COVID-19 (f/k/a "the Coronavirus")

[Lennys Tap]

Clinton had a 36 percent approval rating early in his first term.
Reagan in his first term was down to 35 percent.
Obama at one point in his first term was at 37 percent.
They all cruised to second terms.

But, yes, by all means continue to tell us how enormously significant this is.

https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/presidential-approval/highslows

President Biden's prospect for a second term are (imo) remote for reasons having nothing to do with his current popularity or lack thereof. They had nothing to do with why I posted his numbers. I think his numbers will have a major impact on the midterms, which I think are significant. Using your examples:

Clinton's party lost 54 House seats and 8 Senate seats in his first midterms.

Obama lost 63 House seats and 8 Senate seats.

Reagan lost 26 House seats and gained 1 Senate seats.

Biden doesn't have the majorities going in that Clinton or Obama did so the losses will likely be considerably smaller in raw numbers. In addition, the Senate map favors him in this cycle. But if the history you cite repeats itself (low early popularity preceding large midterm losses) the impact on Biden's administration will be significant.

[Jockey]

President Biden's prospect for a second term are (imo) remote for reasons having nothing to do with his current popularity or lack thereof. They had nothing to do with why I posted his numbers. I think his numbers will have a major impact on the midterms, which I think are significant. Using your examples:

Clinton's party lost 54 House seats and 8 Senate seats in his first midterms.

Obama lost 63 House seats and 8 Senate seats.

Reagan lost 26 House seats and gained 1 Senate seats.

Biden doesn't have the majorities going in that Clinton or Obama did so the losses will likely be considerably smaller in raw numbers. In addition, the Senate map favors him in this cycle. But if the history you cite repeats itself (low early popularity preceding large midterm losses) the impact on Biden's administration will be significant.

The difference is that no one running as a member of the opposition party had supported a coup attempt.

[Lennys Tap]

The difference is that no one running as a member of the opposition party had supported a coup attempt.

Jockey

If you really think that the Democrats hold onto the House in 2022 I'm available for a wager.

[MU82]

Lenny ...

Your history about midterms is correct ... except you forgot to mention how Trump was routed in 2018, too.

In a two-year span, he did an amazing job of losing the House, the Senate and the White House. Impressive ... though all rigged, of course!

As for your 2022 prediction, I totally agree. Dems will almost surely lose the House.

[Pakuni]

President Biden's prospect for a second term are (imo) remote for reasons having nothing to do with his current popularity or lack thereof. They had nothing to do with why I posted his numbers. I think his numbers will have a major impact on the midterms, which I think are significant. Using your examples:

Clinton's party lost 54 House seats and 8 Senate seats in his first midterms.

Obama lost 63 House seats and 8 Senate seats.

Reagan lost 26 House seats and gained 1 Senate seats.

Biden doesn't have the majorities going in that Clinton or Obama did so the losses will likely be considerably smaller in raw numbers. In addition, the Senate map favors him in this cycle. But if the history you cite repeats itself (low early popularity preceding large midterm losses) the impact on Biden's administration will be significant.

This reeks of goalpost shifting, Lenny.
Yes, it's true that the Dems almost certainly will lose House seats in the midterms. Which is what has happened in 11 of the last 12 presidential first terms. It's hardly evidence of the narrative you were spinning earlier about Biden's first-term poll numbers being uniquely disastrous. They are, in fact, entirely common, as would be the loss of House seats.

[Lennys Tap]

This reeks of goalpost shifting, Lenny.
Yes, it's true that the Dems almost certainly will lose House seats in the midterms. Which is what has happened in 11 of the last 12 presidential first terms. It's hardly evidence of the narrative you were spinning earlier about Biden's first-term poll numbers being uniquely disastrous. They are, in fact, entirely common, as would be the loss of House seats.

Not trying to goalpost shift at all. You pointed out that 2 Democratic presidents were extremely unpopular early in their first terms but said it proved meaningless (because they won re-election 4 years later). IMO your point is meaningless because there is no chance Joe Biden will be running in 2024. I say it was meaningful, as Obama and Clinton rank #1 and #2 for the most seats lost in the midterms by a newly elected President in at least 80 years. Trump (also very unpopular at this point) ranks #4, an unelected President (Gerald Ford) ranks #3. So the correlation between early unpopularity and a major routing in the midterms seems pretty clear. Recent gerrymandering (more "safe seats" on both sides)and the narrow edge the Dems enjoy right now will likely temper the rout, but if the past is prologue there will be one - something I don't see predicted by 538 or anyone else at this point.

[SERocks]

https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/october-11-2021

It will be interesting indeed....

[MU82]

xsomething I don't see predicted by 538 or anyone else at this point.

Lots of pundits are predicting the GOP will decisively recapture the House in 2022.

Including lots of liberal pundits, which is why many are so desperate to get some parts of their agenda passed while they have the chance.

[forgetful]

Not trying to goalpost shift at all. You pointed out that 2 Democratic presidents were extremely unpopular early in their first terms but said it proved meaningless (because they won re-election 4 years later). IMO your point is meaningless because there is no chance Joe Biden will be running in 2024. I say it was meaningful, as Obama and Clinton rank #1 and #2 for the most seats lost in the midterms by a newly elected President in at least 80 years. Trump (also very unpopular at this point) ranks #4, an unelected President (Gerald Ford) ranks #3. So the correlation between early unpopularity and a major routing in the midterms seems pretty clear. Recent gerrymandering (more "safe seats" on both sides)and the narrow edge the Dems enjoy right now will likely temper the rout, but if the past is prologue there will be one - something I don't see predicted by 538 or anyone else at this point.

