Will the Dems go full-on Macron from here forward?

[Wisconsin SC Race 2019]

The so-called Blue Wave came on the backs of the wealthy urbanites. Will the Dems take after France's lead and govern to the right of the GOP on economics? We already see how they cried more about SALT exceptions for billionaires in New Jersey than RTW laws being passed.

[Lechasseur]

Depends on who gets nominated in 2020, but frankly it's possible

[mvd10]

Sadly not. It would be terrific though!

[Badger]

What a thread.

[LabourJersey]

The so-called Blue Wave came on the backs of the wealthy urbanites. Will the Dems take after France's lead and govern to the right of the GOP on economics? We already see how they cried more about SALT exceptions for billionaires in New Jersey than RTW laws being passed.

The loss of SALT deductions hurt a huge amount of middle class and upper-class families in New Jersey and New York, not billionaires.

In any case the answer to your question is "No," because 1) the current GOP is about as right-wing as politically possible when it comes to fiscal policy, and 2) college educated suburbanites aren't as fiscally conservative as they once were.

[lfromnj]

Sure just as soon the GOP goes le pen from the populist missouri hicks

[Badger]

Sure just as soon the GOP goes le pen from the populist missouri hicks

So, sometime in the last 3-10 years?

[lfromnj]

Sure just as soon the GOP goes le pen from the populist missouri hicks

So, sometime in the last 3-10 years?

No because le pen is a commie on economics.
Lord macron is our savior

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

The new Democratic coalition has more wealthy suburbanites in it then before, but you'd have know nothing about American politics to believe that poorer and working class people aren't essential pillars of the party. For one, do you really think the party's black voters, who are chronically cursed with economic and social malaises, will forgive a Thatcherite agenda from the party? What about the party's huge base of young people living in rather precarious economic situations? And so on.

People have a very short term memory. They seem to be under the impression that the old Blue Dogs were uniformly Non Partisan League style vulgar populists who said politically incorrect things but fought against the elites, when in fact they were largely corporate shills, owned by Wall Street and special interests. The "new Dems" - the likes of, say, Spanberger or Slotkin - are not ideal, but if anything they are to the left of where centrist Dems used to be. In fact, the most explicitly right wing Democrat on economic grounds is Jeff Van Drew, who is not remotely from the school of Dems that people like hofoid are most scared of.

[LabourJersey]

...and oh, look, here's Exhibit B:

The loss of SALT deductions hurt a huge amount of middle class and upper-class families in New Jersey and New York, not billionaires.

If you're a Democrat who thinks that the most important issue with our extremely regressive federal taxes is how it affects people who make well over six figures in any part of the country, you are a part of the problem described in this thread.

The median household in come in New York City is closer to $50k, and fewer than one third of residents are homeowners. Let's stop pretending that the concerns of people in the $150-$300k income bracket in any way resemble those of the average person, or even in the average voter.

40% of all taxpayers in NJ got SALT deductions: http://www.gfoa.org/salt

Property taxes in NJ matter to the middle class too. I'm not going to deny that the median household income in NJ is notably greater than the national average, but the average voter in New Jersey cares a lot about SALT.

[Wisconsin SC Race 2019]

...and oh, look, here's Exhibit B:

The loss of SALT deductions hurt a huge amount of middle class and upper-class families in New Jersey and New York, not billionaires.

If you're a Democrat who thinks that the most important issue with our extremely regressive federal taxes is how it affects people who make well over six figures in any part of the country, you are a part of the problem described in this thread.

The median household in come in New York City is closer to $50k, and fewer than one third of residents are homeowners. Let's stop pretending that the concerns of people in the $150-$300k income bracket in any way resemble those of the average person, or even in the average voter.

40% of all taxpayers in NJ got SALT deductions: http://www.gfoa.org/salt

Property taxes in NJ matter to the middle class too. I'm not going to deny that the median household income in NJ is notably greater than the national average, but the average voter in New Jersey cares a lot about SALT.

Good to know the Dems care more about privileged suburbanites in New Jersey, while union rights are slashed in Wisconsin and Michigan. 

[Tartarus Sauce]

The new Democratic coalition has more wealthy suburbanites in it then before, but you'd have know nothing about American politics to believe that poorer and working class people aren't essential pillars of the party. For one, do you really think the party's black voters, who are chronically cursed with economic and social malaises, will forgive a Thatcherite agenda from the party? What about the party's huge base of young people living in rather precarious economic situations? And so on.

People have a very short term memory. They seem to be under the impression that the old Blue Dogs were uniformly Non Partisan League style vulgar populists who said politically incorrect things but fought against the elites, when in fact they were largely corporate shills, owned by Wall Street and special interests. The "new Dems" - the likes of, say, Spanberger or Slotkin - are not ideal, but if anything they are to the left of where centrist Dems used to be. In fact, the most explicitly right wing Democrat on economic grounds is Jeff Van Drew, who is not remotely from the school of Dems that people like hofoid are most scared of.

