You want to know how to make a comeback? Democrats have to stop saving the GOP from itself. JVL at the Bulwark has it right. Let America feel the pain. Let Trump’s party repeal the ACA, pass a nationwide abortion and IVF ban, ban contraception, slap their tariffs, make us sicker outlawing vaccines, and deport legions of migrants and their families. Let them gut the federal govt so when these voters need to call someone at the VA or SS, no one is there to help.
Before the OKC bombing, Antigovernment sentiment was fierce. The impact of McVeigh’s mass killing and his target reminded America that the “hated government” was our neighbors, our friends, our family members, our children. McVeigh thought he was sparking a second American Revolution, which people claimed they wanted. Until they were forced to face the horrifying, tragic truth.
I do not feel sorry for these voters who chose to allow a convicted felon, sociopathic liar, rapist, racist, and insurrectionist to lead the (soon to be once) greatest nation on earth. I want them to squeal like gored pigs when the chickens come home to roost. I do feel sorry for the rest of us who will have to endure what is to come.
And you know what else Dan? Stop the circular fire squad. Stop dumping on Dems. The right doesn’t do it, nor should we. And don’t give me hokum about “that’s what sets us apart.” It only adds to the message that Dems suck so much they hate each other. You can’t successfully fight the enemy with an army in disarray.
And stop acting like the Dems were destroyed and are now rudderless and leaderless. JFC, no one talked like this about the GOP after the blue waves of 18, 20, and 24. We have a deep bench. Yes, there are serious issues we must address and get better at. But constant nitpicking and second guessing doesn’t make things better, only worse.
Agree. Dems have been the firewall that insulated Americans from MAGA the last 8 years and when it reached its worst in 2020, Dems saved Americans with stimulus checks and by passing the American Rescue Plan. And then went on to pass the IRA, PACT Act, CHIPS Act +++, championed unions, prioritized WC and MC people, worked on border security and it didn't mean a goddamn thing. We also have the most complicit corporate media who waged a daily war on Biden; there was not one damn day in 3.5 years where recession or inflation wasn't a headline. And when WaPo and LA Times refused to endorse Harris - the fix was in. And the people who refused to vote or switched to Trump are gonna feel alot of pain.
Constant constructive criticism is what makes any good organization (good in the sense that it can hear the criticism, take it in, sort it, process it and improve) into an excellent organization that changes with its times.
We have get over the hurt, we have to realize we somehow could not motivate millions of Biden voters to come out for Harris, and we need to attract a percent of Trump voters to vote blue.
I remember 1984 when Mondale won a total of 13 electoral votes. The next Dem president was Clinton.
Completely different time. You may as well go back a hundred years. That was pre-internet and 24/7 news was a novelty. People were grounded in a shared truth. I have no doubts we will win again—including a blue wave in 26 but only if America is allowed to see just how radical and disruptive, corrupt and incompetent the Trump party truly is. The Dems in Congress have to take the fight to them by being passive—do t try to save Americans. They don’t care, won’t thank you, and won’t remember.
I am 63 and I feel it’s broken for the rest of my life. I feel it’s time to radicalize and put forward an angry politics.
A massive wealth tax. Break up big corporations. Fundamentally reform a justice system that lets powerful felons delay and avoid consequences for crime.
Good heavens, I can barely imagine "factual information that is not being blunted, tampered, or interfered with in any way." Is this like the sound of one hand clapping?
Money, i.e., people and corporations with lots of it, have been corrupting politics (also ruining the environment, etc.) for a very long time, but it got worse after the Citizens United decision. For extra credit: How do we deal with that, given that the SCOTUS isn't going to change its spots any time soon?
1. You cannot discount the role of misogyny and racism. You just can’t. 10 million fewer votes than Biden, terrible numbers of support from white voters, this is a story with pretty evident answers.
2. The media is broken. We have too many folks who would rather be pundits than journalists. Why didn’t Biden’s accomplishments break through - because they were good governance, and therefore not exciting. Boring good governance means fewer clicks, and revenue is king in media right now.
3. Pod Save America - especially the Jon, Jon, and Tommy podcast, spent four years damning the Biden administration because they didn’t do enough, or didn’t do it the right way. It was an unrelenting slog of thinly veiled contempt. You guys need to do some real soul searching - because if this is your idea of a liberal response to the right-wing noise machine, you’ve lost the plot.
Scratching my head to remember PSA "damning" the Biden administration.
I have lots of questions about where we go from here, and I appreciate Dan's thoughts, which is why I read Message Box. But one question I don't have, one thing I know with certainty: The inability to recognize allies and entertain ideas in good faith from within that coalition - that will get us no where.
In what way were / are they wrong? He should never have ran, like HE initially said he wouldn’t, and given the proper time to pick the right replacement. Why he even picked her as VP to begin with never made sense either
Biden’s very fine accomplishments never got the coverage they deserved because Biden and his team were incredibly inept in touting them. Their few attempts were awkward and un-genuine. Even worse, they were telling these things to CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN and NYT and WaPo.
I heard about them and it seems you did too. Guess where we get that kind of news? From the outlets named above.
Guess who never knew about employment levels, the Inflation Reduction Act, or the Infrastructure act. Well, for one, my next-door neighbors, who are glued to Fox.
Somehow our plan was to not only talk about Biden’s accomplishment in a stilted way, but to carefully, surgically, and precisely talk about in places only 40% of voters will see.
Most people do not pay attention to economic indicators outside of the price of groceries and gas. We simply to not have a well-educated electorate. What needs to happen is for inflation to skyrocket under Trump. His voters will have no one left to blame except Trump and themselves.
I know a lot of people who voted D in 20 and 22 and they never, ever wanted to vote for Biden in 2024. Biden got a lot of “vote the bum out” votes and the mistake wasn’t “bashing” Biden, it was that he thought he had a mandate to run for a second term when he in no way did. The problem wasn’t that the pod bashed Biden too much; it’s that they didn’t do it enough to help get him out before it was too late.
Agreed. We were blindsided when he decided to run again. Everyone I knew who voted for him in 20 saw him as a bridge to younger new leadership. Everyone. Polls indicated time and time again that the majority of rank and file Democrats did not want him to run.
That Biden chose not to hear the message was one thing - you don’t succeed in politics without believing in yourself. That the party let him do it was another, and it confirms what I’ve long believed about the upper echelons of the party: They have a condescending attitude towards their less well heeled members.
Consider 2016. As soon as Obama won in 2012, Clinton became the anointed one, enduring high negatives be damned. I thought party leadership would learn an enduring lesson. Silly me.
As they say, history may not repeat itself, but it rhymes.
So after 52 years as a member, I’m done with the Democratic Party and am now a registered Independent. I’m not working for or donating to its candidates any more.
