Lots of great questions, so let’s get right into it.

A quick note: these mailbags run every Saturday as a special feature for paid subscribers. Subscribe to get full access and drop your questions for future mailbags.

Subscribe now

And don’t forget to leave your questions for next week’s mailbag in the comments.

Leave a comment

Jo B.

Considering the insane amount of ink spilled on Hunter Biden, why has the media basically accepted the fact that the Trump spawn are making obscene amounts of money off the government or that someone as inept, corrupt and compromised as Kushner is in charge of some pretty important ’peace’ talks?

Basically everyone just shrugs at the blatant corruption ‘cus Trump’ but when it comes to Kushner, how can anyone be sure he’s actually working in the interest of the US and not his personal funders?

Once again, elected reps, the media, voters all hold the two parties to extremely different standards.

Answer

This is a really hard and important question, because it gets at what has seemed so deeply unfair about the Trump era. There is undoubtedly a double standard, and the reasons why are helpful in understanding how the political media works.

There are three reasons the press holds Democrats to a much higher standard than Trump and the Republicans.

Read more

As Mills said in the statement she released Thursday morning:

While I have the drive and passion, commitment and experience, and above all else — the fight — to continue on, I very simply do not have the one thing that political campaigns unfortunately require today: the financial resources. That is why today I have made the incredibly difficult decision to suspend my campaign for the United States Senate.

Oysterman and veteran Graham Platner is the de facto nominee for Senate against Susan Collins. There is no path to a Senate majority without a win in Maine.

This is a stunning turn of events for a two-term governor who was running with the backing of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and Chuck Schumer. Candidates with this level of institutional support almost never lose their primaries. The fact that she dropped out a month before the primary makes it even more stunning.

The Mills campaign was clearly running out of money. After launching a series of negative ads against Platner, they pulled those ads a few weeks ago and even stopped running the relatively affordable digital ads that campaigns use to raise money.

But the lack of money was not the fundamental problem. The fact that Mills — again, a two-term governor with access to the biggest donors in Democratic politics — was unable to raise money tells a broader story about her candidacy. According to some polls, Mills was trailing Platner by as many as 30 points. She was unable to grab attention or demonstrate any momentum, despite weeks of terrible press for Platner after revelations about his offensive online comments from years ago and a tattoo with Nazi symbolism.

The collapse of the Mills campaign is bigger than Maine. It tells an important story about the state of American politics and what Democrats are looking for in candidates post-2024.

Read more

I was very wrong.

On Wednesday morning, the Supreme Court dropped its decision in Louisiana v. Callais. Here’s how Politico described the 6-3 ruling:

The Supreme Court significantly narrowed a key provision of the Voting Rights Act in a 6-3 ruling Wednesday, further eroding the impact of the landmark civil rights-era law.

For decades, Section 2 — a provision that broadly outlawed discrimination in voting on the basis of race — has been interpreted to allow, and sometimes demand, the use of race-conscious data in redistricting, to protect the voting power of minorities.

But the court’s new opinion, which split the justices along ideological lines, throws into question exactly how states can utilize race in their mapmaking process. The case involves a challenge to two majority-Black districts in Louisiana.

The Court did not formally gut Section 2, as many feared it would. But this ruling is bad for democracy, voting rights, civil rights, minority representation, and the Democratic Party.

Here’s what it means for the midterms and beyond.

Read more

There was one more shoe to drop in the redistricting wars, and that shoe dropped yesterday.

Governor DeSantis released a proposed map for Florida that could potentially lead to Republicans picking up four seats this fall. DeSantis is making the districts of four Democrats significantly more Republican.

I should mention that this map is almost certainly illegal. Florida’s constitution prohibits redrawing congressional or state legislative maps for partisan gain. But DeSantis seems confident he can get the Florida Supreme Court — six of whose seven justices he appointed — to look the other way.

This proposed Florida map is more aggressive than most observers expected and might be so aggressive as to blow up in Republicans’ faces.

Read more

Let’s get into it.

A quick note: these mailbags run every Saturday as a special feature for paid subscribers. Subscribe to get full access and drop your questions for future mailbags.

Subscribe now

And don’t forget to leave your questions for next week’s mailbag in the comments.