Great post, a significant part of the problem I have with the most ardent of left-wing activists is that their activism is more centered around anti-establishmentism than it is about progressivism. The narrative about how the Democrats have all of the sudden been captured by special interests and become Repubilcan-lite corporate neoliberals is one that requires a hefty dose of historical revisionism and selection bias, it's a classic narrative of past purity being tainted. The cultural divide that's been on full display recently between college-educated white metroplitans and non-college educated white non-metropolitans plays into this as well. You're considered to automatically possess more "authenticity" by the grassroots if you come from a blue-collar background than if you're from an upper-middle class cosmopolitan milieu.

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

Honestly, if the Dems go fill on Neo-liberal, then they deserve to lose. Look at how France is doing with Macron, low approvals and riots in the streets, I do not want that for America.

[Thatkat04]

...and oh, look, here's Exhibit B:

The loss of SALT deductions hurt a huge amount of middle class and upper-class families in New Jersey and New York, not billionaires.

If you're a Democrat who thinks that the most important issue with our extremely regressive federal taxes is how it affects people who make well over six figures in any part of the country, you are a part of the problem described in this thread.

The median household in come in New York City is closer to $50k, and fewer than one third of residents are homeowners. Let's stop pretending that the concerns of people in the $150-$300k income bracket in any way resemble those of the average person, or even in the average voter.

40% of all taxpayers in NJ got SALT deductions: http://www.gfoa.org/salt

Property taxes in NJ matter to the middle class too. I'm not going to deny that the median household income in NJ is notably greater than the national average, but the average voter in New Jersey cares a lot about SALT.

Good to know the Dems care more about privileged suburbanites in New Jersey, while union rights are slashed in Wisconsin and Michigan. 

I guess that's why the NJ republican congressional delegation got reduced down to just one seat. Because democrats actually care about suburban voters.

[Obama-Biden Democrat]

Sure just as soon the GOP goes le pen from the populist missouri hicks

So, sometime in the last 3-10 years?

Welfare for whites started in 2008 with Huckabee. He was mocked during the debate for favoring big government, but the rural hicks loved him.

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

Sure just as soon the GOP goes le pen from the populist missouri hicks

So, sometime in the last 3-10 years?

Welfare for whites started in 2008 with Huckabee. He was mocked during the debate for favoring big government, but the rural hicks loved him.

Well, that's the whole GOP base now, welfare for us, none for thee.

[mvd10]

Honestly, if the Dems go fill on Neo-liberal, then they deserve to lose. Look at how France is doing with Macron, low approvals and riots in the streets, I do not want that for America.

France has the highest labour taxes, the most regulated labour market, the highest tax burden in general and extremely generous welfare benefits. Until recently they also had insane capital taxes (with a lot of dumb loopholes though). It's very reasonable to assume that these factors contributed to the high unemployment and low economic growth in France. Obviously Macron could just sit back like the past few French presidents instead of going full ''neo-liberal'', but we've seen what that's led to. Macron is doing what is right and he shouldn't back down. It's really not comparable to Democrats blocking things like universal healthcare because Mark Penn tells them to (not that I support single-payer though).

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

Honestly, if Joe Biden doesn't run they might be forced into a choice between centrist infrastructure capitalism and full-throated AOC-inspired socialism. I don't really know how they choose, but twenty progressives against Bloomberg makes me feel pretty good that I'll be changing my avatar color in 2020.

[PSOL]

I suppose so, if you account that a growing Democratic base favors universal healthcare. Who knows, maybe they’ll move left enough to surpass Macron in my lifetime?

[Badger]

...and oh, look, here's Exhibit B:

The loss of SALT deductions hurt a huge amount of middle class and upper-class families in New Jersey and New York, not billionaires.

If you're a Democrat who thinks that the most important issue with our extremely regressive federal taxes is how it affects people who make well over six figures in any part of the country, you are a part of the problem described in this thread.

The median household in come in New York City is closer to $50k, and fewer than one third of residents are homeowners. Let's stop pretending that the concerns of people in the $150-$300k income bracket in any way resemble those of the average person, or even in the average voter.

40% of all taxpayers in NJ got SALT deductions: http://www.gfoa.org/salt

Property taxes in NJ matter to the middle class too. I'm not going to deny that the median household income in NJ is notably greater than the national average, but the average voter in New Jersey cares a lot about SALT.

Good to know the Dems care more about privileged suburbanites in New Jersey, while union rights are slashed in Wisconsin and Michigan. 

You are wrongly assuming that Democrats aren't far more pissed off than damn near any Republican about the latter.

[Virginiá]

...and oh, look, here's Exhibit B:

The loss of SALT deductions hurt a huge amount of middle class and upper-class families in New Jersey and New York, not billionaires.

