#AskTIME Subscriber Q and A

Welcome to TIME Subscriber Q&A, with TIME political columnist, Joe Klein. This week he has written about 5 things to watch for in the midterm elections.

To read the full post, you need to be a subscriber. It’s not too late to sign up. ($30 a year or 8 cents a day for the magazine and all digital content.) Once you’re signed up, you can log in to the site with a username and password.

DonQuixotic asks, Joe, assuming Republicans make gains in Congress (which in all likelihood they will), do you think their 2016 candidate will be harmed by the tone they set for the next two years? A tone we can almost certainly guess will be one of continued legislative gridlock?

Yes, if they continue down the same path. But they might be more clever and submit bills that look like progress—an immigration bill with money for more security and more visas for entrepreneurs (but nothing for the undocumented already here)–but really aren’t. Remember, they cooperated with Clinton in his second term, gave him constant little-noticed concessions in programs for the working poor, produced budget surpluses…and won the election in 2000.

sacredh asks, Joe, if you had to pick one senate race that you think is going to be an upset, which one would it be?

I don’t make predictions.These are especially hard to call. But I wouldn’t count out Michelle Nunn in Georgia and I especially like the fact that many of her campaign rallies were service projects.

DonQuixotic asks, Joe, since outreach to women seems to be important (or at the very least, necessary) to the Republican agenda, how long do you think it will take them to run a serious female candidate for President to show that it means something to them? One that genuinely has a shot at being on their ticket?

You mean, Sarah Palin wasn’t serious?

nflfoghorn asks, Awright, we got Joe back!!! Anyway, if pundits are correct and Republicans do take the Senate, can you point out any areas where they think they can actually pass laws (i.e., work with the president to a degree) versus blocking every nominee he can possibly throw up between 2015 and January 2017? And do they honestly think they can repeal anything at all under Obamacare?

As I mentioned above, they might pass hollowed out version of an immigration bill. They’ll also give (corporate) tax reform a try and I wouldn’t be surprised if they proposed a significant infrastructure. And no, they have NEVER honestly believed that they could repeal Obamacare…

MrObvious asks, Joe, When you talk to regular folks, do you get the feeling that they understand the moving parts of how things work politically and as a country or do you feel that they seem uninformed about how things work and what’s done in their names?

Sadly, no. In fact, most people who think they know how things work don’t really know. My antidote for this: everyone should do government work for a couple of years. That way the public would learn how difficult it is to get anything accomplished after 200 years of regulations and interest group influence.

deconstructive asks, A change of pace from election / post-election Senate Armageddon q’s. –

Joe, we always see debates over generational viewpoints, like today’s Millennials vs. Everyone Else, the 50’s / 60’s teens vs. parents, and so forth. Since you’ve worked with many younger reporters at TIME (like Katy Steinmetz) and witnessed younger reporters on the beat compared to seasoned veterans, what generational differences do you see among reporters today? As a comparison, at Michael Scherer’s last Q+A, I asked him what were the differences between working at larger TIME vs. smaller Mother Jones, and he said the work is the same. No doubt younger and older journalists do the same work, but I suspect differences exist, which are ________?

I’m really impressed with the young reporters I’ve worked with at TIME. They’re really smart, well-educated and enthusiastic. Which is all you need—except institutional memory, which is why they let a few old guys like me hang around. Reporting is the key. I don’t know how many stories, and issues, I’ve covered where reality on the ground has modified views that I had coming into the story.

yogi asks, JK, ISIS was deemed a the greatest threat ever that must be dealt with because of some nebulous idea that the fall of Iraq would bring the destruction of the US or something, it still was never really made clear to me. War should be a major issue that shouldn’t be treated as simply as deciding what to eat for dinner, yet Congress has passed the buck again with funding to allow the President to bomb however much he wants right before they ran off to campaign. Why doesn’t Congress believe they should debate whether the US goes to war anymore and how we pay for those wars?

