Could Democrats have won if Build Back Better passed?

[Joe Biden 2028]

Suppose President Biden got Manchin and Sinema to agree to the $3.5 trillion reconciliation package. That means the following is passed

-Paid Paternity and Medicare Leave
-Child Care
-Universal Pre-K
-Free Community College
-Medicare covers dental/vision/hearing
-Medicaid Expansion
-Obamacare subsidies
-Expanded child tax credit

Along with the climate provisions we got in the Inflation Reduction Act.

Honestly I think BBB would be a game changer. All these policies are super popular with the American people with 70-80% support. It wouldn't increase inflation because the plan would be paid by tax increases on the ultra wealthy. Just Medicare covering dental/vision/hearing would be a game changer for seniors.

Had Democrats passed BBB, they could run on protecting these new programs in 2024. Saying that Trump would repeal them.

The big question mark of course is rather these programs come into force immediately. Obamacare took until 2013 to open. These plans are more more expansion than Obamacare.

The Bipartisan Infrastructure Act, CHIPS Act and Inflation Reduction Acts are all great. But let’s be honest, 90% of Americans never heard of them because they are stupid. Never mind have the brain capacity to realize the funding and resulting jobs to remove lead from the local school is from Biden’s policies. But social policies like BBB are much better for electoral wins.

Thoughts?

[Epaminondas]

Harris loses by even more due to a spike in inflation.

What Biden did had no bearing on this election. The delusion that Trump's economy was "better", repeated ad nauseam by the right-wing outrage industry, addled voters's minds.

[Joe Biden 2028]

Harris loses by even more due to a spike in inflation.

What Biden did had no bearing on this election. The delusion that Trump's economy was "better", repeated ad nauseam by the right-wing outrage industry, addled voters's minds.

Build Back Better wouldn’t increase inflation, because it was paid for with tax increases. Even then, the spending was meant for a 10 year period. And there’s a strong possibility the money wouldn’t even be spent yet. The only a quarter of the funds from CHIPS and IRA have been delegated or earmarked

[It's Time.]

No. Democrats were destined to lose 2024 from the moment we nominated Biden and he chose Harris as VP. We should’ve known that his ego would cause him to run for re-election despite his age.

[Joe Biden 2028]

No. Democrats were destined to lose 2024 from the moment we nominated Biden and he chose Harris as VP. We should’ve known that his ego would cause him to run for re-election despite his age.

I disagree. When I was urging people to vote for Biden and Harris, I kept hearing “What have Democrats done for me? How is my life better than 2020?”

Having tangible programs would probably flip the 2% needed

[Progressive Pessimist]

No. Nobody would care. This was an emotional election, not one about accomplishments or policy.

[New World Man]

Would have helped on the margins. Handling the border/immigration issue better was the main problem. Still will always hate Machin/Sinema for what they did though.

[Aurelius2]

Inflation would have gone well into the double digits and stayed there for years. Republicans would have at least 57 senate seats, possibly more.

[Mr. Smith]

Yes.

[New World Man]

Suppose President Biden got Manchin and Sinema to agree to the $3.5 trillion reconciliation package. That means the following is passed

-Paid Paternity and Medicare Leave
-Child Care
-Universal Pre-K
-Free Community College
-Medicare covers dental/vision/hearing
-Medicaid Expansion
-Obamacare subsidies
-Expanded child tax credit

Along with the climate provisions we got in the Inflation Reduction Act.

Honestly I think BBB would be a game changer. All these policies are super popular with the American people with 70-80% support. It wouldn't increase inflation because the plan would be paid by tax increases on the ultra wealthy. Just Medicare covering dental/vision/hearing would be a game changer for seniors.

Had Democrats passed BBB, they could run on protecting these new programs in 2024. Saying that Trump would repeal them.

The big question mark of course is rather these programs come into force immediately. Obamacare took until 2013 to open. These plans are more more expansion than Obamacare.

The Bipartisan Infrastructure Act, CHIPS Act and Inflation Reduction Acts are all great. But let’s be honest, 90% of Americans never heard of them because they are stupid. Never mind have the brain capacity to realize the funding and resulting jobs to remove lead from the local school is from Biden’s policies. But social policies like BBB are much better for electoral wins.

Thoughts?

It would have probably kept the house Democrat. Then you could do some stimulus in 2023 and 24($2000 or so)and make people feel better about things.

[Joe Biden 2028]

Inflation would have gone well into the double digits and stayed there for years. Republicans would have at least 57 senate seats, possibly more.

"Build Back Better wouldn’t increase inflation, because it was paid for with tax increases. Even then, the spending was meant for a 10 year period. And there’s a strong possibility the money wouldn’t even be spent yet. The only a quarter of the funds from CHIPS and IRA have been delegated or earmarked"

[Averroës]

The IRA contained a lot of Build Back Better's provisions. The problem was that they passed the corporate pork part of the bill and ignored the social welfare programs that would have benefited more voters, more directly, and a lot more quickly.

Honestly, if they had had the votes for it, they would have been better off just extending the expanded child tax credit than they were with the laughably named Inflation Reduction Act. Instead we got yet another temporary fix to the ACA, and a whole load of pork that didn't move votes where it needed to move them.

[Averroës]

Relevant:

This says everything:

(Original post was deleted, so thank you to those who quoted it for posterity.)

[Joe Biden 2028]

Relevant:

This says everything:

(Original post was deleted, so thank you to those who quoted it for posterity.)

For a long time, Americans didn't approve of "Obamacare". But the same polls showed broad support for government subsidies, protections for pre-existing conditions, staying on parents insurance until 2026 etc. So basically, Americans are dumb and support/not support policies based on nicknames despite not knowing whats in the actual law.

The "Affordable Care Act" always polled better than "Obamacare"

[Averroës]

For a long time, Americans didn't approve of "Obamacare". But the same polls showed broad support for government subsidies, protections for pre-existing conditions, staying on parents insurance until 2026 etc. So basically, Americans are dumb and support/not support policies based on nicknames despite not knowing whats in the actual law.

The "Affordable Care Act" always polled better than "Obamacare"

It's almost always bad politics, and worse analysis, to assume that voter preferences are a result of stupidity. Polls are blunt instruments and apparent contradictions usually have more to do with how the questions are asked than with the respondents themselves.

As far as the subject at hand is concerned, the public has been fretting about inflation for years, and plenty of us were begging Democrats to treat it as a top priority from very early on. The polls were always very clear on this voter preference.

Instead, "Bidenomics" doubled down on Trump's tariffs and pushed an industrial policy straight out of the last century (with green window dressing). Biden pushed the most ambitious spending legislation that his caucus was willing to support at a time when prices were rising. And his administration denied the extent of the inflation problem, insisting that worries were overblown.

It's perfectly reasonable to argue that the bulk of inflation wasn't preventable. But the public saw an administration focused on these big omnibus bills at a time of anxiety about prices. Even worse, very little of it was money bound for their pockets. I think that would have made more of a difference. There is one significant group of voters that Democrats didn't bleed, and that's seniors. Seniors are one of the few large groups of voters who could look at Biden's major spending bills and see how it put more money in their pockets (i.e. via lower prescription drug prices).

That's also why the ACA ultimately became a political winner. It's almost impossible to unwind without directly affecting the well-being of voters. Republicans can't touch it without needing to explain themselves. That's not the case with most of Biden's spending.