I'm not predicting anything one way or the other, as it is way to early. But simply looking at numbers like that, and not the larger picture is kind of pointless.

A good chunk of Biden's low approval is actually progressives thinking he is too moderate. They aren't going to support a conservative. What it could lead to though is actually a lot of liberal members of congress being voted out for ones that are more aggressively progressive.

[jesmu84]

I'm not predicting anything one way or the other, as it is way to early. But simply looking at numbers like that, and not the larger picture is kind of pointless.

A good chunk of Biden's low approval is actually progressives thinking he is too moderate. They aren't going to support a conservative. What it could lead to though is actually a lot of liberal members of congress being voted out for ones that are more aggressively progressive.

Or those progressives may not show up to the polls at all after feeling like their votes/voices were betrayed

[Warriors4ever]

The 'progressives' at least until recently haven't been good about showing up for local and mid-term elections. Plus they can be idiots - they have tried to argue that Durbin and Mike Quigley, my own rep, need to be primaried from the left for not being progressive enough. Maddening as Manchin is, they also have not understood that he can get elected in West Virginia , and that at least matters for things like controlling committees and judicial nominations - I had one tell me in 2017 that if we needed to wait ten years to educate W Virginia voters, then he was okay with that- my response was that, we didn't have ten years....

[forgetful]

Or those progressives may not show up to the polls at all after feeling like their votes/voices were betrayed

Definitely a possibility. One of the reasons I am avoiding making predictions one way or the other.

[MU82]

Colin Powell, dead from COVID-19.

https://apnews.com/article/colin-powell-dead-covid-9c918dc1c137ebf368f2cbb461e4fad4

[pacearrow02]

Colin Powell, dead from COVID-19.

https://apnews.com/article/colin-powell-dead-covid-9c918dc1c137ebf368f2cbb461e4fad4

After being fully vaccinated

[jesmu84]

https://twitter.com/kayaoakes/status/1449773745774612480?t=GUd_B0xinkpZVY7CfiejhA&s=19

Interesting commentary from the Pope

[Uncle Rico]

After being fully vaccinated

He also had multiple myeloma

[pacearrow02]

He also had multiple myeloma

Ahhhh

[JWags85]

https://twitter.com/kayaoakes/status/1449773745774612480?t=GUd_B0xinkpZVY7CfiejhA&s=19

Interesting commentary from the Pope

There is a TON of irony in his financial related comments. 

[Pakuni]

There is a TON of irony in his financial related comments.

Oh, do tell ...

[Uncle Rico]

Ahhhh

Shocking you didn't have all the facts. 

[JWags85]

Oh, do tell ...

The richest organization on the planet with overflowing coffers that has never paid tax, whose head is draped in gold and riches walking around ornate halls and palaces in the Vatican, is telling banks to wipe out debt and financial obligations and for UBI to be widespread?  Its hardly coming from a humble, hard scrabble monk

If Bill Gates was saying it, people would come for his neck.

[pacearrow02]

Shocking you didn't have all the facts.

Hey numb nuts....I knew that.  I just find it interesting that for 20 months when it was pointed out that 80%+ of the deaths attributed to Covid where in folks that were old or with multiple comorbidities it was poo poo'd cause that wasn't justification for someone having to die even a day earlier as a result of Covid then they would have otherwise with their already serious health complications. 

[Uncle Rico]

Hey numb nuts....I knew that.  I just find it interesting that for 20 months when it was pointed out that 80%+ of the deaths attributed to Covid where in folks that were old or with multiple comorbidities it was poo poo'd cause that wasn't justification for someone having to die even a day earlier as a result of Covid then they would have otherwise with their already serious health complications.

His family announced he died from complications of Covid-19.  Take it up with them. 

[Pakuni]

The richest organization on the planet with overflowing coffers that has never paid tax, whose head is draped in gold and riches walking around ornate halls and palaces in the Vatican, is telling banks to wipe out debt and financial obligations and for UBI to be widespread?  Its hardly coming from a humble, hard scrabble monk

If Bill Gates was saying it, people would come for his neck.

You think the Catholic church is the richest organization in the world?

Anyhow, it's a tired and weak argument (not to mention a deflection from the actual point) to suggest that because the Catholic church has wealth - the vast majority of which is real estate and art - it has no moral authority when it comes issues of poverty.

[JWags85]

You think the Catholic church is the richest organization in the world?

Anyhow, it's a tired and weak argument (not to mention a deflection from the actual point) to suggest that because the Catholic church has wealth - the vast majority of which is real estate and art - it has no moral authority when it comes issues of poverty.

Organization?  Yes.  I didn't say company, but organization, yes I do.

I wasn't deflecting from anything?  I just made a comment on the irony of it, cause otherwise its "interesting,  I don't agree with all of it but thats certainly direct wording". 

And you're adding a bunch of extra meaning that I never said nor implied.  Thats also why I mentioned Gates, who has a charitable foundation with a $50B endowment, aka someone in a position of immense wealth and luxury who also has a profound financial/charitable vehicle for good 

You can certainly disagree or have a different take without having to label something a tired and weak deflection.  Its doesn't always have to be about headhunting, FFS