Leave a comment

Stephen Chamberlin

Obviously the next R POTUS candidates are Vance or Rubio. Is there anyone else you feel may step into the race and is there anyone who stands a chance of winning a primary? Personally I think the best thing Vance can do now for his chances is to resign...

Answer

There are certainly more pressing matters in the world than gaming out the 2028 GOP primary, but it’s a fascinating intellectual exercise that offers a window into the state of today’s Republican Party — and what the subscribers want, the subscribers get.

History would suggest that Vance will almost certainly be the nominee. Sitting vice presidents who run for the nomination tend to win, and win with relative ease. George H.W. Bush and Al Gore are the two most recent examples. Both faced primary challenges but locked up their nominations early.

That said, my confidence that Vance will be the nominee has waned considerably.

Read more

The past week has been a perfect encapsulation of Trump-induced whiplash.

Last Thursday, we were at war and blockading the Strait of Hormuz. On Friday, Trump declared the Strait was open, Iran had agreed to all our conditions, and we were on the cusp of a peace deal. By Saturday morning, the Strait was closed again, and Iran had fired on at least two ships. On Sunday morning, U.S. officials were about to head to Pakistan to hammer out a deal, and a few hours later, the U.S. had seized an Iranian ship and Trump was once again threatening to commit war crimes. By Monday, peace talks were back on — and then, moments before J.D. Vance was scheduled to leave for Islamabad, they were called off, though the ceasefire was extended.

It’s impossible to know if, how, or when this moronic and illegal war will come to an end. Anyone dumb enough to start it is too dumb to finish it.

In that brief moment of “peace” on Friday, the stock market rallied, oil prices dropped, and political pundits began to wonder whether all the damage from the war would fade by November.

I don’t think so. Even if the war ended tomorrow and the Strait reopened, Trump will have suffered lasting political damage.

Of course, if the U.S. is still embroiled in a raging war and gas is well north of $4 a gallon come November, that’s a worst-case scenario — one Trump is doing a great job of ensuring with his unhinged tweets and schizophrenic policy decisions.

But no matter what happens, the damage is done, and this war is not one of those Trump outrages that will be memory-holed in a matter of weeks. Republicans will pay a price for Trump’s ill-fated, ill-considered decision to go to war.

Here’s why.

It’s the Decision, Not the Conflict

New wars tend to start popular and then lose altitude over time as people begin to reckon with the costs in blood and treasure. The Gulf War, the War in Afghanistan, and the Iraq War all launched with broad bipartisan support. The latter two dragged on and became particularly unpopular — but crucially, voters had initially supported the decision to go to war, and only soured over time on how those wars were conducted.

Not so with Trump’s war in Iran.

Read more

This is a huge victory in the battle for control of the House this year. The Virginia congressional delegation currently comprises six Democrats and five Republicans. The new maps will likely result in a delegation with 10 Democrats and 1 Republican — a net gain of four seats for Democrats.

While Florida is still trying to redraw their maps, Democrats have largely nullified the GOP’s effort to rig the 2026 elections through mid-decade redistricting. Florida Republicans may still gain a few seats, but far fewer than anyone thought possible last year.

This sort of election is different from the congressional special elections and local races — like the recent Supreme Court race in Wisconsin — that we’ve been using as a barometer of the political environment. A singular ballot initiative in the spring, six months after a high-profile governor’s race and seven months before the midterms, is not your typical election. So we don’t want to over-interpret the results, but there are some important takeaways.

The Political Value of Standing Up to Trump

A year ago, Democrats were in a panic about Republicans gerrymandering themselves into a semi-permanent majority. But Democrats didn’t just whine, cry, or get in the fetal position. Unlike in the past, they didn’t complain about broken norms and talk about how little power they had.

They got off their asses and got to work.

Read more

Today, I’m excited to announce a project that has been years in the making: Message Box Pro — a members-only consulting service designed for people running for office, working on campaigns, and leading grassroots organizations.

The traditional model of political consulting is broken. The economics are such that only well-funded congressional and statewide candidates can afford strategic advice. The vast majority of candidates running for local office — and the people running grassroots and community organizations — are left without guidance at exactly the moment they need it most.

