Will 2028 be the first not so close election in a while?

[President Johnson]

I also think we won't see a return to neocon GOP era. The GOP changed... since Tea Party and definitely after Trump, it's no longer the party of Bush, Romney & Reagan. It's the party of Trump, even if he leaves we get at someone who basically would run on his ideology but without his toxic persona.

I completely agree with this take. In my view, it has become somewhat evident that the two major political parties in US are increasingly definited by their stances on globalism in a broader sense.

The Democratic Party's embrace of globalization can be seen in its support for free trade agreements, immigration reform, and international cooperation on issues such as climate change and human rights. Democrats argue that globalization has the potential to create economic opportunities, promote cultural exchange and address global challenges that require collective action. On the other hand, the Republican Party has been moving towards a more protectionist and nationalist approach, advocating for trade barriers, restrictions on immigration and denial of the climate crisis. Republicans argue that globalization has led to job losses, and threats to national sovereignty and that a more isolationist approach is needed to protect American interests.

This shift in the parties' positions on globalization has somewhat blurred the traditional lines of the right-left political spectrum. While these traditional ideological boundaries remain intact, the broader debate over globalization has increasingly shaped the debate and changed voter coalitions.

[President Johnson]

I also think we won't see a return to neocon GOP era. The GOP changed... since Tea Party and definitely after Trump, it's no longer the party of Bush, Romney & Reagan. It's the party of Trump, even if he leaves we get at someone who basically would run on his ideology but without his toxic persona.

I completely agree with this take. In my view, it has become somewhat evident that the two major political parties in US are increasingly definited by their stances on globalism in a broader sense.

The Democratic Party's embrace of globalization can be seen in its support for free trade agreements, immigration reform, and international cooperation on issues such as climate change and human rights. Democrats argue that globalization has the potential to create economic opportunities, promote cultural exchange and address global challenges that require collective action. On the other hand, the Republican Party has been moving towards a more protectionist and nationalist approach, advocating for trade barriers, restrictions on immigration and denial of the climate crisis. Republicans argue that globalization has led to job losses, and threats to national sovereignty and that a more isolationist approach is needed to protect American interests.

This shift in the parties' positions on globalization has somewhat blurred the traditional lines of the right-left political spectrum. While these traditional ideological boundaries remain intact, the broader debate over globalization has increasingly shaped the debate and changed voter coalitions.

It’s something generally that we are seeing all across the west . The old right left divide is slowly being replaced by a new divide which is more based on opinions of globalization and with AI it’s probably gonna get more profound as AI will transform the economy.

The only question is will we see political figures who are able to rise and create the new consensus . For the new deal/post war consensus you had FDR/Atlee and for the neoliberal one you had Reagan/Thatcher so the question is will we have a leader who can shape a new consensus or not .

Definitely this is a trend over the Western world. That's also why Tories are struggling with the Reform Party and French Republicains are under pressure from RE, which basically has superseded them as the main political party of the political right.

Another major factor is traditional voter bases are disappearing or have changed their priorties. Well educated white collar workers of the upper middle class were a key constituency for center-right parties, but have moved somewhat to the liberal side, which is why Democrats make inroads in the suburbs. Meanwhile, the traditional worker, who was usually the base of Social Democratic parties, is basically dying out. The remaining of them are increasingly repelled by their former parties embracing cultural liberalism (like LGBT rights, immigration reform, political correctness etc.).

[President Johnson]

Honestly starting to be convinced that we'll have three poisoned chalices back-to-back: 2016 (COVID), 2020 (cost of living crisis, Gaza), and 2024 (regional conflict in the Middle East that will likely end in a US-Iran conflict and a global recession with it). What will make 2028 interesting is that it should theoretically be the first post-Trump election, which is a real unknown unknown.

Covid wasn't necessarily a poisoned chalice for the 2016 election. It was just Trump's complete missmanagement that cost him support and maybe his reelection. A more competent president regardless of party could have used the crisis to his/her advatage, by carefully but forcefully leading the nation through the crisis. Usually people tend to flok to the incumbent in a time of emergency, especially if he or she is perceived as an able leader who's in the driver's seat. Leaders like Lincoln, Roosevelt or Churchill are seen as titans because the navigated through difficult times. Trump even got an uptick of his approval ratings in February and March 2020, when the pandemic reached the US. He just bungled it afterwards.