I’ve always voted and will continue to. I know I won’t vote for a Republican ever again (I rarely did before, and never for president). I may be crazy but I’m not stupid, so I won’t vote Green. Libertarians have started making Greens look sane, so they’re not an option. So unless a believably centrist movement emerges and morphs into a legitimate third party, I’ll probably vote for Democrats for whom I have respect.
The party could win me back by doing the hard work of restructuring itself and putting in people who actually figure out how to communicate with its members.
I respectfully disagree. Except in old b&w movies, party leaders don’t anoint anyone, nor do donors. That should have been apparent once Biden fell apart in the debate. Donors clamored for him to get out, but he ignored them.
I remember that Hillary Clinton was very popular after stints as Senator and Secretary of State.
Once she announced, the Fox propaganda painted her as an unethical and dishonest shrew, and the MSM picked up on their email fixation.
But quitting the party? You’re an articulate and forceful person. Why not stay and try to influence it?
I stopped listening to Pod Save America two years ago. I call it Pundits Sink America. Know-it-all insider white guys -- there's better commentary elsewhere. I subscribe to this Substack so I can get insight into how these people think.
Rory Stewart the UK politician? I loved HOW NOT TO BE A POLITICIAN and meant to read more of his earlier work (I've got a longtime interest in the Middle East in particular) but my to-read list has been out of control for many years. Will check out The Rest Is Politics for sure.
I subscribe to Dan’s newsletter, not PSA. Dan is far more level headed than the rest. Frankly, my choice would be for Dan and Alyssa to take over the early in the week pod, and then he and Jon F. can do the Thursday pod.
Today's newsletter fails to acknowledge root causes: racism, misogyny, white supremacy, unrelenting corporate greed. No, I have no "solutions" to be aired in public. Now I have to defend myself physically because I was born a woman.
I have felt for a very long time, and even commented here, that local news and local pols don't identify when federal dollars are benefiting area projects and businesses. I think our senators in Oregon do a great job communicating with people - they both hold town halls in every county in the state every year, but we aren't seeing evidence of the infrastructure improvements nor of investment in rural projects. That shit should get big labels on it.
That being said - the economy has been a long time "bone of contention" in discussions between my husband and myself. I monitor rents and other economic indices, mostly because I am buying more staples when I shop. I also pay our bills since I am more computer savvy. Things have gone up and aren't coming down. A studio apartment in the small city where we live is $1200 a month, but people who need to live in studio apartments are making $1500 a month. It doesn't really get better than that baseline.
These are nuts and bolts for people - not the stockmarket or GDP. And a reminder that a lot of economists (and politicians) think that some unemployment is good for the economy. This leaves out a lot of people who are desperately looking for work, more work, or better work.
Okay. Rant over. But we do need to reckon with things on this level and get very real about it.
The reality that Right Wing media has saturated the country must be considered. Harris focused on inflation and going after the industrialists actually causing it, but who heard her? R’s were pushing fear- Ds don’t care about you, and your son will come home from school your daughter. That’s all that was heard, because RW media also hammers the lie that main stream media is lying. Data clearly shows, a whopping majority wanted the policies Harris offered- until they found out they were her policies. Data also show, D voters have a clear understanding of facts that are reassuring, while R voters believe false stories that cause fear. I think we’re confronted with a “most of the above” battle. Fox is on screens in airports, restaurants, car repair lounges, and even hospitals. (How do we get propaganda networks off the air in a free speech system?) Ds may scan a variety of sources, but obviously, many Americans do not. I really don’t think the entire electorate ever heard her or saw her on TV. And there was only one debate where both candidates were head to head.
Can we stop having politicians that speak like politicians? And honestly, the misogyny is real and we just can’t run women. Much as I love Elizabeth Warren, I now see that she’s totally unelectable nationally. She speaks like a politician and many, many, many men in this election thought Kamala was “weak” and they hated her voice and thought “she’d be eaten alive by world leaders.” It’s gross and awful and depressing but I’ve reconciled myself to the idea that there will never be a female president in my lifetime. (And I am a woman myself)
No more women. No more politician speak. No more long complicated policies. Find our salesman standard bearer (whoever he is) and build up dem mommy bloggers and dem TikTokers and dem WWF podcasters and dem… online gaming personalities (?) or whatever. Build a network of people who are popular online for non-political stuff and have them incept democratic ideas. No one (except us few political junkies) give a shit about politics. There’s a chart I’ve seen that compares people’s beliefs on different issues and their votes and republicans are just dead wrong about everything. People don’t know about D priorities because they’re not coming up in their instagram feed in a way they trust. People do not give a shit about political podcasts or bloggers. They want to spend their limited attention on other shit. It’s not good enough to go on Call Her Daddy one time. We need to find all the Alex Coopers and get them to subtly pitch dem ideas in non-political contexts. Do an ad read that’s like “oh man, Trump’s tariffs are killing us right? Well, Bombas has the solution, 15% off socks…!” Have a mommy blogger be like, “ever since RFK took fluoride out of the water, my kids’ teeth have been a mess, so I’ve started doing some ‘clean living’ and eliminating all acids from our diet!” It’s all entirely stupid and we have to stop pretending the electorate is anything other than mostly stupid.
Yes, yes, yes on cultivating Dem influencers among Mommy bloggers and other social media influencers not promoted as “political.” Things like, “It sucks that we have to pay out of pocket for school wellness check ups because insurance coverage changed.” Make it real. Make it tangible. Make it personal.
I am not willing to give up on women as candidates. Not yet.
This. All of this. We can’t change the media landscape. We have to hack it from the inside. We have to partner with people like the Marques Brownlees of the world to build an agreement that the world Dems propose is better. Joe Rogan has done this for the Republicans for a decade. We have to stop complaining about the media and we need to start PLAYING.
I’m ready for a democrat who actually answers questions honestly. Who is a little less “on message” 100% of the time. I would hear Dan sometime praise Kamala’s answers to questions where the answer was basically a complete dodge and pivot while knowing that most voters would hate that answer.
Let’s put someone out there who makes mistakes sometimes.Someone who is willing to get caught saying the “wrong” thing. Ironically - I think this will help voters trust them more.
Why shouldn't politicians speak like politicians? Or do you want teachers to stop speaking like teachers, lawyers to stop speaking like lawyers, scientists to stop speaking like scientists, etc. For each and every category the range is huge. There are lawyers who talk arcane gibberish, then there are lawyers like Joyce Vance and Marc Elias who speak effectively to non-lawyers.
P.S. I've heard it suggested that the first woman president will be a Republican, the way the first woman SCOTUS justice was a Republican. However, I don't believe that the first woman president will be an Elise Stefanik or a Sarah Huckabee Sanders, so unless we're talking several decades from now I don't think it's gonna happen.