Over the years, I’ve consistently heard from people running for local office — state legislature, school board, city council — who tell me they rely on Message Box and Pod Save America to help guide their campaigns. These are candidates whose campaigns can’t afford to run a poll or hire a political consultant. I also regularly hear from folks working in communications, messaging, and digital strategy at every level of government and campaigns who use Message Box to sharpen their approach.

It’s frankly an indictment of the Democratic Party’s infrastructure that downballot candidates are left to fend for themselves.

The need has never been greater. As politics becomes increasingly nationalized, even local races are heavily influenced by national events and trends. A school board candidate in Wisconsin needs to know how to respond when Trump attacks teachers’ unions. A city council candidate in Arizona needs messaging guidance when immigration dominates the news cycle.

I want to help fill that gap.

What is Message Box Pro?

Message Box Pro is a subscription product that provides data-driven insights, strategic guidance, and public opinion analysis. Subscribers receive:

• Weekly Strategy Memos — Clear, timely, actionable guidance tailored to the political environment, delivered directly to your inbox. Think of it as your campaign strategist breaking down what’s happening and what to do about it. Unlike my Substack posts, which are primarily news analysis, these are the kinds of memos I’ve written for politicians like Barack Obama throughout my career.

• Weekly Office Hours — Post your questions and challenges throughout the week. Get answers from me — and learn from other community members who’ve faced similar situations.

• Message Testing & Polling Insights — Access to data-driven messaging and public opinion analysis designed to help you understand the shifting political landscape and identify the most effective responses to the issues dominating the news cycle.

• A Community of Operatives, Organizers, and Candidates — Connect with other candidates, campaign staff, and organizers. Share what’s working, troubleshoot challenges, and build a network that extends beyond your race.

Who is this for?

• Local and municipal candidates and elected officials (school board, city council, state legislature, county commission)

• Grassroots and advocacy organizations

• Campaign staff, communications professionals, and political operatives

• Anyone who wants to sharpen their understanding of political strategy, messaging, and how to break through in today's chaotic media environment

Pricing: $49.99/month

The first 250 members lock in this founding rate forever. After that, the price goes up to $65 — so if this is for you, now is the time.

This is a fraction of what a single strategy call with a consultant costs (more than a $1,000) or a monthly retainer with a firm ($5,000–$15,000).

Join Message Box Pro

A few important notes:

This is a separate product from the Message Box newsletter. Message Box will continue exactly as it is — same content, same price ($7/month or $70/year for paid subscribers).

Message Box Pro is designed specifically for people actively working in politics or running campaigns. If that’s not you, you probably don’t need it. But if you’re a candidate, staffer, or organizer who needs strategic guidance you can’t otherwise afford, this is built for you.

I’m limiting founding memberships to 250 people to ensure I can deliver real value. Once we hit that number, the price goes up.

Questions? Reply to this email or comment below.

Thanks for your support over the years. I’m genuinely excited about this — and about the chance to help campaigns win races they might otherwise lose.

Join Message Box Pro

That’s all very true.

The last ones onto the Trump train are the first ones out.

The fact that the coalition Republicans (and a lot of pundits) thought would produce a semi-permanent MAGA majority crumbled within a year is notable (and reassuring).

But this focus on the presidential-year coalition actually understates Trump’s political problem. Right below the surface, an existential threat looms for Republicans in 2026, 2028, and the long term.

White working-class voters have soured on Trump.

It’s not getting nearly enough attention, but Trump’s most reliable voters — the ones that powered his two presidential wins and kept him afloat in turbulent times — are abandoning him in droves.

Read more

But first a some housekeeping. These mailbags run every Saturday as a special feature for paid subscribers. Subscribe to get full access and drop your questions for future mailbags.

Subscribe now

Don’t forget to leave your questions for next week’s mailbag in the comments section.

Leave a comment

Tyler

It seems like the majority of Democrats and Independents are shifting to a negative view of AIPAC/Israeli lobby. How does the Democratic Party thread the needle of calling out anti-semitism but also acknowledging that Bibi’s regime in Israel has too much control and influence over our politicians / foreign policy and that has led to general negative feelings towards Israel?

Answer

For decades, support for Israel was a bipartisan staple. Aid to Israel passed with near-unanimous support every year, and criticism of Israel was enough to make someone persona non grata in Washington.

