Republicans admit the GOP’s midterm forecast is bleak. But they’re clinging to two hopes: voters’ fear and loathing of Democrats.
“It’s going to be a hate election,” a Republican tied to President Trump’s political operation told Axios. “Voters have to hate the Dems more than they hate us. And we have material to work with.”
Why it matters: There’s broad GOP frustration that Trump has made challenging midterm elections worse by not focusing heavily on pocketbook issues — especially the tax cuts Republicans won — while launching the Iran war, which raised gas prices and fueled inflation.
Trump’s prime-time speech Thursday night about China’s alleged influence campaign targeting U.S. voters six years ago did little to assuage those concerns.
“I have yet to understand how we win the midterms by talking about what happened in 2020,” Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) told Axios.
The Republicans’ plan will probably work too. Hate is the opiate of the masses. Some say its religion, but religion is merely a syringe.
And it will work. NOT because GOP are masterminds or excel at execution, no. But because Dems will let them. Dems would rather concede to Republicans then let progressives have any power. So get ready for Dems torpedoing their own candidates, pissed off voters voting for Republicans in protest.
A reminder: MAGA talks a good game, but they are virtuosically incompetent, and are ALWAYS bluffing, and fuck up literally EVERYTHING they touch.
It’s far more likely that all the derision they are planning on heaping on Dem candidates’ policy proposals, like healthcare, college, day care, reforms, etc., will actually create increased interest in those policies. All that money they have, and they’ll end up using most of it to promote DemSoc policies and candidates.
We know MAGA well by now, and whenever they think they are going to intimidate us into obeying, it backfires badly, and causes their own humiliation.
So bring it on MAGA, this should be hilarious.
Voters have to hate the Dems more than they hate us. And we have material to work with.
After “they’re eating the dogs” what’s left?
After Trump & Accomplices has raised food prices 33%, dogs starting to look like good eating.
Massage this message against the GOP.
“Because of Trump, you can’t have steak cause it’s too expensive.”
“Your taxes are paying for Trump and Hegseth to eat steak and lobster while you eat rice and beans.”
“Sure we’re openly shooting and killing American citizens lawfully demonstrating against government overreach, but the Democrats want people to be able to go to the bathroom without us looking at their genitalia. Vote GOP this fall.”
- Republican political ad probably
I received a flyer with multiple brags about how actively transphobic and anti-immigrant a candidate was during the last election cycle
the Democrats want people to be able to go to the bathroom without us looking at their genitalia.
Oh great! So that are destroying jobs too. In this economy!
Despite that, the Democratic party has a lower approval rating than Trump. People see Trump as evil. They see Democrats as shiftless empty suits that believe in nothing.
I too, am disappointed in the lack of action from the DNC, and even worse the actions the DNC are taking to bridle the DSA who are actually pushing change forward. However, a “do nothing” DNC is safer than the actively destructive GOP.
Not always. For example, I as a trans person need to vote against any transphobic Democrat. I can’t afford to myopically pretend that only the election in front of me exists. If the Democrats go the way of Labor in the UK, I will lose civil rights for the rest of my life. If a Republican wins, there’s always the possibility of Democrats reverting things after the next election.
For me personally, a transphobic Democrat is far more dangerous to my safety and well being than any Republican. It’s more important to make sure at least one party isn’t transphobic than it is to win every election.
eurh, uh, trying to parse your first sentence a few times and coming up short. help me out:
you need to vote against any transphobic candidate, right?
because if you vote for a republican, even if they claim to be trans-tolerant, you gotta know they’re lying?
I <3 my trans brothers sisters mothers and fathers, and would never ask anyone to vote against their values. but also, I see time after time how LGB folk are treated by the GOP and have no doubt they would throw transfolk right onto the same pyres given the opportunity. They openly despise their own pick-me trans person, Caitlyn Jenner. I cannot fathom how someone like Jenner justifies supporting conservatives.
If you don’t support a strong democratic party, they may very well go the way of Labor, but I fail to understand how that means you might support an opposing candidate.
I guess there’s green party? jill whatsername?
No. I said Democrat for a reason. Stop thinking in terms of a single election. I’m talking about coalitions and power balance within parties. You need to get past “Democrats good, Republicans bad.” Both parties are themselves coalitions, coalitions whose fortunes can rise and fall within the party.
Republicans are always going to be evil. But if the Democrats turn against us, now both parties are out to get us. That is the real threat, where trans persecution gains bipartisan support. We’re completely and utterly fucked if that happens. I fear a future where transphobia becomes so entrenched in both parties, that advocating for trans rights becomes as politically radioactive as a politican advocating for the rights of pedophiles in today’s world. I am willing to lose an individual election to Republicans if it means transphobic Democrats do not gain power within the party.