I am a lawyer. The most successful thing I do as a lawyer is to talk to my clients like their people. I say “this is fucking insane.” Then I write a brief in legalese and explain it to my client like they’re a teenager. I say “like” and “fuck” and “bullshit” a lot. Not in court. But to the person who hired me. We can walk and chew gum at the same time. We can speak to the electorate like the ADHD children they are (and to be clear, I’m ADHD, I’m not knocking the neurodivergent) but we can’t keep talking to the electorate using words like “neurodivergent.” We CAN talk to each other that way. But your comparison is just not apt. Scientists don’t need to pander to millions of stupid, uninvolved people. Lawyers usually don’t. Teachers don’t really need the buy in of their students. There’s not going to be a mass exodus of kids from schools because teachers speak like teachers.
This. I work with very smart people and I still have to water down a few concepts for my colleagues to understand them. They are not stupid. But the fact is that I have to get their “buy in” to sponsor my projects, and I have to bring the projects to their level/attention span. It’s a fact in any power dynamic. Democrats need to learn to dance to this tune.
Politicians are going to politician. I advocate that the rest of us, especially those who have a social media presence, talk about the impact of policies to their own lives. People tune out politicians. They don’t turn out their favorite Insta influencer.
Good comments but really doesn’t address what I thought was most interesting—Trumps total votes were very close to totals in 2020. The difference is that Dems total votes decreased. Why? Apathy? Folks angry about Gaza? Folks angry about economy? Folks angry about trans in women’s sports?? etc etc. Focusing on the margin of loss alone misses that issue.
Spot in. That’s an important rabbit hole to traverse.
It turns out that Trump’s cap is real. Yeah, he apparently made inroads with some traditionally Democratic constituencies. But if so, he lost votes elsewhere. Where did they go?
To Harris? Some perhaps. Maybe, perchance, they didn’t vote. They’ve joined the ranks of believing their votes don’t matter. If so, then indeed democracy is dying here. And it’s not all Republicans’ fault.
The fancy word foe what’s happening is we’ve slipped into anocracy. And very few Democrats care enough to do anything about it.
Why are we making this so much more complicated than it is? People were angry about the post Covid price spikes and wanted someone to blame. Their natural instincts blamed the party in charge, and Trump’s campaign gleefully reinforced this instinct with its messaging.
It does not matter that the economy is otherwise good. Humans are not perfect economic evaluators. Without this inflation spike, Kamala (or possibly even Joe) would likely have won, and all our arguments about misogyny, racism, etc would be falling flat right now.
TLDR. It's the racism and misogyny. We suck as a people. You cannot analyze how we elected what we just elected without realizing how vile, petty, greedy, racist, and misogynist we are. People stayed home and allowed this to happen. Now the people will suffer the consequences of their pettiness and depravity. We are a shithole country. PS there is no "working class coalition" here these are ignorant stupid cruel people who fear anyone different. What we should do is let them burn it to the ground and destroy this shitty excuse for a nation.
“Working class people suck! You are ignorant, stupid, cruel people who fear anything different. Go to hell! But please vote for us on your way out. Thank you.”
Not a great way to win people over. If we don’t want these voters, who make up a large part of the electorate, fine. I don’t think it’s possible to win by alienating all of them. And I don’t think they’re inherently cruel. I think they’re angry or frustrated and Trump channels that anger towards the wrong people and things. We could do a better job of channeling it towards the right things.
This. The Brazilian left solved this riddle and got Lula back in power. They had two hammering messages:
Employment: “It’s so bad that engineers are driving Ubers.” Simple, true, to the point.
Economy: “You ate more steaks when Lula was president.” They literally hammered this message. Lula went on our equivalent of Joe Rogan and hammered this in. He invited the host to a steak barbecue after the election.
Democrats need similar talking points, and they have to own the narrative that life under Dems is better.
And also find a way to pierce the Right Wing bubble, while getting folks to accept and believe the boatload of real news outside their silo. Gay rights were propelled when individuals bravely came out to their families and friends. If you love a gay person, you become more open to listen. Maybe democrats can try the same approach, and admit being a bleeding heart liberal (which I am proudly) to friends and family who aren’t. Just brainstorming here!
I didn't say working class people suck. I said we suck. ALL OF US - ME INCLUDED. The working class didn't do this and if you think they did you're deluding yourself. WHITE PEOPLE DID THIS. THEY'VE BEEN DOING THIS MY ENTIRE LIFE AND FOR DECADES BEFORE THAT. His voters skewed wealthier and whiter. So keep thinking it's all messaging or something WE aren't COMMUNICATING when reality is staring you directly in the face. The choice was between a steaming pile of shit and the same old chicken dinner and we chose a steaming pile of shit. WE the people did this. There are 366 million of us but the majority couldn't be bothered to vote. Until and unless WE THE PEOPLE face the stark and dire consequences of our shortsighted actions we will continue to descend into chaos. Its unfortunate. Didn't have to be like this. But it is obvious we are broken. And it is obvious we must become even more broken to understand exactly who (us) is doing the breaking and why. Until we do that there is no change. Only more of our stagnant stale excuses for acting like barbarians.
Turns out humans are not born cosmopolitans…people have always been “vile petty, greedy, racist and misogynist.” In fact, racism and misogyny have historically been simply normal—the crazy thing about this moment is that Trump is doing a better job of bringing together people of different races than Democrats are, and people need to take a long look in the mirror to realize why that is—it’s because we’ve made ourselves toxic, and the reflex of calling people racist and sexist at every turn is a big part of that.
The way liberals react in these moments reminds me of the old Peanuts cartoon where Linus says “I love mankind, it’s people I can’t stand!” As long as liberals hate people, they’re going to be bad at politics in a democracy.
I agree that a portion of the electorate is vile, selfish, racist and biased against women in power. That’s a fact. But the fact is that we don’t need those votes to win. If we have a white male candidate (and I say this as a Latina woman) and the right strategy, we can win. We don’t need the “bottom of the barrel” voters. We need to scrape the top.
That’s why I see no point in dwelling and complaining that there are despicable people around us. Yes, they exist and they suck, but I won’t give them my energy because they will always suck. But some people don’t suck, and we need their votes.
I don’t think we need a white male, we could certainly lose with the wrong white male. What we need is someone who is not deliberately chosen on the basis of their race, we need someone who rises to the top based on their own personal ability and appeal.
It is possible. But we know that the only time we beat Trump was with a blue-eyed white, Catholic male. I think undecided votes told us (as well as they could) that they saw Kamala as “not presidential enough.” Against a convicted rapist, the message (that they can’t say out loud) is clear: there’s still enough misogyny in this country to keep a woman away from the White House. Brazil only elected Dilma because we had a very strong incumbent endorsing her (Lula, the most popular politician Brazil has ever seen), a booming economy and the weakest opposition the left had in decades. Nowadays, even the Brazilian left won’t risk another woman candidate in this economy and political climate. It’s devastating, but it’s true.
We can not get caught thinking that “uncorrupting” the media will get us out of this mess. To do that we need power, and we can’t be in power unless we win. I agree that the changing media landscape got us here, but reshaping the media landscape is impossible (especially from the ground up).
