@ImNotOwned The problem with replacing leadership more often is that "How Effective you are as Leader" and "How Long you've been Leader" are positively correlated.
@On_Politike@billscher "without parallel." Here's McConnell at -30 at a pretty high water mark for Republicans. Are you going to claim that he was an ineffective Leader too?
@billscher Thank you! Half the Senate is running for Prez (if you believe Clyburn), is there a world where the headwinds get too strong a la Biden? Or will the secret ballot keep the Kellys, Ossoffs, et al in the yes column?
@ImNotOwned Insane that just a few days ago you could have posted a tweet that said, "My most left wing take is that James Gunn probably deserved to be fired"
@treeaston It is a little funny that the only reason Van Hollen is in the Senate at all is that he realized he would never actually have a shot at being Speaker. Maybe he has just been playing the long game this whole time.
@Emmatationn The year is 1830. Poor people get too big in the Democratic-Republican party. The rich people leave.
The year is 1930. Poor people get too big in the Democratic party. The rich people leave.
The year is 2030. Poor people get too big in the Republican party.
@billscher I'm obviously with you that the job is Schumer's still, but there's a loooot of smoke coming up around this right now. Is there a world where the vote comes up split and Schumer throws the job to Schatz just to stop any push from the left?
@SenatorLuma At least with Cali the jungle primary offsets this problem. Yeah you can't win without being a Democrat, but you're still able to run and govern from the right if you so choose. Feinstein/Becerra/Newsom are all bog-standard Dems, but fought off left-wing challengers instead
@tencor_7144 Are you saying that the data shows Texas wasn't a result of candidate quality, but a fundamental leftward shift in the electorate? Because if that's what it shows, that's what it shows, but it would make me seriously question the usefulness of it.
@Brien_Jackson If you follow this to its natural conclusion though, it just means that SCOTUS will always swing back and forth based entirely on the Presidency. That would be a very bad thing