Issues Shaping Up For Election 2022?

Everything isn’t totally in place yet, nor is the field of play totally where I, for one, would like it to be. Nevertheless, some of the big issues as well as blocking issues are falling into place. Examples:

Here’s a tweet I got from Red State. It identifies two losing Dem issues—one that nobody cares about, and one that everybody cares about. Bad combo:

Emily Jashinsky @emilyjashinsky

Dems are telling the press they’re worried the country is too “distracted” by inflation to care about their January 6 hearings.

To make matters worse, Dems are setting themselves up to be blamed for ignoring and making worse the issue that everybody cares about—inflation—in favor of more political theater. That enrages normals and leads Dems to maybe stay home.

This one hasn’t come to fruition yet, but could. It would play broadly into all sorts of social divide issues:

Charles C. W. Cooke @charlescwcooke

If President Biden "cancels" student debt, the GOP must take a flamethrower to the college status quo. If it's broken enough to warrant a BBB-sized taxpayer bailout, it's broken enough to burn to the ground.

nationalreview.comBiden Must Reap the Whirlwind If He ‘Cancels’ Student-Loan Debt | National ReviewSuch an unprecedentedly disastrous act would necessitate an unprecedentedly strong response from elected Republicans.

A flamethrower is exactly what our educational establishment needs, and more and more people realize that. People are hurting, and will be enraged by that bailout.

Here’s an issue that the MSM has been keeping under wraps for years, now. That may not continue—and Dems will be blamed for the coverup. Politicians getting rich off their positions and enabling their pervo kids? No sympathy from hardly anyone:

Jonathan Turley @JonathanTurley

Given this mounting evidence, the position of Attorney General Garland has gone from dubious to ridiculous in evading the issue of a special counsel appointment.

jonathanturley.orgGarland Stonewalls Questions about a Special Counsel in Hunter Biden Scandal Despite New Evidence Tied to President BidenAttorney General Merrick Garland continued to refuse to address questions over his refusal to appoint a Special Counsel in the Hunter Biden investigation despite new evidence tying President Joe Bi…

Sample of what Turley is saying:

Attorney General Merrick Garland continued to refuse to address questions over his refusal to appoint a Special Counsel in the Hunter Biden investigation despite new evidence tying President Joe Biden to the controversial business deals. The New York Post is reporting that President Biden agreed to cover more than $800,000 in bills of Hunter, including legal fees tied to the foreign deals. While President Biden’s denial of knowledge of Hunter’s deals has been repeatedly contradicted (including by Hunter himself), White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki declared that President Biden stands by his denials. However, she declined to explain new information showing that a key business partner in these deals visited the White House over a dozen times, including at least one meeting with then Vice President Biden.

…

What may be even more damaging is the the new disclosure that Hunter Biden’s business partner, Eric Schwerin, made at least 19 visits to the White House and other official locations between 2009 and 2015. Schwerin was the president of Rosemont Seneca, one of the key firms involved in the alleged influence peddling schemes.

And now we learn that Joe Biden Has $5.2 Million In 'Unexplained' Income:

While some of the Bidens’ income came from book deals and speaking engagements (imagine people paying to watch Biden speak!), there is a $7 million discrepancy between the income declared on his tax returns and the income he declared on government transparency reports.

“Some of that difference can be accounted for with salaries earned by First Lady Jill Biden and other sums not required on his reports – but still leaves $5.2million earned by Joe’s company and not listed on his transparency reports,” the Daily Mail‘s investigation concludes.

“The ‘missing millions’ – combined with emails on Hunter’s abandoned laptop suggesting Joe would have a 10% share in Hunter’s blockbuster deal with the Chinese – raise a troubling question: did Joe Biden receive money from the foreign venture?”

Hm … a $5.2 million discrepancy? That’s not small potatoes. What exactly was Biden trying to hide? Was it his cut of Hunter Biden’s shady foreign business deals? There are a lot of unanswered questions here.

Coming on top of everything else, this unexplained income becomes one of those things that, if you have to explain it, you’ve already pretty much lost. It just sticks to you and your party. You can’t change the subject.

With public opinion continuing to shift against the Dems, things will probably only get worse. SWC has an interesting thread on a huge issue for normal Americans—border security. It’s an example of how winning can be losing. A legal win for Zhou could be a big loser for Dems:

Interesting arguments yesterday in SCOTUS on the "Remain in Mexico" policy for asylum seekers that was put in place by Trump, but suspended on "Day 1" by Biden, and later repealed by DHS.

This is one of those immigration issues where the Exec. Branch has tremendous discretion.

Given the negative impact the Biden border policy is having on Dem candidates, it's one where a decent slice of the Dem. party establishment is secretly hoping SCOTUS will save them by ruling against the Biden Admin.

The policy is driven by extreme left-wing interest groups who advocate for "open borders." The Dem party establishment can't get control unless it can get the GOP to do along with a "path to citizenship" for those already in the country without status.

From the coverage of the questions by SCOTUS, it looks like deference to Exec. authority is going to prevail, with the "center" being something involving "Not our problem". Congress has passed a law the Exec. can't comply with--and never has--and Cong. hasn't fixed the problems.

SCOTUS doesn't seem inclined to allow individual states to come forward and demand Exec. compliance with a law Congress won't fix, particularly where compliance would require taking specific steps involving foreign policy considerations.

Not good news for Dem. party politics.

No doubt issues will continue to shift and develop throughout the summer. However, the dynamic in play—and likely to continue—is that the Dem focus on political theater and their captivity to the radical aberrant section of the population (a small minority in the big scheme) will turn off their relatively normal followers while enraging normals. On the big issues of the day, Dems lose big time.

Look, this may not be salvation in our time, but we need some victories.