2. That said, its a mistake for Ds to hyper-focus on this issue and their own efforts need to include a sustained campaign to make people FEAR losing abortion access. Yes, access (*w some regulations) polls good, but the Right's "Abortion on Demand" branding campaign has been
3. VERY effective in whittling away support for elective abortions, and their machine is perfectly geared to wage that messaging war against the Left's own, wonky, policy-oriented messaging techniques. The GOP will go pure emotion- you must too to combat it.
1. Just as the 2022 Midterms will begin Nov. 3rd, in the dust of VA's 2021 cycle & the GOP's shameless, tax-payer subsidized witch hunt of @GavinNewsom.
As I tell @StrikePac donor's- the narrative for the cycle gets set then & there.
2. & the media narrative will be that mb, just MB, Ds can beat the "midterm effect" in '22. But, lose a ton of seats in VA's House or the majority, &/or barely eek out a recall defeat- the narrative favors the GOP.
3. win '21 & Ds can recruit quality cand's to challenge Rs for the House seats they backdoored in 2020 & force the Rs to spend on defense. Those "lost" districts are all what I call my "2nd tier" districts in my model: educated but not as robustly as other
Y'all gotta remember, the GOP is ruthless. They will napalm him. Hard to hit 50% yes? ABSOLUTELY
Impossible? Not for the GOP
I should add, they'll try to get to that 50% by running ads against Newsome from the Left to get progressives to vote yes on the recall AND likely sneak logistic support to any progressive candidate.
1. Its a 50 yr pattern broken just twice, once under extraordinary conditions (2002, right after 9/11 where GOP benefitted from a rally around the flag effect that could STILL HAPPEN 1. bc mass polarization was just beginning & 2. D voters far less polarized) and then in 1998 in
2. what we (political scientists) attribute to a backlash about trying to impeach Clinton about lying about an affair. That's it though, in every other midterm, POTUS' party loses seats. Plus, right now we have a pattern of stronger midterm effects, which I believe is a product
3. of hyperpartisanship, party sorting, coalitional realignments for both parties, & changes in geographic strongholds for both parties.
That all said @jakehteach it IS possible we'd see a disruption in 2022 if D's carpe diem extremism & racism in the GOP & turn the referendum
1. I'm going to open a convo w @RadioFreeTom about this.
Yes, 40% didn't graduate & no owe tons of $ but likely still have bad job prospects & although some didn't grad bc tough circumstance/med issues, as a once prof I can tell you, that's NOT the majority. Most didn't bc
2. they didn't like doing, or prioritize enough, the college part of college & end up failing out.
Now here's the thing- just some context- your college record is permanent so if you fail out somewhere at 19 or 20 you can't "transfer" out that shitty GPA & its very hard to get
3. access to loans/aid again to go back when you're in your late 20s when you have a worth ethic & better understand living in poverty (as I did- though lucky, I didn't START until I was that age). So they're stuck w loans they can't pay AND they can't continue on to finish. BUT
1. I ♥️ the findings of this study & I think their approach is cool (nat experiments > anything else) but I worry the entire analysis in built on selection bias bc it doesn't seem like they consider non-prosecution DISCRETION which may distort the entire pool they sample from.
2. By this I mean maybe prosecutors are just good at identifying likely "1 & doners? Better test would be to analyze all the data from someplace that has already stopped all prosecution of "low-level" misdemeanors the compare before & after data to see if 1. reoffenses decrease
3. overall from before & after AND be able to control for really imp factors like race, place/geographic location/income, gender, etc AND eliminate that potential front-end selection bias. In other words we can't be sure from this analysis bc of the "discretion" bias.