"We won't return to 2016's level of progress until the 2030's"

[Blue3]

"The decade of the 2020's will be all about fixing the mess Trump makes of everything.

We probably won't be back to 2016's level of progress until the 2030's. "



Agree that this is likely, or Disagree?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

"The decade of the 2020's will be all about fixing the mess Trump makes of everything.

We probably won't be back to 2016's level of progress until the 2030's. "



Agree that this is likely, or Disagree?

2016 wasn't that great.

[Blue3]

"The decade of the 2020's will be all about fixing the mess Trump makes of everything.

We probably won't be back to 2016's level of progress until the 2030's. "



Agree that this is likely, or Disagree?

2016 wasn't that great.

No it wasn't.

(And to be clear, I'm talking about the overall state of the government, of politics, of the country, of foreign relations and the world.)

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

"The decade of the 2020's will be all about fixing the mess Trump makes of everything.

We probably won't be back to 2016's level of progress until the 2030's. "



Agree that this is likely, or Disagree?

2016 wasn't that great.

No it wasn't.

(And to be clear, I'm talking about the overall state of the government, of politics, of the country, of foreign relations and the world.)

Well, we really don't know yet.

[Blue3]

But what do you predit? More likely or unlikely?

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

What is a "level of progress"?

[The Mikado]

The word "progress" is so meaningless in this context. What does it mean? GDP growth? Wage growth? Unemployment rate? Like, I have no idea what this comment is supposed to be suggesting.

[(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31]

The word "progress" is so meaningless in this context. What does it mean? GDP growth? Wage growth? Unemployment rate? Like, I have no idea what this comment is supposed to be suggesting.

[Beet]

It's definitely possible. I don't know who said it, but the next decade could be a worldwide disaster.

[ApatheticAustrian]

in the best case trump is going to create a sugar high, without real growth, in the worse case, he is going to spread his "kiss of death" to new institutions.

[Blue3]

What is a "level of progress"?

2016's level of political progress, how far we had come on social issues and economic issues and foreign relations and other issues. What the status quo was at the end of the Obama presidency.

It was far, far from the goal, even Obama would gladly admit that.

But it might take until the 2030's to simply get back to that level again.



Another example is Reconstruction, when we had African-American politicians in the 1860's and 1870's, an income tax, investment in infrastructure, etc. Then game Jim Crow and the Gilded Age, and we didn't really return to that level of progress for decades.



Think of responsible budget management, adequate funding and regulations at the EPA, all the people covered by ObamaCare, what was our warming relations with Iran and Cuba, the decades-old friendly status quo with Mexico, a government committed to not embracing torture, a government that doesn't see us as at war with Islam, a government that doesn't see war with China inevitable, etc.

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

How far we had come towards what?

Reconstruction was a good thing simply because it was morally right and Jim Crow and the Gilded Age were bad things simply because they were morally wrong, not because they were at different points along some objective, quantifiable scale of "progress".

[Blue3]

How far we had come towards what?

Reconstruction was a good thing simply because it was morally right and Jim Crow and the Gilded Age were bad things simply because they were morally wrong, not because they were at different points along some objective, quantifiable scale of "progress".

You're not understanding.

I'm not talking about something easily quantifiable. I'm talking about the status quo at the end of the Obama presidency in everything. Many progressives saw Obama's presidency as 5 steps forward, but wish we had taken at least 20 steps forward, with the goal being about 100 steps forward. Trump is poised to take us 20 steps backward. It will take a long time to get us back to the very flawed status quo at the end of the Obama administration. This isn't math, it's metaphor.

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

How far we had come towards what?

Reconstruction was a good thing simply because it was morally right and Jim Crow and the Gilded Age were bad things simply because they were morally wrong, not because they were at different points along some objective, quantifiable scale of "progress".

You're not understanding.

I'm not talking about something easily quantifiable. I'm talking about the status quo at the end of the Obama presidency in everything. Many progressives saw Obama's presidency as 5 steps forward, but wish we had taken at least 20 steps forward, with the goal being about 100 steps forward. Trump is poised to take us 20 steps backward. It will take a long time to get us back to the very flawed status quo at the end of the Obama administration. This isn't math, it's metaphor.

I disagree with the premises of the metaphor. I understand what you're saying, and it concerns me too, but I really don't think "progress" is the best way to understand this.

[Blue3]

How far we had come towards what?