A transphobic Republican winning means pain for a few years. For me, ensuring that at least one party is not militantly transphobic is a far higher priority than winning a single election. I personally had to flee my home to escape Republican political persecution. I became an internally displaced refugee in my own country because of them. But at least now I live in a blue state with solid protections at the state level. If Democrats turn the way of Republicans, I will have to flee the country entirely.
Again, stop thinking of things just between parties. Parties are not a monolith.
I as a trans person need to vote against any transphobic Democrat.
I don’t know your candidates, but if both candidates are transphobic in some way, can I safely assume that the GOP candidate is more transphobic or are you saying the DNC candidate is more transphobic than your GOP one?
For me personally, a transphobic Democrat is far more dangerous to my safety and well being than any Republican. It’s more important to make sure at least one party isn’t transphobic than it is to win every election.
Wait, let me follow your logic. Am I reading you right that you positing that voting for the GOP makes the DNC less transphobic?
You’re going to vote for the GOP, which by every measure, is the more transphobic party, as a strategy to try to reduce transphobic legislation being written into law? That makes no sense to me whatsoever. If anything I think it would make the DNC more transphobic because they see they are losing elections to pro-transphobia GOP candidates and the DNC would think thats what voters want.
You need to think of power coalitions and long term policy positions.
Again, you’re stuck in binary short term thinking. I need to be more long term and strategic than you do.
And yes, transphobic DNC candidates losing makes the party less transphobic in the long run. We need to make transphobia completely toxic in the Democratic party, and that’s only possible if transphobic candidates lose. Every win by a Dem transphobe means more transphobes winning the next primary cycle. Look at Labor in the UK now. They’ve been completely taken over by TERFs.
Again, you’re still stuck in this thought pattern where the only election that matters is the one in front of you. I’m thinking decades into the future here.
Right now, we are seeing a transformation of the Democratic party. DSA candidates for instance are pulling the party further left than it has gone in decades. Do you think that could have ever happened without Trump being elected. (Please don’t put words in my mouth and pretend I’m saying that means it’s a net positive that Trump won. You’re better than that.)
The only reason the DSA candidates are doing well now is that the old common sense understanding that corporate centrists are “more electable” has been completely shattered. That would not have been possible without the 2016 and 2024 elections.
Remember, parties are coalitions. There are both trans allies and TERFS in the Democratic party. And TERFS need to be seen as complete losers. Elect a TERF? Lose the general election as all the queer people sit it out.
Small minority groups have no real political power on their own. Queer people are never going to be able to win elections on their own. The only power small minority groups have is the ability to work as a spoiler. And if you’re not willing to exercise that power, you will have none.
And frankly, if both parties turn transphobe, this whole country can burn to the ground as far as I care. You don’t get to expect someone’s political support after you’ve decided they don’t count as a human being.
And yes, transphobic DNC candidates losing makes the party less transphobic in the long run.
My fellow, there’s a nonzero chance we engage in civil war in the next 2 years. What the heck do you mean “long run”?
Take it from one marginalized community to another; your issues will not be won in a campaign trail. It will be fought for through years, decades of demonstration to a point that the public outcry can’t be ignored. If there’s one thing about the establishment, it’s their policies shift with the sand. Trans support increases from the public and establishment dems will eventually get the message.
Again, you’re stuck in binary short term thinking. I need to be more long term and strategic than you do.
I have a trans family member. I am personally invested in their rights as a person be respected.
And yes, transphobic DNC candidates losing makes the party less transphobic in the long run.
We disagree completely. Up until 2 years ago I think we would agree that the DNC, for the most part, supported trans rights. When did we start seeing a handful of DNC candidates shifting on this position? When the candidates winning elections, the GOP, went transphobic. So the DNC losing more elections won’t make them less transphobic, it will make them more. We’ve seen this in real time in the last 2 years.
(Please don’t put words in my mouth and pretend I’m saying that means it’s a net positive that Trump won. You’re better than that.)
WTF. Its a good thing I never said anything of the sort. I don’t even think you need me in this conversation when you’re the one putting words in my mouth, and then criticizing me for it.
And frankly, if both parties turn transphobe, this whole country can burn to the ground as far as I care.
You are the one advocating for the GOP and voting for GOP candidates directly opposed to trans rights. You are directly hurting my trans sister. You are the person with the torch setting fire to the country.