I agree that “Get the Money Out” could be a good message, but: Trump aligned himself with billionaires and still won. It doesn’t seem like getting money out of politics is a priority for the electorate. I’d say the opposite: too many people in America believe that if you have the money, you earned it and you can do what you want with it (including buying a president or a Supreme Court justice or two). This is kind of the fabric of the American Dream.
Finally, I disagree that the right message can overcome underlying gender biases in moderate voters. Given the option, most of them will default to their perception that a man is more prepared than a woman. We need to remove this variable from the equation.
Yeah. NO. I KNOW a good deal of racists and misogynists that voted for him. They're my "friends" and "family" and I REFUSE TO TREAT THEM LIKE THEY AREN'T RACISTS AND MISOGYNISTS. It's the elephant in the room and - as we ALWAYS say to our brown brothers and sisters - clean your own house - it's on us "white" people to clean our own house. They treat people like shit but I'm supposed to not call them garbage because it may hurt their feelings? 🙄
Can we separate needing to win elections from satisfying your personal moral outrage? The steps to accomplishing these two different goals are not the same.
Actually this isn’t a matter of individuals vs group—“people” is also a collective noun—it’s more about liking people in the abstract but not in reality. Anyway, democracy is all about collective action—if you can’t get together with people on anything, you’re not going to win.
Dan, your article is a great starting point. We really need to rethink everything. Some years ago, I heard a speaker (I wish I could remember who, but it was someone legit) who said that while Americans have many different religious and cultural beliefs, there is one thing that *all* Americans believe in: Fairness. I think we should keep that in mind.
We also need to focus on what’s happening in blue states. Let’s forget these stupid performative message bills and #resistance. Let’s actually start taking steps that will address some issues we’ve seen. New York and California are losing electoral votes because it’s too hard to build housing. We should be looking at permitting reform and getting more housing built in these areas faster. We should start testing other policies and start calling out the success of things like higher minimum wage.
We also need to be more willing to for lack of a better term eat our own. Kathy Hochul is up in New York in 2 years and should be jettisoned by the party because she’s unpopular and has been ineffective. We should work to make sure the best candidates are available next year in New Jersey and Virginia.
There’s another point I’ve read a few places. Our old friend Tim Miller has suggested that Trump remained politically viable because people stopped him from doing the truly awful stuff he wanted to do in his first term. I’m torn, because I don’t want to inflict pain, but giving him the space to actually do the horrible things he wants to do could make voters wise up (or that’s totally naive since the insurrection and the felony convictions weren’t enough to do it this time)
I am fascinated to see how the country responds to Trump’s mass deportation programs and suggestion that he can change constitutionally enshrined citizenship laws by royal fiat. Very frightened at the possibility that people will get in line and support his madness. Sure as hell hope not.
My sense is that west coast Democrats have been placing a high priority in recent years on ways of boosting the housing supply. For example, a fair amount of legislation has passed that reforms land-use and permitting regulations. Is it enough? Probably not, but that's not necessarily the fault of lawmakers. This is a complex problem that does not lend itself to the simple solutions.
I don't know how well this would apply to the coasts but in the midwest there are a lot of old factory towns where simply focusing on the areas that have depopulated would solve a lot of problems. Case in point Detroit had a population high point of about 2.5 million. It currently has less than 1 million. Rather than necessarily building more housing can we look at why don't people live in this area any more? Lets fix that because the infrastructure is already there for people to live here. In many ways transit IS housing because it increases how far you can go in the same 30 min which creates flexibility.
I agree NIMBYism can be problematic but don't think we should blame the high cost of housing entirely on this phenomenon. For one thing, unregulated growth may not be wise in the parts of the west that rely on increasingly tenuous water supplies due to climate change.
In addition, a well-run regulatory process can better resolve potential issues with a proposed development, such as mitigating traffic congestion or blockage of solar to existing buildings with solar panels.
I didn't say I blame the problem entirely on NIMBYism. I believe it's a large factor, but as you said there are lots of other roadblocks to housing reform.
Many of Trump's followers fall for the three greatest attributes of a snake oil salesman...
Charismatic Persuasion: They possess a natural charisma and persuasive communication skills, allowing them to convince others of the value of their product, even if it's worthless. They are adept at reading their audience and adjusting their pitch to evoke trust and excitement.
Confidence and Showmanship: A successful snake oil salesman exudes confidence, often to the point of being theatrical. Their showmanship can captivate audiences, making their claims seem more credible, and instilling a sense of urgency to buy.
Manipulative Storytelling: They craft compelling stories that resonate emotionally with their audience, often claiming miraculous benefits or invoking fear of missing out. They weave these narratives in a way that taps into people's desires, fears, or insecurities, making the product seem like an indispensable solution.
But Trump's Super Power is...
He knows that to sell a lie, you need Repetition. In the same way, advertisements reinforce a product through repetition, even one with questionable attributes.
Repetition is a key tactic for a snake oil salesman—or anyone trying to convince others of something questionable. Repeating a lie often enough can give it a sense of familiarity, leading people to perceive it as truth, a psychological phenomenon known as the "illusory truth effect." The repetition makes the information easier to process.
The number of impressions needed to turn a lie into a "truth" varies, depending on factors like the audience's existing beliefs, their trust in the source, and the context in which the message is repeated. However, research suggests that even just three to six repetitions can significantly increase the perceived truthfulness of a statement, especially if the audience doesn't have prior information to contradict it.
Why do you think Trump speaks so long at so many rallies? Roy Cohen taught him well.
Actually speeches at rallies are the least consequential form of communication—I wasn’t under the impression that Trump actually repeated himself that much in rally speeches. There’s also more to it than repetition, you’ve got to start with something that will resonate. If you keep repeating something that offends people, you’ll just piss them off.
How many times do you think Trump repeated the big lie that the election was stolen over the past four years? Enough to turn it into truth for his "pied pipers?"
Thanks. This is a good start to conversations we must have. The loss at the top of the ticket feels overwhelming even though, as you say, it wasn't a landslide like Reagan or Nixon. (Part of the reason it feels so horrible is that, unlike Reagan and Nixon, Trump was a convicted felon who had been found liable for sexual assault and has used violent and disgusting rhetoric about political rivals and marginalized groups.) I also think it's worth looking at the races we did win -- in North Carolina and Wisconsin we broke super majorities in their state legislatures; in NY, we flipped 3 Congressional seats and passed Prop 1 despite millions of dollars spent against us; we are sending superb leaders like Ruben Gallego and Andy Kim to the Senate. The information environment is key. There is a generation of young men being raised on a diet of far right podcasts and I don't think we offer any alternative yet. I'm also concerned about Prager U radicalizing young kids in schools. Looking forward to reading more of your thoughts. In the meantime, there are elections in 2025 to work on.
Hey Dan, can you write a bit about the growing role/opportunity for independent candidates in heavily Red states? You’ve mentioned the damage the D brand has taken over the years and one area where it’s really glaring is in ballot initiatives and the performance of independent state wide candidates in red states.