That has changed dramatically in just a few years. I have never seen an issue shift this fast in my lifetime. And it’s moving faster than the Democratic establishment has realized.

Read more

But MAGA types attacking “Dear Leader”?

Never.

Until now.

Trump is getting savaged by some of his closest former allies. Tucker Carlson has been going on hour-long tirades. Alex Jones is calling for the 25th Amendment. Megyn Kelly is telling Trump to “shut the fuck up.” Candace Owens called Trump a “genocidal lunatic.” Fellow travelers like podcasters Theo Von, Shawn Ryan, Tim Pool. and Joe Rogan, who all backed Trump in 2024, have been harshly critical of Trump on several issues, including the Epstein files and the war in Iran.

The clips of Trump getting ripped by his former allies have gone viral on social media and become a source of schadenfreude for Democrats and others disgusted by Trump.

It finally feels like the walls may be collapsing around him.

But the press and pundits have been quick to rain on our parade, pointing to polls showing that MAGA voters are sticking with Trump, with nearly 9 in 10 supporting the war in Iran.

I think this analysis misses the point, misunderstands how the modern media ecosystem works, and understates the short- and long-term damage to Trump.

What About the MAGA Voters?

Sure, Dan, but does dissent from the MAGA media really matter when MAGA voters aren’t following them off the Trump train?

Trump is losing Republican support — just not in the way the press expects.

Read more

This report opened up a floodgate of women talking about Swalwell’s inappropriate behavior and sexual misconduct. The allegations are horrifying, and the courage of the women who came forward should be applauded.

Swalwell has denied the allegations of sexual assault, although in a video posted on Friday night, he seems to admit to some level of infidelity.

Until this point, Swalwell was the frontrunner to be the next governor of California. He entered the race with a ton of momentum and had the support of powerful organizations like the California Teachers’ Association and the SEIU. He had also been endorsed by influential politicians like Senator Adam Schiff.

Swalwell has pledged to fight on and continue his campaign.

Here’s what comes next in the race.

Read more

I was on vacation when the Hasan Piker discourse reached a fever pitch, and I have never been so glad to be off my phone. I briefly considered not writing about it at all, and then thought about doing something longer and broader about Piker and the ideological battles within the party. But there were a lot of questions about Piker in the mailbag, and then even more people asking me to answer them. So, the subscribers get what the subscribers want.

Before we get into it, a little housekeeping:These mailbags run every Saturday as a special feature for paid subscribers. Subscribe to get full access and drop your questions for future mailbags.

Don’t forget to leave your questions for next week’s mailbag in the comments section.

These mailbags run every Saturday as a special feature for paid subscribers. Subscribe to get full access and drop your questions for future mailbags.

Subscribe now

Don’t forget to leave your questions for next week’s mailbag in the comments section.

Leave a comment

Tony

What are your thoughts on the Hasan Piker should or shouldn’t argument on Democrats engaging with him.

Answer

Trump is currently engaged in a disastrous, illegal war that costs hundreds of billions of dollars, has led to global chaos, and spiked gas prices above $4 a gallon. And Democrats have decided to have a fierce internal debate about a Twitch streamer.

It really could not be more on brand and shows that we have not learned the lessons of 2024.

For those blessed enough to have missed this internal Democratic beef, Hasan Piker is a wildly popular progressive streamer and a vehement critic of Israel. The leaders of Third Way recently wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal arguing that Democrats should shun him:

Read more

Subscribe now

Donald Trump has never seemed particularly stable. He’s always demonstrated a fleeting grasp on reality and is prone to incredibly erratic behavior. In general, you wouldn’t ask someone who acted like Trump to watch your laptop while you went to the bathroom at Starbucks, let alone run your country.

However, even by Trumpian standards, the President’s behavior in recent weeks has been incredibly alarming. It begins with the bizarre, capricious decision to wage a pointless war in the Middle East. Most people give more thought to their lunch order than Trump gave to bombing Iran. That irrational decision was followed by even more irrational behavior. One day, Trump says we are winning the war because the U.S. doesn’t need the Strait of Hormuz (we do), and the next day, Trump is threatening to bomb Iran back to the Stone Age because they won’t open the Strait. On Easter, Trump posted this unhinged rant:

And while that was bad, the post from yesterday morning was even worse.