When did we start seeing a handful of DNC candidates shifting on this position? When the candidates winning elections, the GOP, went transphobic. So the DNC losing more elections won’t make them less transphobic, it will make them more. We’ve seen this in real time in the last 2 years.
It depends entirely on why they lose. Democrats didn’t lose in 2024 because of transphobia. Polls show trans issues were near the bottom of voter priorities.
When a party loses an election, politicians start to innovate. They change their messaging and start modifying their platform to try out something different. If those changes improve electoral results, those changes will stick. If they’re a net negative, they’ll end.
What we’re seeing with the Democrats is experimental transphobia. They’re testing the waters to see if it improves their odds. I as a trans person need to do everything I can to make sure that experiment is a resounding failure. Most Democrats aren’t openly transphobic…at least not YET. It’s unusual and “innovative” to be a transphobic Democrat. If a Democrat experiments with transphobia, and they win an election, that teaches every other Democrat that transphobia is a winning strategy. If they lose in landslide because the queer vote abandoned them for their betrayal, the experiment fails, and other Democrats will be less likely to take up transphobia.
WTF. Its a good thing I never said anything of the sort. I don’t even think you need me in this conversation when you’re the one putting words in my mouth, and then criticizing me for it.
You were almost certainly going to. After all, you just said I advocated for the GOP. Which should be pretty obvious I don’t support. Whenever I point out that sometimes trans people need to vote against some Democrats for larger strategic reasons, someone with a room temperature IQ will come out of the woodwork and say, “well that must mean you love Trump!” I wasn’t accusing you of putting words in my mouth. I was asking you not to do that. However, you still did it anyway when you accused me of advocating for the GOP.
You are the one advocating for the GOP and voting for GOP candidates directly opposed to trans rights. You are directly hurting my trans sister. You are the person with the torch setting fire to the country.
That is not the case. In almost all scenarios, I support voting for a Democrat over a Republican. But a Democrat experimenting with transphobia against a Republican? Regardless of how that race goes, a transphobe is going to win. From my perspective, that particular election is already lost. At that point my priority is making sure the transphobic Democrat has as little credibility as possible. And that’s achieved by making sure they lose by the largest margin possible.
You will only see this as advocating against trans issues if you have the future time horizon of a fruit fly.
A lot of us who disapprove of the party are still going to vote for them. It doesn’t mean anything.
That’s what Kamala said.
Everything Kamala said turned out to be true. If people have seen 2 years of this and still think “both sides are the same”, they clearly already picked their side.
One should not slander people who simply have stricter ethics than oneself as “both sides are the same.” That’s how you lose elections.
The political situation is way different now than it was in 2024. Running as the incumbent party in an inflationary environment is always an uphill battle. The GOP should’ve won by more than they did. They barely gained control of the house
Ok.
A lot of us who disapprove of the party are still going to vote for them. It doesn’t mean anything.
That’s what Hillary said.
So the standard election strategy for the GOP. It’s always hate, they just change up who it’s targeted at. Recently it’s been a mix of “immigrants” (I.E. non-white people), muslims (once again non-white people), trans people (the easier target in the LGBT sphere now that gay and lesbian people are broadly accepted), and of course the perennial favorite Democrats (and if they’re feeling spicy they accuse anyone left of Fox News of being a communist).
I’ve been around a long time now and this has been the GOP playbook literally since Reagan if not longer. Reagan was a slight break from the norm for them in that he focused on the debunked and incredibly damaging trickle down economic theory (something they’ve continued to pursue since then leading to our current late stage capitalism that’s teetering on the edge of collapse).
Seriously, my first thought when seeing this, like how the fuck is this at all different than any other election since…ever???
after 2024 every article could spit out “trump down by 3786728764 points” and i’m not assuming shit until the wednesday after. maybe not even then, since his favorite hobby after shitting his pants is trying to overturn elections
Two bucks from me that he’ll launch a coup of some sort if he doesn’t get his way in the midterms. Or that enough democrats will capitulate that he’ll get his way anyway, whichever is closer.
My theory is: Dems win, make him a lame duck, he ignores all the rules while blaming Dems for 2 years, pumps the world full of propaganda for 2 years, the racists come out in droves for the next presidential election that trump has rigged and they resume control.