In the past several cycles we’ve seen democratic policies as ballot measures perform extremely well despite Dems in statewide races doing really poorly, and in the case of Evan McMullin and Dan Osborn, we now have two data points showing swings of between (depending on your benchmark) 12-22 points better than Dems in those states.
At some point, if we’re really in an existential crisis here but still looking for a political solution to retake power, shouldn’t we take a look at this dynamic and recognize that to be competitive we need to ditch the D brand in states like Strong R states like Iowa, Tennessee, Kentucky, and otherwise non-competitive senate states coming up in 2026? Can state parties get the national party’s blessing to break off, or rebrand in a way that allows them to keep some modicum of political infrastructure while running away from the party as a brand in its marketing and messaging?
Here’s a crazy idea—what if we went back to the original name of the party, the “Democratic-Republican” party? If nothing else, it would confuse the hell out of a lot of people and offend the hell out of leftists, but maybe that’s not a bad thing? At least not in a lot of places.
We have a flourishing and popular party here in MN. The Democratic Farmer and Labor party. Seems pretty apt, and would give the party a much needed rebranding. Why no one is looking at our purple state and adapting our moderate in the streets liberal in the sheets model is just beyond me. It's not just a coincidence we vote blue in a sea of red.
Thank you Dan. As much as this sucks, being in the opposition is also liberating. We don't have to "defend" any politician or policy and can be in 100% attack mode. I believe we really need (1) get much louder, (2) paint MAGA leadership as a bunch of elite billionaires (which is true), and (3) embrace a "radical" populist agenda, which means huge taxes on the ultra wealthy and getting money out of politics. This may ruffle the feathers of the rich donor class, but frankly if their money isn't helping us win, then why are we embracing them? Our biggest strength is our ability to mobilize a huge grassroots army and our biggest weakness is losing control of the conversation due to the loudness gap. If we can fix the latter (not easy) then the former becomes an even more powerful asset. Not giving up, let's go!
You want to know how to make a comeback? Democrats have to stop saving the GOP from itself. JVL at the Bulwark has it right. Let America feel the pain. Let Trump’s party repeal the ACA, pass a nationwide abortion and IVF ban, ban contraception, slap their tariffs, make us sicker outlawing vaccines, and deport legions of migrants and their families. Let them gut the federal govt so when these voters need to call someone at the VA or SS, no one is there to help.
Before the OKC bombing, Antigovernment sentiment was fierce. The impact of McVeigh’s mass killing and his target reminded America that the “hated government” was our neighbors, our friends, our family members, our children. McVeigh thought he was sparking a second American Revolution, which people claimed they wanted. Until they were forced to face the horrifying, tragic truth.
I do not feel sorry for these voters who chose to allow a convicted felon, sociopathic liar, rapist, racist, and insurrectionist to lead the (soon to be once) greatest nation on earth. I want them to squeal like gored pigs when the chickens come home to roost. I do feel sorry for the rest of us who will have to endure what is to come.
And you know what else Dan? Stop the circular fire squad. Stop dumping on Dems. The right doesn’t do it, nor should we. And don’t give me hokum about “that’s what sets us apart.” It only adds to the message that Dems suck so much they hate each other. You can’t successfully fight the enemy with an army in disarray.
And stop acting like the Dems were destroyed and are now rudderless and leaderless. JFC, no one talked like this about the GOP after the blue waves of 18, 20, and 24. We have a deep bench. Yes, there are serious issues we must address and get better at. But constant nitpicking and second guessing doesn’t make things better, only worse.
Agree. Dems have been the firewall that insulated Americans from MAGA the last 8 years and when it reached its worst in 2020, Dems saved Americans with stimulus checks and by passing the American Rescue Plan. And then went on to pass the IRA, PACT Act, CHIPS Act +++, championed unions, prioritized WC and MC people, worked on border security and it didn't mean a goddamn thing. We also have the most complicit corporate media who waged a daily war on Biden; there was not one damn day in 3.5 years where recession or inflation wasn't a headline. And when WaPo and LA Times refused to endorse Harris - the fix was in. And the people who refused to vote or switched to Trump are gonna feel alot of pain.
Constant constructive criticism is what makes any good organization (good in the sense that it can hear the criticism, take it in, sort it, process it and improve) into an excellent organization that changes with its times.
We have get over the hurt, we have to realize we somehow could not motivate millions of Biden voters to come out for Harris, and we need to attract a percent of Trump voters to vote blue.
I remember 1984 when Mondale won a total of 13 electoral votes. The next Dem president was Clinton.
Completely different time. You may as well go back a hundred years. That was pre-internet and 24/7 news was a novelty. People were grounded in a shared truth. I have no doubts we will win again—including a blue wave in 26 but only if America is allowed to see just how radical and disruptive, corrupt and incompetent the Trump party truly is. The Dems in Congress have to take the fight to them by being passive—do t try to save Americans. They don’t care, won’t thank you, and won’t remember.
Should be 18, 20, and 22!
I am 63 and I feel it’s broken for the rest of my life. I feel it’s time to radicalize and put forward an angry politics.
A massive wealth tax. Break up big corporations. Fundamentally reform a justice system that lets powerful felons delay and avoid consequences for crime.
Unless you've got a plan to get there, that's nothing but a wish list.
Lol. Out with it!
Good heavens, I can barely imagine "factual information that is not being blunted, tampered, or interfered with in any way." Is this like the sound of one hand clapping?
Money, i.e., people and corporations with lots of it, have been corrupting politics (also ruining the environment, etc.) for a very long time, but it got worse after the Citizens United decision. For extra credit: How do we deal with that, given that the SCOTUS isn't going to change its spots any time soon?
Three thoughts:
1. You cannot discount the role of misogyny and racism. You just can’t. 10 million fewer votes than Biden, terrible numbers of support from white voters, this is a story with pretty evident answers.
2. The media is broken. We have too many folks who would rather be pundits than journalists. Why didn’t Biden’s accomplishments break through - because they were good governance, and therefore not exciting. Boring good governance means fewer clicks, and revenue is king in media right now.
3. Pod Save America - especially the Jon, Jon, and Tommy podcast, spent four years damning the Biden administration because they didn’t do enough, or didn’t do it the right way. It was an unrelenting slog of thinly veiled contempt. You guys need to do some real soul searching - because if this is your idea of a liberal response to the right-wing noise machine, you’ve lost the plot.
Scratching my head to remember PSA "damning" the Biden administration.
I have lots of questions about where we go from here, and I appreciate Dan's thoughts, which is why I read Message Box. But one question I don't have, one thing I know with certainty: The inability to recognize allies and entertain ideas in good faith from within that coalition - that will get us no where.
