The amazing thing about huge electoral shifts is that the involve like 5-10% of people changing their opinion. When people say there's a ton of anger in NoVa at the Dems, it translates to like 1 in 10 Northam-Biden voters who *might* vote for Youngkin.
No different than the *huge* anger among some NoVa Republicans at Trump. It's was like 10% of them.
Most people are partisans, and most elections are (big-picture) not huge landslides numerically, so it doesn't take monster swings to move outcomes.
On the other hand, you do get people who literally can't believe Northam-Biden-Youngkin voters exist. And that's clearly wrong too, even in an age of elevated partisanship.
Especially given the Trump factor, which made more Northam-Biden voters than usual out of Republicans.
It's a given in politics that a shift from 54-46 to 46-54 is eye-popping, but it involves a minimal portion of the electorate. And they themselves aren't the angriest; they're just the marginal voter on the new side.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Both parties procedural positions at this moment on the debt limit are so stupid, in their own way, that I really don't know what to say. The GOP's seems more craven and dangerous, but the Dems also seem to be operating in a transparently-hackish fantasyland.
The GOP position can be summed up as "we won't consent to letting you do something alone that you want to do and we want you to do, because we want you to do it alone a different way in order to put an exact number on it."
The Dem position seems to be "we can't do it the way you want us to because you will somehow prevent us from doing the exact thing you want us to do."
I'd buy this libertarian view of vaccines if the proponents were offering a plan to hold people liable for infecting others, but that's sort of the point of public health regulation: the externalities can't be controlled by the market.
It's one thing to say "people shouldn't have to get the vaccine." I actually agree with that.
It's a entirely different thing to say "people shouldn't have to get the vaccine and also should pay no public cost for making that choice." That's nuts.
The Dems are going to come to a deal in the next day/week/month, it will pass, and then six people are going to write "is that anyway to run a legislature" pieces in major outlets and my head is going to explode.
Yes, in fact, this is how legislative politics in a republic works.
One thing people mistake is the actual mechanics of legislative negotiations. It's really mundane, and not at all magical.
The stakes are higher and players more experienced, but if you've ever been in a drag-out session at the HOA or in the church basement, you're familiar.
People laugh when they wheel in the pizzas, but that's almost the perfect anecdote to properly set the scene. People get tired and cranky, it's often boring and then tense and then boring; then someone annoys you. You circle around the same shit aimlessly. No one listens.
Everything takes six times longer than you expect, because that's how negotiations and deliberations always go; people stray off focus constantly and bring up stuff you thought was resolved 40 minutes ago. One person always talks too much.