Will the parties switch economically?

[Vosem]

The Overton Window will probably just move left for everyone, just like it moved right with the rise of neoliberalism. What I think we might be seeing is a "Red Tory" rebranding of American conservatism: emphasis on the connection between the individual and the community, supportive of some aspects of a welfare state as a noblesse oblige, protectionist.

What aspects of American conservatism do either of these things?

I think the Overton Window moved right for everyone in 2009-10 and there has been a long effort to deny that this happened, which will probably not be tenable by the end of this decade. The causes of that shift suggest that at least for economic/fiscal questions the Overton Window will probably continue shifting right, at least until some kind of very large-scale catastrophe (pandemic/war/climate-shift/rogue-technology) happens.

[Vosem]

The Overton Window will probably just move left for everyone, just like it moved right with the rise of neoliberalism. What I think we might be seeing is a "Red Tory" rebranding of American conservatism: emphasis on the connection between the individual and the community, supportive of some aspects of a welfare state as a noblesse oblige, protectionist.

What aspects of American conservatism do either of these things?

I think the Overton Window moved right for everyone in 2009-10 and there has been a long effort to deny that this happened, which will probably not be tenable by the end of this decade. The causes of that shift suggest that at least for economic/fiscal questions the Overton Window will probably continue shifting right, at least until some kind of very large-scale catastrophe (pandemic/war/climate-shift/rogue-technology) happens.

Gretchen, stop trying to "make right wing economics are popular" happen! It's not going to happen!

It's been happening for the last few decades and the general logic of cultural shifts suggests that it should continue happening for the foreseeable future. My guess is that the sum of both parties' ideological movements will be economically rightwards over the next 10-15 years. (If Republicans move leftwards, it'll be because Democrats are galloping rightwards, and vice versa. Most likely is that both parties will move a little bit right, though.)

[Vosem]

No and I'll echo RINO Tom said, they don't have to to appeal to non college whites. What is not popular to these voters is far right economic policy like abolishing SS, as evidenced by Rojos underpwrformance and Blake Masters getting demolished.

RoJo has had three consecutive performances that extrapolate out to clear national victories! (Though, to be fair, three times in pretty good Republican environments.) Masters lost to a popular incumbent by 4 points, which given the general lean of the year was pretty bad but also wasn't exactly getting *demolished* or anything.

The day the GOP nominates someone *exactly like* RoJo at the national level is the day they win a comfortable national majority, absent an excellent environment for Democrats. (Someone *exactly like* Masters would much-more-likely-than-not lose, but I don't even think that would be hopeless given a sufficiently strong environment and weak Democrat.)

The Republicans are still the party of the energy companies and more established businesses, the Democrats still back unions and working class policies.

These are not the same. I'm not even sure they're the same inside the Democratic coalition, which is where you see this sort of assumption, but they're quite different outside of it.

[Vosem]

No and I'll echo RINO Tom said, they don't have to to appeal to non college whites. What is not popular to these voters is far right economic policy like abolishing SS, as evidenced by Rojos underpwrformance and Blake Masters getting demolished.

RoJo has had three consecutive performances that extrapolate out to clear national victories! (Though, to be fair, three times in pretty good Republican environments.) Masters lost to a popular incumbent by 4 points, which given the general lean of the year was pretty bad but also wasn't exactly getting *demolished* or anything.

The day the GOP nominates someone *exactly like* RoJo at the national level is the day they win a comfortable national majority, absent an excellent environment for Democrats. (Someone *exactly like* Masters would much-more-likely-than-not lose, but I don't even think that would be hopeless given a sufficiently strong environment and weak Democrat.)

The Republicans are still the party of the energy companies and more established businesses, the Democrats still back unions and working class policies.

These are not the same. I'm not even sure they're the same inside the Democratic coalition, which is where you see this sort of assumption, but they're quite different outside of it.

If I were a republican strategist trying to design the easiest possible opponent to beat, the result would look very close to Mandela Barnes. Supports very progressive and unpopular criminal justice policies, has tax/corruption scandals, was viewed as having incited the Kenosha riots and has a history of making very inflammatory remarks(like the scalise shooting). In even a neutral environment, someone like that should have been steamrolled by Generic R. Johnson clearly was not that

I would've chosen someone who struggled to unite the Democratic coalition and with a focus on unpopular economic ideas. I think Barnes didn't really struggle to win Democratic votes and was decently charismatic; he was probably below-median, I guess, but I don't think he was especially bad or anything. (I continue to think that Fetterman was a really bad candidate, actually, and it just ended up not mattering because Oz was so much worse.)