In what way were / are they wrong? He should never have ran, like HE initially said he wouldn’t, and given the proper time to pick the right replacement. Why he even picked her as VP to begin with never made sense either
Biden’s very fine accomplishments never got the coverage they deserved because Biden and his team were incredibly inept in touting them. Their few attempts were awkward and un-genuine. Even worse, they were telling these things to CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN and NYT and WaPo.
I heard about them and it seems you did too. Guess where we get that kind of news? From the outlets named above.
Guess who never knew about employment levels, the Inflation Reduction Act, or the Infrastructure act. Well, for one, my next-door neighbors, who are glued to Fox.
Somehow our plan was to not only talk about Biden’s accomplishment in a stilted way, but to carefully, surgically, and precisely talk about in places only 40% of voters will see.
Most people do not pay attention to economic indicators outside of the price of groceries and gas. We simply to not have a well-educated electorate. What needs to happen is for inflation to skyrocket under Trump. His voters will have no one left to blame except Trump and themselves.
I know a lot of people who voted D in 20 and 22 and they never, ever wanted to vote for Biden in 2024. Biden got a lot of “vote the bum out” votes and the mistake wasn’t “bashing” Biden, it was that he thought he had a mandate to run for a second term when he in no way did. The problem wasn’t that the pod bashed Biden too much; it’s that they didn’t do it enough to help get him out before it was too late.
Agreed. We were blindsided when he decided to run again. Everyone I knew who voted for him in 20 saw him as a bridge to younger new leadership. Everyone. Polls indicated time and time again that the majority of rank and file Democrats did not want him to run.
That Biden chose not to hear the message was one thing - you don’t succeed in politics without believing in yourself. That the party let him do it was another, and it confirms what I’ve long believed about the upper echelons of the party: They have a condescending attitude towards their less well heeled members.
Consider 2016. As soon as Obama won in 2012, Clinton became the anointed one, enduring high negatives be damned. I thought party leadership would learn an enduring lesson. Silly me.
As they say, history may not repeat itself, but it rhymes.
So after 52 years as a member, I’m done with the Democratic Party and am now a registered Independent. I’m not working for or donating to its candidates any more.
I’ve always voted and will continue to. I know I won’t vote for a Republican ever again (I rarely did before, and never for president). I may be crazy but I’m not stupid, so I won’t vote Green. Libertarians have started making Greens look sane, so they’re not an option. So unless a believably centrist movement emerges and morphs into a legitimate third party, I’ll probably vote for Democrats for whom I have respect.
The party could win me back by doing the hard work of restructuring itself and putting in people who actually figure out how to communicate with its members.
I ain’t holding my breath.
I respectfully disagree. Except in old b&w movies, party leaders don’t anoint anyone, nor do donors. That should have been apparent once Biden fell apart in the debate. Donors clamored for him to get out, but he ignored them.
I remember that Hillary Clinton was very popular after stints as Senator and Secretary of State.
Once she announced, the Fox propaganda painted her as an unethical and dishonest shrew, and the MSM picked up on their email fixation.
But quitting the party? You’re an articulate and forceful person. Why not stay and try to influence it?
I stopped listening to Pod Save America two years ago. I call it Pundits Sink America. Know-it-all insider white guys -- there's better commentary elsewhere. I subscribe to this Substack so I can get insight into how these people think.
Rory Stewart the UK politician? I loved HOW NOT TO BE A POLITICIAN and meant to read more of his earlier work (I've got a longtime interest in the Middle East in particular) but my to-read list has been out of control for many years. Will check out The Rest Is Politics for sure.
Keep crying about misogyny and racism and you’ll be crying for the next several decades.
Your plan is to simply pretend it doesn’t exist?
Harris voters:
Black Women 92%
Black Men 78%
Hispanic Women 60%
White Women 45%
Hispanic Men 43%
White Men 37%
Do tell that racism and misogyny didn’t play a role.
I subscribe to Dan’s newsletter, not PSA. Dan is far more level headed than the rest. Frankly, my choice would be for Dan and Alyssa to take over the early in the week pod, and then he and Jon F. can do the Thursday pod.
Today's newsletter fails to acknowledge root causes: racism, misogyny, white supremacy, unrelenting corporate greed. No, I have no "solutions" to be aired in public. Now I have to defend myself physically because I was born a woman.
And propaganda.
Dan, I just want to say thank you for somehow finding the strength to be a functioning adult this past week. I know it's not easy. We appreciate you.
I have felt for a very long time, and even commented here, that local news and local pols don't identify when federal dollars are benefiting area projects and businesses. I think our senators in Oregon do a great job communicating with people - they both hold town halls in every county in the state every year, but we aren't seeing evidence of the infrastructure improvements nor of investment in rural projects. That shit should get big labels on it.
That being said - the economy has been a long time "bone of contention" in discussions between my husband and myself. I monitor rents and other economic indices, mostly because I am buying more staples when I shop. I also pay our bills since I am more computer savvy. Things have gone up and aren't coming down. A studio apartment in the small city where we live is $1200 a month, but people who need to live in studio apartments are making $1500 a month. It doesn't really get better than that baseline.
These are nuts and bolts for people - not the stockmarket or GDP. And a reminder that a lot of economists (and politicians) think that some unemployment is good for the economy. This leaves out a lot of people who are desperately looking for work, more work, or better work.
Okay. Rant over. But we do need to reckon with things on this level and get very real about it.
That doesn't sound like a rant - that sounds like reality.
The reality that Right Wing media has saturated the country must be considered. Harris focused on inflation and going after the industrialists actually causing it, but who heard her? R’s were pushing fear- Ds don’t care about you, and your son will come home from school your daughter. That’s all that was heard, because RW media also hammers the lie that main stream media is lying. Data clearly shows, a whopping majority wanted the policies Harris offered- until they found out they were her policies. Data also show, D voters have a clear understanding of facts that are reassuring, while R voters believe false stories that cause fear. I think we’re confronted with a “most of the above” battle. Fox is on screens in airports, restaurants, car repair lounges, and even hospitals. (How do we get propaganda networks off the air in a free speech system?) Ds may scan a variety of sources, but obviously, many Americans do not. I really don’t think the entire electorate ever heard her or saw her on TV. And there was only one debate where both candidates were head to head.
