Between Two Majorities | The Cordray Administration

[Pessimistic Antineutrino]

Just caught up reading this timeline - it's almost scary how plausible this is - it's just so well written.

I've always been a believer in the cyclical nature of U.S. politics and that the next big realignment, a Democratic one, will occur sometime in the 2020s.

I just have one question though - what happens to the electoral college in the age of Cordray? Democrats having close to a 3/4 majority in the House and a filibuster proof Senate majority means they can basically amend the constitution at will, and even though the political landscape has changed, 2000 and 2016 are probably still (relatively) fresh in the public's mind. You mentioned that Cordray breaks 500 in 2028 which means it's still around then. Might the abolition of the electoral college happen in his second term or Castro's? Or have 2000 and 2016 passed far enough out of the public memory for it not to really be an issue anymore?

[Pessimistic Antineutrino]

It bothered me a little bit to see so many prominent Republicans like Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz and Rand Paul go down, but I guess it makes sense considering the magnitude of the waves that happened in those 3 cycles. After all we did see people like Frank Church, George McGovern and Warren Magnuson go down in 1980. An entire generation of GOP leaders getting wiped out does open up the party for new leaders to arise and reform the party in 2036 and beyond.

I do wonder how the house map shook down. I'd imagine that 2022 saw a bunch of marginal and D-trending seats flip - that would probably be the year that a lot of the ancestrally Republican but anti-Trump seats finally flip, like the remaining Orange County seats, and upscale suburban districts like IL-06, KS-03, NJ-07, NJ-11 and MN-03. Of course if Trump really falls off the wagon soon we may see those seats flip in 2018. To break 300 seats is a very difficult task with current polarization, but working class whites going over in droves for Cordray makes it a lot easier. I think in this scenario we see places that flipped in 2010 like MS-01 and SC-05 going back, as well as upscale districts that weren't quite budged by Trump like the suburban Texas districts (TX-03 for example) going D.

Moving forward I think places like TX-03 are the first ones to flip back in 2030 and on if we really are looking at a more technocratic, upscale GOP while former "Blue Dog" seats stay Democratic. In this scenario we may end up with a lot less polarized House, one looking more like 1996 than 2016.

Also @TD: really appreciated the response regarding the fate of the electoral college. I could see it sticking around because it benefitted the Dems but if the 2020s is anything like the 1960s in terms of amending the constitution it's easy to imagine it going. If Pence were to lose the popular vote in 2020 it'd probably be toast.

[Pessimistic Antineutrino]

Note: Right above this article is the just published "Donald Trump first 5 months" in power. Link: Here and Democratic Civil War Underway

RyanCare: A Huge Fight on the Floor

July 2017 -- (Washington). The Senate floor was a mess. RyanCare had barely cleared the House of Representatives 232-202. The Trump Administration was deeply divided on the topic internally. And Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wisconsin) was now trying to lobby the U.S. Senate to pass RyanCare. Meanwhile, protests thronged outside the Capitol as people chanted "Hands Off My Medicare!"

The idea to grant Americans Medicare vouchers, for where they could shop for healthcare was a brainchild of Paul Ryan. It had been part and parcel of his 2011 package and became heavily identified with the Romney-Ryan ticket of 2012. The Democrats had used the issue to beat the Republicans, and now with the Trump Administration behind it, they were prepared to do it again.

Trump had been deeply wary of the idea. His aides too, but the insistent advocacy of Ryan and RNC Chair Reince Priebus overrode the concerns of Steve Bannon and other alt-right members. He finally signed onto it in a tepid announcement, and the House prepared to vote. But the Administration was always half-for it, half-against it.

From the start, the Left saw it as a moment for public outrage and ginned up the voting public against it. They resurrected the "attacks on Granny" line and attacked President Trump and the Congressional Republicans over the topic. The sustained Democratic assault caught the White House off guard, which now felt on the defensive. Deeply divided, Trump went out to campaign for the bill, calling it "essential for America's fiscal future." But his rallies were populated by many people who relied on Medicare for survival, and polls showed the public sharply against it 55-41%. During the campaign, there had been zero appetite for entitlement reform.

The House Democrats, led by Minority Leader Tim Ryan (D-Ohio) (who had ousted former Speaker Nancy Pelosi a few months earlier), expressed outrage and voted as a uniform bloc against it. About eight Republicans defected, in addition to them. In the Senate, Senate Majority Leader McConnell (R-Kentucky) struggled to whip up 60 votes to overcome a furious Democratic filibuster.

Schumer now saw it as his moment to strike. After letting much of the Trump agenda pass early on, he saw it as the moment to strike back. The Senate Democrats, sensing how vital Medicare was to many Americans, voted as a bloc to deny McConnell cloture on the bill.

In the end, with 3 Republicans defecting, it failed 49-51. Medicare would remain intact (and a growing part of the deficit). The Trump Administration's momentum would be stalled six months into the Presidency. The grand GOP legislative agenda came to a screeching halt.

Trump withdrew in defeat, without acknowledging it. He announced, to great fanfare, a bipartisan commission on Medicare, patterned on the 1983 one that saved Social Security. He called it a "win" and said that substantive reform would be a result of the hard fought battle.

The damage, however, was done. The Administration had suffered its first major loss, six months in.

Your TL may be occurring ahead of schedule

[Pessimistic Antineutrino]

Everyone take a look at 2008. Don't answer if I PM'd you the answer. But if Obama was a foreshadowing President what should've happened in 2008 but didn't happen? Trust me it's a traditional major factor in the run up to a realignment.

I'll throw up two articles on this issue but I think what I've concluded will be interesting. You'll want to read it.

A serious 3rd party bid?

I'm thinking it's this - considering 1912 and 1968.