Even if you put aside the intemperate language and the bizarre praise to Allah, here is the President of the United States promising to commit war crimes — in writing. I want to say that again: the President of the United States just threatened to kill more than 90 million Iranians. That is the textbook definition of genocide.

Trump’s unhinged behavior has caused many people to bring up the 25th Amendment, which allows for the removal of presidents who are physically or mentally incapable of performing their duties.

Dozens of members of Congress and several potential presidential candidates — like Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker — have called for invoking the 25th Amendment to remove Trump from office. Democratic activists have latched onto the idea.

Should Trump be removed from office?

Absolutely.

Is the 25th Amendment a way to do that?

Not really. And Democrats should stop promoting the idea.

Here’s why.

Subscribe now

How the 25th Amendment Works

Most people believe that a majority of the cabinet and the Vice President can simply get together and remove the President from office. It doesn’t exactly work that way.

The Vice President and a majority of the cabinet send a notice to Congress stating that the President is unable to perform his duties. At that point, the Vice President becomes Acting President.

The President then has the opportunity to dispute this. The Vice President and cabinet must reaffirm their declaration, and Congress must assemble and vote within 21 days. A two-thirds majority in both chambers is required to keep the Acting President in place.

Why the 25th Amendment Is Pure Fantasy

By now, everyone has come around to the idea that removing Trump via impeachment is an impossibility. If the Senate wouldn’t convict Trump on his way out of office — right after he sent a mob of his supporters to murder them — it’s hard to fathom a scenario where they’d vote to remove him now.

And the degree of difficulty on the 25th Amendment is much, much higher than traditional impeachment.

It starts with getting J.D. Vance and a majority of Trump’s cabinet to vote for his removal. Look at that roster of sycophants and incompetent lackeys and tell me which one of them would put loyalty to country over loyalty to Trump. I can’t think of a single one, let alone enough to constitute a majority.

Even if somehow that happened, you’d still need two-thirds of both houses to remove him. (For comparison, impeachment only requires a majority in the House and two-thirds of the Senate.)

And let’s say all of those impossible things somehow occur — we still end up with J.D. Vance as President and Mike Johnson as Vice President.

What a win!

Why Calling for the 25th Amendment Is a Problem

I really do get why people are calling for the 25th Amendment. We are in a dangerous situation and people desperately — and understandably — want a solution. These Democratic politicians also want to make the point that Trump is unfit for office, and there’s some value in that. Though honestly, I think most people can see it with their own eyes and don’t need Democrats to point it out.

But this public push for the 25th Amendment comes with real downsides.

First, it raises expectations for something that absolutely will not happen. I think it’s cheap — and a little disrespectful to our voters — to push an idea we know won’t lead to the desired outcome. It’s a gimmick for engagement and fundraising. We should be honest with our voters about what defeating MAGA is actually going to take, instead of chasing clicks and online donations.

Second, it puts the onus on the wrong people. J.D. Vance and Trump’s cabinet will face their judgment in the history books — and the afterlife — for the ways they’ve sold their souls to Trump. But they are not accountable to voters in November. We need voters to understand that Trump is only able to act like this because Republicans in Congress let him. They are the ones responsible, and they are the ones who should be held accountable in November. The best way to rein in Trump is not to appeal to his cabinet — it’s to elect a Democratic Congress.

I wish there were easy answers. There aren’t. Stopping Trump comes down to winning back political power. Everything else is a distraction.

Share

From a political — or frankly any — perspective, things couldn’t be going worse for Trump and the Republicans. This is the least popular Trump has ever been, and it’s the worst political environment he has faced in his career.

And yet, per Nate Silver, the generic ballot average is only 5.5 points — about 2 points less than it was in 2018 when the Blue Wave swept in 41 Democrats, and 3 points lower than the Democratic popular vote margin in that election.

This is why so many Democratic strategists remain slightly anxious about the election. A 5.5-point Democratic margin is enough to win the House, but it’s not enough for the Senate, and it’s just less than what it should be given Trump’s numbers, the war, and the state of the economy.

It’s fair to ask: Is the Blue Wave really coming this fall? Or are Democrats about to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory again?

Read more

When Trump started the Iran War, he did not do that. Instead of addressing the widest possible audience, Trump posted a hastily edited video of himself speaking to an empty room while wearing a baseball cap — presumably because he couldn’t be bothered to comb his hair.