Can we stop having politicians that speak like politicians? And honestly, the misogyny is real and we just can’t run women. Much as I love Elizabeth Warren, I now see that she’s totally unelectable nationally. She speaks like a politician and many, many, many men in this election thought Kamala was “weak” and they hated her voice and thought “she’d be eaten alive by world leaders.” It’s gross and awful and depressing but I’ve reconciled myself to the idea that there will never be a female president in my lifetime. (And I am a woman myself)
No more women. No more politician speak. No more long complicated policies. Find our salesman standard bearer (whoever he is) and build up dem mommy bloggers and dem TikTokers and dem WWF podcasters and dem… online gaming personalities (?) or whatever. Build a network of people who are popular online for non-political stuff and have them incept democratic ideas. No one (except us few political junkies) give a shit about politics. There’s a chart I’ve seen that compares people’s beliefs on different issues and their votes and republicans are just dead wrong about everything. People don’t know about D priorities because they’re not coming up in their instagram feed in a way they trust. People do not give a shit about political podcasts or bloggers. They want to spend their limited attention on other shit. It’s not good enough to go on Call Her Daddy one time. We need to find all the Alex Coopers and get them to subtly pitch dem ideas in non-political contexts. Do an ad read that’s like “oh man, Trump’s tariffs are killing us right? Well, Bombas has the solution, 15% off socks…!” Have a mommy blogger be like, “ever since RFK took fluoride out of the water, my kids’ teeth have been a mess, so I’ve started doing some ‘clean living’ and eliminating all acids from our diet!” It’s all entirely stupid and we have to stop pretending the electorate is anything other than mostly stupid.
Yes, yes, yes on cultivating Dem influencers among Mommy bloggers and other social media influencers not promoted as “political.” Things like, “It sucks that we have to pay out of pocket for school wellness check ups because insurance coverage changed.” Make it real. Make it tangible. Make it personal.
I am not willing to give up on women as candidates. Not yet.
This. All of this. We can’t change the media landscape. We have to hack it from the inside. We have to partner with people like the Marques Brownlees of the world to build an agreement that the world Dems propose is better. Joe Rogan has done this for the Republicans for a decade. We have to stop complaining about the media and we need to start PLAYING.
I’m ready for a democrat who actually answers questions honestly. Who is a little less “on message” 100% of the time. I would hear Dan sometime praise Kamala’s answers to questions where the answer was basically a complete dodge and pivot while knowing that most voters would hate that answer.
Let’s put someone out there who makes mistakes sometimes.Someone who is willing to get caught saying the “wrong” thing. Ironically - I think this will help voters trust them more.
Product placement in other words.
Why shouldn't politicians speak like politicians? Or do you want teachers to stop speaking like teachers, lawyers to stop speaking like lawyers, scientists to stop speaking like scientists, etc. For each and every category the range is huge. There are lawyers who talk arcane gibberish, then there are lawyers like Joyce Vance and Marc Elias who speak effectively to non-lawyers.
P.S. I've heard it suggested that the first woman president will be a Republican, the way the first woman SCOTUS justice was a Republican. However, I don't believe that the first woman president will be an Elise Stefanik or a Sarah Huckabee Sanders, so unless we're talking several decades from now I don't think it's gonna happen.
I am a lawyer. The most successful thing I do as a lawyer is to talk to my clients like their people. I say “this is fucking insane.” Then I write a brief in legalese and explain it to my client like they’re a teenager. I say “like” and “fuck” and “bullshit” a lot. Not in court. But to the person who hired me. We can walk and chew gum at the same time. We can speak to the electorate like the ADHD children they are (and to be clear, I’m ADHD, I’m not knocking the neurodivergent) but we can’t keep talking to the electorate using words like “neurodivergent.” We CAN talk to each other that way. But your comparison is just not apt. Scientists don’t need to pander to millions of stupid, uninvolved people. Lawyers usually don’t. Teachers don’t really need the buy in of their students. There’s not going to be a mass exodus of kids from schools because teachers speak like teachers.
This. I work with very smart people and I still have to water down a few concepts for my colleagues to understand them. They are not stupid. But the fact is that I have to get their “buy in” to sponsor my projects, and I have to bring the projects to their level/attention span. It’s a fact in any power dynamic. Democrats need to learn to dance to this tune.
Politicians are going to politician. I advocate that the rest of us, especially those who have a social media presence, talk about the impact of policies to their own lives. People tune out politicians. They don’t turn out their favorite Insta influencer.
Well said. I believe the right female candidate can win soon. AOC generation.
Good comments but really doesn’t address what I thought was most interesting—Trumps total votes were very close to totals in 2020. The difference is that Dems total votes decreased. Why? Apathy? Folks angry about Gaza? Folks angry about economy? Folks angry about trans in women’s sports?? etc etc. Focusing on the margin of loss alone misses that issue.
Spot in. That’s an important rabbit hole to traverse.
It turns out that Trump’s cap is real. Yeah, he apparently made inroads with some traditionally Democratic constituencies. But if so, he lost votes elsewhere. Where did they go?
To Harris? Some perhaps. Maybe, perchance, they didn’t vote. They’ve joined the ranks of believing their votes don’t matter. If so, then indeed democracy is dying here. And it’s not all Republicans’ fault.
The fancy word foe what’s happening is we’ve slipped into anocracy. And very few Democrats care enough to do anything about it.
Inflation. Inflation. INFLATION!!!!
Why are we making this so much more complicated than it is? People were angry about the post Covid price spikes and wanted someone to blame. Their natural instincts blamed the party in charge, and Trump’s campaign gleefully reinforced this instinct with its messaging.
It does not matter that the economy is otherwise good. Humans are not perfect economic evaluators. Without this inflation spike, Kamala (or possibly even Joe) would likely have won, and all our arguments about misogyny, racism, etc would be falling flat right now.
Basically: it’s the economy, stupid.
TLDR. It's the racism and misogyny. We suck as a people. You cannot analyze how we elected what we just elected without realizing how vile, petty, greedy, racist, and misogynist we are. People stayed home and allowed this to happen. Now the people will suffer the consequences of their pettiness and depravity. We are a shithole country. PS there is no "working class coalition" here these are ignorant stupid cruel people who fear anyone different. What we should do is let them burn it to the ground and destroy this shitty excuse for a nation.
“Working class people suck! You are ignorant, stupid, cruel people who fear anything different. Go to hell! But please vote for us on your way out. Thank you.”
Not a great way to win people over. If we don’t want these voters, who make up a large part of the electorate, fine. I don’t think it’s possible to win by alienating all of them. And I don’t think they’re inherently cruel. I think they’re angry or frustrated and Trump channels that anger towards the wrong people and things. We could do a better job of channeling it towards the right things.
This. The Brazilian left solved this riddle and got Lula back in power. They had two hammering messages:
Employment: “It’s so bad that engineers are driving Ubers.” Simple, true, to the point.
Economy: “You ate more steaks when Lula was president.” They literally hammered this message. Lula went on our equivalent of Joe Rogan and hammered this in. He invited the host to a steak barbecue after the election.
Democrats need similar talking points, and they have to own the narrative that life under Dems is better.
And also find a way to pierce the Right Wing bubble, while getting folks to accept and believe the boatload of real news outside their silo. Gay rights were propelled when individuals bravely came out to their families and friends. If you love a gay person, you become more open to listen. Maybe democrats can try the same approach, and admit being a bleeding heart liberal (which I am proudly) to friends and family who aren’t. Just brainstorming here!
