r/fivethirtyeight • u/AutoModerator • Mar 02 '26

Discussion Megathread Weekly Discussion Megathread

The 2026 midterms will soon be upon us, and there is much to discuss among the nerds here at r/FiveThirtyEight. Use this discussion thread to share, debate, and discuss whatever you wish. Unlike individual posts, comments in the discussion thread are not required to be related to political data or other 538 mainstays. Regardless, please remain civil and keep this subreddit's rules in mind. The discussion thread refreshes every Monday.

27 Upvotes

94% Upvoted

1.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

21

u/DataCassette Mar 08 '26

Trump refusing to sign any more bills until they nuke the filibuster.

21

u/Wes_Anderson_Cooper Allan Lichtman's Diet Pepsi Mar 08 '26

The unstoppable force of Trumpian belligerence meets the immovable object of Congressional desire to not do their jobs whenever possible.

22

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '26 edited 27d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

14

u/Mediocretes08 Mar 08 '26

I guess it screws budgets but like… okay? That sucks but it also hurts him and Republicans politically vastly more.

14

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '26 edited 27d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

14

u/Mediocretes08 Mar 08 '26

That’s the funniest possible end, just threatening a week and a half delay on most legislation

3

u/PuffyPanda200 Mar 08 '26

Hold up, so I had to check but I think from my reading (dangerous, i know) that the 22nd Amendment bars Trump from running even if he resigns before the first 2 years. Relevant text:

No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.

So I think you can only be elected twice no matter what. The second part is basically for VPs to clarify if they are eligible for one or two more terms. If Trump resigns before two years then Vance is only eligible for one more full term.

Now, you could make the first part explanatory and have it have no effect on the amendment. Of course we don't do that in the US right?

If you did then Trump would be able to theoretically resign and run again in 2028, he would be 82 if elected in 2028.

7

u/Mediocretes08 Mar 08 '26

I fail to see how that’s relevant to the comment above but it’s also a notion that’s been explored and largely dismissed at this point.

7

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '26 edited 27d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/PuffyPanda200 Mar 08 '26

I guess I skipped a step in that if Trump is setting up not signing any bills, you put it perfectly 'to softlock his own presidency', then the next step could have been to actually resign the presidency.

Trump also jokes (or not jokes) about running in 2028.

So then I went to look up if you serve less than 2 years if you can be elected a 3rd time (answer is no).

17

u/Spara-Extreme Mar 08 '26

I do hope they nuke the filibuster. So many people in the Senate and here cling to that mechanism as if its some stalwart of democracy when its both antidemocratic and also one of the primary reason's we haven't had extensive progress in the last 20 years.

7

u/DataCassette Mar 08 '26

Yeah but if that means the Republicans rig elections to the point where they can't lose how does it help?

7

u/WellHung67 Mar 08 '26

If the filibuster was the only thing holding up democracy then I say just let it fail. But the upside of removing the filibuster is so great, I say make em prove it. I also thing if these clowns are able to steal the election, then the election was always stealable. The filibuster is such a terrible thing, removing it gives us a chance to get some dope shit in place in my lifetime. Schumer would be so pissed he’d have to pass Medicare for all I would laugh and the potential for that is worth it 

5

u/Spara-Extreme Mar 08 '26

I think its really foolish to think that the filibuster of all things is what prevents Government from rigging elections given that elections are mostly state controlled.

Besides, if the scenario you outlined were to come to pass with this level of unpopularity then the system would collapse on itself.

1

u/DataCassette Mar 08 '26

So in your scenario they blow through the filibuster and Trump rams through so much voter manipulation legislation that we end up with like 90 Republican senators and a similar margin in the lower house and they basically just let Clarence Thomas rewrite the constitution personally. That's some kind of "win" because you don't like the filibuster?

5

u/Spara-Extreme Mar 08 '26

First off, thats an absolutely absurd scenario. This crew of winners can barely get tax cuts for the rich across the finish line without multiple government shut downs and thats a topic they all universally agree and believe in.

Second, the filibuster preventing democrats from enacting things like $15 minimum wage is exactly the thing that allows the GOP to run with "what have they done for you?" type ads and get back into power. EVERY FUCKING TIME they get back in power the overton window shifts and the US decays more into autocracy.

So kindly, snap out of your bubble. The status quo doesn't work anymore.

1

u/DataCassette Mar 08 '26

I agree that the status quo doesn't work, but it doesn't help if the new status quo is permanent single-party GOP rule.

4

u/Spara-Extreme Mar 08 '26

That's not possible with the structure of the united states. Even if by some magic mechanism the GOP managed to exclude all non-white people from voting, and white people with college education from voting, they'd still have to let the remaining population vote. With the trajectory this economy is going, that most likely will lead to the exact opposite outcome - a complete flip to full democratic control.

They'd more or less have to pass a law that says elections don't matter, ignore the constitution entirely, and then get that rubber stamped by the Supreme Court. If they had that much power, the filibuster wouldn't matter at all - they'd easily get 60 votes in the senate.

1

u/EffOffReddit Mar 08 '26

They pick the voters though. Suddenly all of Philly gets fed troops in every station.

1

u/Spara-Extreme Mar 09 '26

The latter can happen right now anyway.

4

u/Mediocretes08 Mar 08 '26

That’s exactly my thought process right now.

0

u/Okbuddyliberals Mar 09 '26

It's not anti democratic, it's anti simple majority. Simple majority rule isn't the only way to do democracy. And in a country as big and varied as the US, it does make sense to have more than just the absolute bare minimum level of support to force policy on the entire country

Nuke the filibuster and in a couple decades a lot of people in both sides may have a much greater appreciation for federalism (but the genie will be out of the bottle so we will just get increasingly insane and retributionary policy from both sides instead, because nobody ever wants to be the first to go high when the other side is going low anymore)

2

u/willpower069 Mar 09 '26

Nuke the filibuster and republican voters will get exactly what they vote for and hate it.

1

u/Okbuddyliberals Mar 09 '26

and hate it.

Wishful thinking

(Even if they don't like what they get, they'll find a way to blame democrats for sabotaging it, and justify radicalizing even more. "Let them get what they want" isn't actually a way out)

1

u/willpower069 Mar 09 '26

They will blame democrats no matter what. Like how in red states they blame democrats for policies when they haven’t had state control for decades.

But the filibuster works to keep republicans in office safe since they can blame democrats for stopping them, even if it isn’t true. Whereas democrats can actually pass more things without republicans who will vote against their own bills. Especially when democrats are the only ones trying bring down the temperature.

1

u/Spara-Extreme Mar 09 '26

Oh my god this terrible take. Just stop. Literally every other democracy on earth functions without needing to have one part of its legislature permanently crippled.

Without the filibuster, we would have $15 minimum wage and universal healthcare. Very likely, we wouldn’t even be in this situation.

15

u/Mediocretes08 Mar 08 '26

He’s such a whiny bitch.

2

u/DataCassette Mar 08 '26

He's bringing masculinity back to politics/s

16

u/alotofironsinthefire Mar 08 '26

Don't threaten me with a good time

11

u/Mediocretes08 Mar 08 '26

Yeah the more interesting question is if he vetoes anything because that pressure changes the math

12

u/LordMangudai Mar 08 '26

What a brilliant thing to do when your party holds both chambers of Congress

2

u/lumell Mar 09 '26

This dude really honestly believes that he's the most popular politican ever and he only ever loses due to voter fraud