Reconstruction was a good thing simply because it was morally right and Jim Crow and the Gilded Age were bad things simply because they were morally wrong, not because they were at different points along some objective, quantifiable scale of "progress".

You're not understanding.

I'm not talking about something easily quantifiable. I'm talking about the status quo at the end of the Obama presidency in everything. Many progressives saw Obama's presidency as 5 steps forward, but wish we had taken at least 20 steps forward, with the goal being about 100 steps forward. Trump is poised to take us 20 steps backward. It will take a long time to get us back to the very flawed status quo at the end of the Obama administration. This isn't math, it's metaphor.

I disagree with the premises of the metaphor. I understand what you're saying, and it concerns me too, but I really don't think "progress" is the best way to understand this.

It's just the word I'm using for lack of a better one.

My point is, while Democrats are dreaming of single-payer, some see still see that as the next step to take... and don't realize that it will probably be politically difficult to even get back to the 90% coverage rate that Obama left us with. And then apply that thinking to all changes Trump is likely going to make that Democrats and like-minded individuals will see as moving in the wrong direction. That even if we get a Democrat in the WH in 2020 or 2024, it might not be until the 2030's that we're back just to Obama-levels.

[The Mikado]

I'm not talking about something easily quantifiable.

I need metrics. I can't evaluate the two unless I know what I'm comparing.

[Mr. Smith]

Depends entirely if Trump is booted out of office or him/Pence get the whole 8 years.

[pbrower2a]

Economic progress? If by that one means more physical output per capita, we have no chance of ever recovering the economic levels of the 1970s. We are no longer buying the stuff that we used to. Do you remember how profitable consumer electronics used to be? Such objects as televisions and sound systems are being sold for less than the profit margins that retailers used to have, and with a difference between 1980 dollars and 2016 dollars.

Assuming that a Trump Presidency will be a failed Presidency, repudiation of the Trump agenda can be swift. If he loses the House of Representatives (approval of the House of Representatives is at 29% according to one poll, and the Republicans own that disaster), then his legislative agenda will stall. But even without that, Democrats could win big in 2020 (Presidency and both Houses of Congress, not to mention some State legislatures that now have Republican majorities); facing a failed Trump Presidency, they could draft legislation intended to undo the damage.

If it is social progress, then Trump is already failing. The Religious Right might love to abolish abortion, same-sex equality, and even contraception  while pushing school prayer (of their choosing) and creationism. It's not getting such done.  

We could be set up for a Presidency best described as "Barack Obama in style and agenda, but getting away with it". That would be another FDR.    

[OSR stands with Israel]

Economic progress? If by that one means more physical output per capita, we have no chance of ever recovering the economic levels of the 1970s. We are no longer buying the stuff that we used to. Do you remember how profitable consumer electronics used to be? Such objects as televisions and sound systems are being sold for less than the profit margins that retailers used to have, and with a difference between 1980 dollars and 2016 dollars.

Assuming that a Trump Presidency will be a failed Presidency, repudiation of the Trump agenda can be swift. If he loses the House of Representatives (approval of the House of Representatives is at 29% according to one poll, and the Republicans own that disaster), then his legislative agenda will stall. But even without that, Democrats could win big in 2020 (Presidency and both Houses of Congress, not to mention some State legislatures that now have Republican majorities); facing a failed Trump Presidency, they could draft legislation intended to undo the damage.

If it is social progress, then Trump is already failing. The Religious Right might love to abolish abortion, same-sex equality, and even contraception  while pushing school prayer (of their choosing) and creationism. It's not getting such done.  

We could be set up for a Presidency best described as "Barack Obama in style and agenda, but getting away with it". That would be another FDR.    

1970s lmao, it was the worst economic decade since the great depression .

[The_Doctor]

I assume the 2020s will be basically the Democrats ramming through policy after policy on the backs of Trump/Pence's GOP coalition failing to sustain itself past 2022 or give 45% of the country a reason to vote for them (40% post-major crisis of some kind). So, sure, yeah, the 2020s will be a massive course reversal of the Trump/Pence era. It's not going to be a "moderate Democratic" era.  

The era since 2008 has been OK but for most people, wage growth has been stagnant, opportunities limited, and a ton of "middling" jobs been available and the list goes on and on. We've started turning the corner a bit but probably the country needs some fundamental reform.  

And we have some serious problems coming up in the T/P era.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Too optimistic to think the US will have recovered from Trump's dictatorship by the 2030s.