are farmers actually rich? i was always fed this narrative that they are perpetually struggling, etc. plus there has been a lot consolidation, average farm acreage doubled since 2000 or some statistic like that. are all the poor farmers out of business?
plus there’s a lot of conglomerates that own the processing and just abuse the chicken farmers for example.
I hope you’re right.
It’s pretty much historically 100% that the side the wins the whitehouse gets trounced in the midterms. I think its happened in every midterm almost ever. Winning team relaxes and votes less, losing team is fired up and pissed off.
I’ve had a theory that this is changing due to social media and politics being in peoples lives 24/7 instead of something that used to just come up during elections, so hopefully I’m right and we still get big turnout. History is not on our side though and neither is momentum, redistricting, or competent leadership
Yes but it’s just a matter of time before the White poors strike it rich. Duh.
Conventional wisdom is incumbents have advantage but I’m not sure if that’s even true anymore given how partisan the country is now. Obama went from +7% in 2008 to +4% in 2012 and that was during an improved economy after taking over the worst economy in history in 2008. If Biden goes against Trump again he won’t have the name recognition/familiarity advantage most incumbents have. If covid slows down Trump will take credit for this vaccine. If it doesn’t Biden will take the blame for it. Trump has a way, way better shot against Biden in a 2024 rematch than he did in 2020.
i mean, it all depends on what he can get done. but the possibility is there.
Does incumbency advantage exist when supporters of both candidates believe their guy is the rightful President?
They usually have a high net worth but not a ton of liquidity.
Yeah, I do have a suspicion that Charles Koch is behind a lot of these local Rs not playing along with the election steal.
I think its all about scale. Small farms probably make like a lower middle class profit, with lots of risk. In my rural area there are lots of farms, and mostly the household have one spouse with a stable paying job (think teacher) and one running the farm.
I think if you bump up to a medium sized farm with a revenue over $1 million (these would be suppliers to the big processing conglomerates) then yeah the owners probably have incomes and net worth that looks more like a small business owner. If they inherited the farm from parents, then you’re probably talking full blown millionaire-who-thinks-hes-self made deplorable territory.
I can’t see Biden running for a second term either. He’s only there now because he was the best available alternative to Trump. That said, I don’t want to assume Harris is going to be the likely nominee. I wish Biden would put a really dynamic and charismatic person in charge of HRS. Make that person the face of the war against the virus. That person might be able to gain a following. Do the Dems even have anyone who fits in that category?
In the Fox News/facebook era where Biden is literally winning over 0 new voters over the next 4 years no matter how good of a job he does I’m not sure if that advantage even exists anymore. Biden would basically need to turn out all of his 2020 voters again which is going to be hard.
Yeah I think people need to realize we’re in a new era of politics and the rules have changed. I’m not sure any of the old rules apply. This could be good for us in 2022, or it could be an absolute disaster.
I do expect FB to behave more once Trump isn’t around to threaten them. But politics being apart of peoples lives 24/7 now has changed everything. Like even after the election millions and millions of people are going to be sharing political stories on FB, engaging, memes, organizing etc.
I think the main advantage of incumbency now is if you’re willing to use it like a weapon like Trump did which dems won’t, and Republicans will.
Regarding the moral dilemma of Jones Day, I have a high-powered lawyer brother-in-law that insists that we have a “combative legal system” (meaning that’s how it’s designed) and thus there are never any ethical issues with defending any particular client. We originally got into this argument over the summer when some Harvey Weinstein defense attorney got kicked off a non-profit board.
I assume this attitude is prevalent in the profession.
Is it just me or does this DHS guy that Trump fired look kinda like Tucker Carlson?
I generally agree with this, especially in regards to criminal matters.
I’m reminded of Liz Cheney’s smear campaign against the military lawyers who defended Guantanamo detainees (“Whose values do they share?”).
Lol at Americans accepting that other countries do anything better than the US. Its The Best Country In The World, stupid.
It’s how they sleep at night. Magically, these BigLaw ghouls only discover the essential merits of an adversarial system when a scumbag can afford their outrageous billing rates.
You’ll literally never see a BigLaw attorney representing a random violent criminal, which gives away the game.
BMWs, mistresses, and Ivy League admissions for you C- kids dont pay for themselves.
I honestly think people are way too confident in their predictions for what happens over the next 2-4 years in American politics.
Like, how can anyone feel confident that they know what will shake out with Trump and his base after he leaves office? Trump could have zero influence going forward or he could have complete unfettered control of the GOP. If Trump fades away, does Trumpism remain? It could, but it also…might not?
People have super short memories and the GOP could rebrand into whatever they want and not face any consequences at all. Ultimately the GOP establishment does not want to deal with Trump anymore and would rather go in a direction that is more GTO for seizing and holding onto power, and it’s pretty unclear to me who is going to win that battle and what direction the winner ultimately takes thereafter.