Despite 13 American soldiers losing their lives, hundreds more being wounded, global economic chaos, and growing opposition to his regime-change war of choice, Trump refused to take the basic step of explaining the war to the American people.

Until last night.

One month into the war, Trump finally gave a nationally televised address — but instead of offering clarity or rallying the country to the cause, he delivered an overlong, low-energy, rambling speech that served no strategic purpose.

Not that anyone should be surprised, but at the moment of greatest need for the country and greatest peril for his presidency, Trump failed to deliver.

He waved the white flag on his war and his presidency. It’s possible we will look back on last night as the moment we knew Trump’s presidency was functionally over. He’s still in office and can still do great damage, but the momentum is gone. All but his most committed supporters have tuned him out. It’s all over but the shouting.

1. The White Flag of Surrender

Because the speech was so poorly written, it’s hard to identify any strategic rationale for giving it. To the extent there was a purpose, it was to declare victory. Instead, it read as an admission of defeat.

Read more

When I spoke to Stratton on Pod Save America a few days after her win, she said that the turning point for her campaign was this viral ad.

The ad was officially titled “They Said It,” but it quickly became known as the “Fuck Trump” ad.

Whether this ad was really the reason Stratton won is one of those unanswerable causation-versus-correlation questions. However, there is no doubt that the ad broke through and injected energy into a campaign that desperately needed it.

I find this ad fascinating, because the conversation around it brings to bear some of the biggest strategic questions that Democrats must wrestle with as we head into the midterms.

So, I ask the question — Is Fuck Trump a good message for Democrats?

Read more

A quick reminder: these mailbags run every Saturday as a special feature for paid subscribers. Subscribe to get full access and drop your questions for future mailbags.

Subscribe now

One note: No mailbag next Saturday, but if you have questions, I’ll try to get to them later in the week.

Bethany Reynolds

How effective is negative campaigning in party primaries?

The Maine Senate campaign took a hard turn this week, as Gov. Janet Mills released a couple of negative ads on her primary opponent, Graham Platner. I’m watching this play out in my social media feed, which is about 50% Maine Democrats. Most of them had already staked out a side, but there’s a lot of speculation about whether this is appropriate or effective, or if it will backfire. While I think a candidate’s past comments are fair game in a primary, it seems risky for a primary candidate to go negative, rather than perhaps leaving that to allied PAC’s. What does polling suggest about such tactics?

Answer

The Maine Senate primary has gotten nasty quickly. Even though the election isn’t until June, Janet Mills’ campaign launched a barrage of negative attack ads against Graham Platner.

Even for a high-profile race like this one, the timing and tone of these ads is notable. An Emerson poll shows Platner with a massive 27-point lead in the primary. Whether that poll is accurate or not, everyone seems to agree that Platner is ahead, and a slew of negative ads this early suggests the margin isn’t razor-thin.

It’s clear that Platner has the momentum, and Janet Mills is trying to stop it.

Will it work?

Read more

The most recent piece of evidence came on Tuesday night, when Democrat Emily Gregory won a special election for a state House district in Florida. Trump won that district by 11 points in 2024, and it just happens to be Trump’s own district, because it contains Mar-a-Lago. There is some incredible symbolism about a Democrat flipping the district that contains Mar-a-Lago. On the same night, a Democrat also flipped a Trump +7 state Senate seat near Tampa.

These results continue the trend of Democrats dramatically overperforming — and Republicans woefully underperforming — in special elections across the country.

Everywhere you look, there is bad political news for Trump and it seems to get worse by the day. Yes, it’s the war in Iran, the high gas prices, the long TSA lines — but it’s bigger than just the things happening right now.

It’s worth taking a step back to look at the political landscape, Trump’s standing, and where things might be going. This could be a generational opportunity for Democrats if we recognize it and take the necessary steps to seize it.

Let me explain:

Read more

Should Democrats agree to this deal? Will the SAVE Act pass? And if it does, who does it hurt more — Republicans or Democrats?

and I dig into all of that and more in a lively Substack Live conversation.

Give it a watch — and if you find it valuable, consider becoming a paid subscriber. This newsletter only exists because of the incredible community that makes it possible.

Subscribe now