Problem is: It’s not that MAGA wants to be in charge (though that’s a thing too); it’s that Trump needs to be in charge. First so he (not just MAGA, he) can become the fascist dictator of his dreams, but also so he can avoid prison. Remember, Trump already has charges for which he’s going to prison as soon as he’s out of the presidency. Trump is too demented and too incompetent to play a “power behind the throne” type of game with a puppet president, so his personal ambitions will never materialize unless he’s the one in charge. He simply can’t afford to be a lame duck president, and we already know he’s a (more or less; Trump doesn’t actually believe in anything) fascist who has no qualms about overturning democracy.
Good. The democrats tried that after forcing Kamala on us. Kamalas whole campaign was “Guys trump is really bad pls vote for me” and it was doomed from the start.
You havr to actually have political goals. Theres an absurd fear of a candidate whos “too radical”, but mamdani proves that its precisely what voters want.
Isn’t that what they’ve been doing for the last 20 years?
Or is this admitting Trump’s utter failure with that line “more than they hate us”?
Longer than that. Reagan coined the term “welfare queen”.
Yes but it really kicked into high gear when clutches pearls a half black man won the presidency. Guess I should say 18 years but meh.
Nixon’s aide famously admitted in the 90s that the entire point of the War on Drugs was to go after black people, Jews, and hippies.
The racism on the right is nothing new. It’s been their main form of divide and conquer alongside sexism and anti-LGBT bigotry and fearmongering since the founding of the country (a reminder that the founders compromised with elitists to allow them to keep slaves).
Yes but when a half black man won the highest office in the entire country their heads exploded. There was a real shift at that point. Fox went off their rocker. I’m telling you, that was a changing point.
Barry Goldwater said desegregation was a states rights issue while winking at the KKK as hard as he could
“You can’t afford groceries or gas, you’re losing your health insurance, you might get laid off, data centers are fucking up your water, and we’re actively ruining the environment, we vehemently protect rapists, and do treason out in the open— but yeah at least we’re not Democrats! What with their socialism or communism… Whatever the current boogie man term is for scaring the dim witted…”
I’ll vote for anyone that isn’t in the pocket of the billionaire class, isn’t a Zionist, and is genuinely for the working class. If you don’t fit this criteria, kick rocks.
I hope you folks can find one.
People have been calling me pessimistic for saying the midterms are the Dems election to lose but just… For fuck sakes have you all not been paying attention for the last decade?! Like seriously, you people trust the Democrats to run good campaigns? Have you not seen how Republicans have been putting their thumb on the scale every possible chance they get? How many times do you have to go up against a stacked deck before you learn the game is rigged?
If a race is less than +5 in favor of the Dem, it’s a loss. If a race is less than +15 in favor of the Dem, it’s a toss up. Lots of people taking it as a given that the Dems will take back the House (some dumbasses are even entertaining the idea that they’ll magically take the Senate, lol), but it’s very much an uphill battle. How the fuck does no one else see this?
trump would have handily won 2020 if his catastrophic and completely expected bungled response to covid weren’t fresh on everyone’s minds. as it was, he barely lost that one too
Almost every election is the Dems’ to lose. Unfortunately they tend to deliver.
Dems need to lead with bold, sincere policy proposals to meaningfully improve Americans’ living conditions in order to win. We have many young socialists winning primaries and elections with such a strategy, however the establishment dinosaurs are terrified to deliver for their constituents instead of their donors.
If the old guard refuse to get out of the way, and once again return to the familiar identity politics and pro-corporate talking points, they will once again manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
If the old guard refuse to get out of the way, and once again return to the familiar identity politics and pro-corporate talking points, they will once again manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
That’s still a win for them. For like 90% of our “representatives” they’re only Democrats by necessity. The area they live in won’t choose a Republican or the Republican role is already taken by a different parasite, so if they want to continue the game of being a political parasite they need to pretend to give a shit about what people want who vote for them. Corpos win, Republicans win, their investments win, so they couldn’t possibly care less.
Good fucking luck with that GOP. Stupid and desperate strategy. It’s a lot harder to make people hate the opposition party, especially when you have a geriatric loudmouth pedophile as your front man.
And it’s even harder in a midterm when you’re missing your precious Emmanuel Goldstein figure like a Harris or Obama to hate on.
It’s the only play they know.
I think the wedge issue they will keep hammering on is trans. Probably why Pedolf Shitler went on about the Bud Light thing from 3 years ago and why he blathers on with complete nonsense like “trans for everyone” or whatever.
“Voters have to hate the Dems more than they hate us. And we have material to work with.”
Yeah that’s working real well in Texas
Paxton: Talarico is a vegan!
Talarico: Paxton is a bad Christian and a literal criminal.
Hate and Fear. Emotional people need emotion to know how they should feel.