If you're a Democrat who thinks that the most important issue with our extremely regressive federal taxes is how it affects people who make well over six figures in any part of the country, you are a part of the problem described in this thread.

The median household in come in New York City is closer to $50k, and fewer than one third of residents are homeowners. Let's stop pretending that the concerns of people in the $150-$300k income bracket in any way resemble those of the average person, or even in the average voter.

It's a shame actually, because if Democrats would just stop saying they are going to restore the SALT to its former glory, they could make it easier for themselves in the future when passing high-cost policy like some sort of worthwhile healthcare reform (M4A, etc). Republicans have already taken the fall for that particular tax increase, and all Democrats have to do is leave it be.

It doesn't really make sense to campaign on high-cost policies while fashioning yourself as those willing to stick it to the rich, only to then campaign on returning favorable tax deductions to upper crust districts. No sense at all, and strategically moronic.

[Thatkat04]

...and oh, look, here's Exhibit B:

The loss of SALT deductions hurt a huge amount of middle class and upper-class families in New Jersey and New York, not billionaires.

If you're a Democrat who thinks that the most important issue with our extremely regressive federal taxes is how it affects people who make well over six figures in any part of the country, you are a part of the problem described in this thread.

The median household in come in New York City is closer to $50k, and fewer than one third of residents are homeowners. Let's stop pretending that the concerns of people in the $150-$300k income bracket in any way resemble those of the average person, or even in the average voter.

It's a shame actually, because if Democrats would just stop saying they are going to restore the SALT to its former glory, they could make it easier for themselves in the future when passing high-cost policy like some sort of worthwhile healthcare reform (M4A, etc). Republicans have already taken the fall for that particular tax increase, and all Democrats have to do is leave it be.

It doesn't really make sense to campaign on high-cost policies while fashioning yourself as those willing to stick it to the rich, only to then campaign on returning favorable tax deductions to upper crust districts. No sense at all, and strategically moronic.

There in lies the issue though. Capping SALT didnt just hurt wealthy New Yorkers. It hurt middle class people living in high property tax areas.

[Technocracy Timmy]

It doesn't really make sense to campaign on high-cost policies while fashioning yourself as those willing to stick it to the rich, only to then campaign on returning favorable tax deductions to upper crust districts. No sense at all, and strategically moronic.

It makes perfect sense at least from an electoral standpoint. Voters want free s**t but don’t want to pay for it. When you ask Americans what they want to cut it’s never the big expensive items in the budget but is instead things like foreign aid and congressional salaries (which collectively make up less than 2% of the budget). Sometimes they might  want to cut military spending but even that’s not consistent.

Also as been noted above, a ton of middle class people benefit from SALT. 40% of New Jersey families benefit from it. And these upper income folks from NJ are ten times more likely to vote for the Democratic Party than poor whites are (last I checked even poor people were majority white).

[Virginiá]

It makes perfect sense at least from an electoral standpoint. Voters want free s**t but don’t want to pay for it. When you ask Americans what they want to cut it’s never the big expensive items in the budget but is instead things like foreign aid and congressional salaries (which collectively make up less than 2% of the budget). Sometimes they might  want to cut military spending but even that’s not consistent.

Yea but not everything should be based on elections either. Policy still has to be paid for, unless we want to just adopt Republicanomics, where everything is just put on a the country credit card for future generations to be crushed with. Outside of districts where SALT is a top issue (and only if it's necessary for that candidate to win the election), Democrats should just leave this be until they are in a position to make policy, at which point they can decide whether it's best left in place to pay for things like Medicare-for-all, or whatever they have planned. I don't see why they would rush to restore SALT, then later on plan to raise taxes for big new programs. They should try to set this up so they raise the least amount of taxes at one time as possible. I mean, granted, I haven't thought about this a whole lot or crunched a lot of numbers, but I'm pretty sure taxing the rich isn't going to come close to covering the bulk of the Democratic Party's agenda.

[ag]

The so-called Blue Wave came on the backs of the wealthy urbanites. Will the Dems take after France's lead and govern to the right of the GOP on economics? We already see how they cried more about SALT exceptions for billionaires in New Jersey than RTW laws being passed.

At this point, it all will be a fudge: the Democratic coalition is not economcis-based, but is defined by the opposition to Trump and, to some extent, by social and cultural issues. Once Trump is gone, it would be quite interesting. A lot of those recently attracted to the Democratic party will, of course, be pushing for freer markets, but the party also, obviously, contains also the more "economically-leftist" types as well, with even outright socialist ideas now well-represented. As long as Trump is around the coalition will, likely paper those differences over. Who wins later is harder to say.

I myself, of course, am on the side of the "rightwingers". I mean, am I not the resident archetype of a neoliberal? Vive Macron!