Absolutely agree. We should never go to war without passing a war tax to pay the costs. Veterans have told me that it would be a sign that the public and government had their backs—and also a brake on mission creep, if the government was pursuing the wrong course.

yogi asks, JK, one of the narratives I’ve heard from various news sources is the general electorate still says that the economy is one of their main issues that plan base their vote on. Given that the GOP looks to make gains and control in both the House and Senate and only a year ago they shutdown the federal government that hurt the economy, this raises the questions: 1. Why hasn’t the electorate held the GOP accountable for this shutdown? and/or 2. Have they simply forgotten because the media has decided they don’t want to raise this issue?

The shutdown had a minuscule impact on the economy. And Obama’s disastrous health care launch took it off the table before it could be fully digested. The real problem here is that economics is counterintuitive. People simply don’t understand why government spending money—the Obama stimulus, for example—can be a boon in bad times. And despite years of media exposition and criticism, a lot of people still believe that massive tax cuts can boost the economy.

DonQuixotic asks, Joe, do you believe we may be seeing the very first American generation that is truly left off with worse opportunities than their parents due to our government’s inability to function, our economy, crippling personal debt, declining environment, and emerging global superpowers competing with our own interests?

It’s not impossible. We baby boomers have been an embarrassment when it comes to preparing for the future…but I don’t bet against the creativity of Americans.

hivemanster asks, Joe, do you ever feel bad that you’re embedded in a “media”, and I use that term loosely, that roughly resembles the tabloids of yesteryear? Enquiring minds want to know..

Yes. In some ways, it’s worse. There’s more competition now for a less interested audience and so the race to the bottom, using scare tactics and conspiracy theories, is on full throttle.

Sue_N asks, Joe, in your “5 Things to Watch” column you wrote:

But Republicans found in 1998 that compromising with a Democratic President could produce odd results, like balanced budgets and a Republican presidential victory in 2000.

Do you honestly, in your heart of hearts, believe that today’s Tea Party GOP, which has turned obstructionism and vitriol into performance art, has any notion whatsoever of compromising with Obama? The TPGOP (and, let’s face it, that is the maniacal id that controls the GOP now) has shut down the government, made noises about suing Obama simply for doing his job, voted 50+ times to repeal the ACA, insulted his commitment to this nation and accused him of aiding and comforting terrorists, made the idea of nullification an actual part of political discourse, talked up impeachment and so on. Do you honestly, seriously expect these people now to turn to Obama and say, “Heh, only joking, let’s be friends now”?

And do you honestly, seriously, expect a party that has made its bones by saying “government is the enemy, government is the problem, government shouldn’t be doing anything” to suddenly believe in actually doing anything?

At what point will the media, and you, give up on the “but they’ll govern when they’re in power, really” nonsense and just admit that when the GOP takes over the Senate, we’re going to see two years of ugliness that will make the past four seem like a party?

You’re probably right, but the business community killed a lot of Tea Party candidates for Senate this year—and we might find that the business-friendlies will want to get some business-friendly stuff done. The Chamber of Commerce favors immigration reform, infrastructure spending…and corporate tax reform, which could be a good thing, if properly negotiated.

MementoMori asks, – Voting officials in 27 states, almost all of them Republicans, have launched what is threatening to become a massive purge of black, Hispanic, and Asian-American voters

– The Republican Sec of State in GA has “lost” tens of thousands of Dem leaning voter registrations.

– Republican controlled states have reduced hours and days when you can vote, which adversely affect minorities and the poor.

– Republican controlled states have enacted Voter ID laws that accept a concealed carry gun license, but refuse a student ID. Again, targeting left-leaning voters, while facilitating right-leaning voters.

There is an increasingly long list of Republican efforts to keep people from voting. It’s not about “preventing fraud”. It’s not about “protecting the will of the people”. This is a bold-faced attempt to subvert the electoral process and there is no equivalent effort from Dems to prevent or limit people from voting.

The Question: At what point does the Republican effort to subvert the electoral process warrant a critical response from the media?

It’s already been criticized. And much of it, especially the limitations on early voting, is despicable. But I do believe you should have to provide some sort of I.d. in order to vote.