tweets
10 Nov 20
Excellent thread and good description, but I have some conceptual issues.
If Republican politicians are following incentives to be on party-aligned TV and other party-aligned media; to raise money from party donors; and to win primaries - that's a story about a *strong* party, with politicians in service, we might say, to Hannity and donors.
It is also, alas, a highly dysfunctional party because it doesn't place winning elections and governing as top priorities. But that doesn't mean it's weak.
Read 6 tweets
3 Jun 20
Read the whole thread, but this is the key: Trump doesn't know how to get exec branch personnel to do what he wants. He's bad at what Neustadt called "persuasion." And it builds on itself - he's easily rolled, which creates the reputation that he's easily rolled. More...
Truman was wrong about Ike; Ike knew better than to just say "Do this! Do that!" and expect anything to happen, because he knew very well how political and bureaucratic authority worked. Trump is the one who really thinks that it works by saying "Do this! Do that!" It doesn't.
So for one thing: Like Nixon when he failed at persuasion, Trump tries to get around it by, in effect, cheating against the system (and therefore against the law and the constitution). Which is very dangerous to the system, and also dangerous to Trump.
Read 5 tweets
22 Sep 19
218 to call the current formal impeachment inquiry an even more formal impeachment inquiry? Yeah, but what's the point?

218 to approve articles? Maybe. But if all they have is 218, it gets maybe 45 in the Senate. And then what?
I do think it's correct that moving ahead with impeachment would make impeachment more popular with people who don't like Trump but currently oppose impeachment.
But there's no reason to believe impeachment per se will make Trump less popular. Didn't work in 1998-1999. Didn't work in 1974.
Read 9 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!