I didn't say working class people suck. I said we suck. ALL OF US - ME INCLUDED. The working class didn't do this and if you think they did you're deluding yourself. WHITE PEOPLE DID THIS. THEY'VE BEEN DOING THIS MY ENTIRE LIFE AND FOR DECADES BEFORE THAT. His voters skewed wealthier and whiter. So keep thinking it's all messaging or something WE aren't COMMUNICATING when reality is staring you directly in the face. The choice was between a steaming pile of shit and the same old chicken dinner and we chose a steaming pile of shit. WE the people did this. There are 366 million of us but the majority couldn't be bothered to vote. Until and unless WE THE PEOPLE face the stark and dire consequences of our shortsighted actions we will continue to descend into chaos. Its unfortunate. Didn't have to be like this. But it is obvious we are broken. And it is obvious we must become even more broken to understand exactly who (us) is doing the breaking and why. Until we do that there is no change. Only more of our stagnant stale excuses for acting like barbarians.
First thing, stop calling them “they”. These are your neighbors and probably even coworkers.
Comments like this are why people hate liberals.
Turns out humans are not born cosmopolitans…people have always been “vile petty, greedy, racist and misogynist.” In fact, racism and misogyny have historically been simply normal—the crazy thing about this moment is that Trump is doing a better job of bringing together people of different races than Democrats are, and people need to take a long look in the mirror to realize why that is—it’s because we’ve made ourselves toxic, and the reflex of calling people racist and sexist at every turn is a big part of that.
The way liberals react in these moments reminds me of the old Peanuts cartoon where Linus says “I love mankind, it’s people I can’t stand!” As long as liberals hate people, they’re going to be bad at politics in a democracy.
I agree that a portion of the electorate is vile, selfish, racist and biased against women in power. That’s a fact. But the fact is that we don’t need those votes to win. If we have a white male candidate (and I say this as a Latina woman) and the right strategy, we can win. We don’t need the “bottom of the barrel” voters. We need to scrape the top.
That’s why I see no point in dwelling and complaining that there are despicable people around us. Yes, they exist and they suck, but I won’t give them my energy because they will always suck. But some people don’t suck, and we need their votes.
I don’t think we need a white male, we could certainly lose with the wrong white male. What we need is someone who is not deliberately chosen on the basis of their race, we need someone who rises to the top based on their own personal ability and appeal.
It is possible. But we know that the only time we beat Trump was with a blue-eyed white, Catholic male. I think undecided votes told us (as well as they could) that they saw Kamala as “not presidential enough.” Against a convicted rapist, the message (that they can’t say out loud) is clear: there’s still enough misogyny in this country to keep a woman away from the White House. Brazil only elected Dilma because we had a very strong incumbent endorsing her (Lula, the most popular politician Brazil has ever seen), a booming economy and the weakest opposition the left had in decades. Nowadays, even the Brazilian left won’t risk another woman candidate in this economy and political climate. It’s devastating, but it’s true.
We can not get caught thinking that “uncorrupting” the media will get us out of this mess. To do that we need power, and we can’t be in power unless we win. I agree that the changing media landscape got us here, but reshaping the media landscape is impossible (especially from the ground up).
I agree that “Get the Money Out” could be a good message, but: Trump aligned himself with billionaires and still won. It doesn’t seem like getting money out of politics is a priority for the electorate. I’d say the opposite: too many people in America believe that if you have the money, you earned it and you can do what you want with it (including buying a president or a Supreme Court justice or two). This is kind of the fabric of the American Dream.
Finally, I disagree that the right message can overcome underlying gender biases in moderate voters. Given the option, most of them will default to their perception that a man is more prepared than a woman. We need to remove this variable from the equation.
Yeah. NO. I KNOW a good deal of racists and misogynists that voted for him. They're my "friends" and "family" and I REFUSE TO TREAT THEM LIKE THEY AREN'T RACISTS AND MISOGYNISTS. It's the elephant in the room and - as we ALWAYS say to our brown brothers and sisters - clean your own house - it's on us "white" people to clean our own house. They treat people like shit but I'm supposed to not call them garbage because it may hurt their feelings? 🙄
Can we separate needing to win elections from satisfying your personal moral outrage? The steps to accomplishing these two different goals are not the same.
No.
Linus had it exactly backward. As individuals, people are okay. Put them in a group…it’s all to easy to form an easily-led mob.
Actually this isn’t a matter of individuals vs group—“people” is also a collective noun—it’s more about liking people in the abstract but not in reality. Anyway, democracy is all about collective action—if you can’t get together with people on anything, you’re not going to win.
TLDR?
And the rest of your comment is pretty dark.
Is your proposed solution to raise the moral and ethical essence of the electorate until it passes muster with the Democratic Party?
Perhaps the next papal election will need a campaign manager.
Enjoy the fascism.
Dan, your article is a great starting point. We really need to rethink everything. Some years ago, I heard a speaker (I wish I could remember who, but it was someone legit) who said that while Americans have many different religious and cultural beliefs, there is one thing that *all* Americans believe in: Fairness. I think we should keep that in mind.
It is not only our messaging, it’s scaling it up to reach the same numbers as the right wingers
We also need to focus on what’s happening in blue states. Let’s forget these stupid performative message bills and #resistance. Let’s actually start taking steps that will address some issues we’ve seen. New York and California are losing electoral votes because it’s too hard to build housing. We should be looking at permitting reform and getting more housing built in these areas faster. We should start testing other policies and start calling out the success of things like higher minimum wage.
We also need to be more willing to for lack of a better term eat our own. Kathy Hochul is up in New York in 2 years and should be jettisoned by the party because she’s unpopular and has been ineffective. We should work to make sure the best candidates are available next year in New Jersey and Virginia.
There’s another point I’ve read a few places. Our old friend Tim Miller has suggested that Trump remained politically viable because people stopped him from doing the truly awful stuff he wanted to do in his first term. I’m torn, because I don’t want to inflict pain, but giving him the space to actually do the horrible things he wants to do could make voters wise up (or that’s totally naive since the insurrection and the felony convictions weren’t enough to do it this time)
You are right about housing, but what is the federal role in permitting reform? There’s an important role for local Democrats, I guess.
I am fascinated to see how the country responds to Trump’s mass deportation programs and suggestion that he can change constitutionally enshrined citizenship laws by royal fiat. Very frightened at the possibility that people will get in line and support his madness. Sure as hell hope not.
Yeah maybe but my partner is close to retirement age. We need our social security and 410k. This is real stuff not abstract.
My sense is that west coast Democrats have been placing a high priority in recent years on ways of boosting the housing supply. For example, a fair amount of legislation has passed that reforms land-use and permitting regulations. Is it enough? Probably not, but that's not necessarily the fault of lawmakers. This is a complex problem that does not lend itself to the simple solutions.
Yes and there is a LOT of local resistance to housing reform from existing homeowners. They got theirs and don't want to change anything.
I don't know how well this would apply to the coasts but in the midwest there are a lot of old factory towns where simply focusing on the areas that have depopulated would solve a lot of problems. Case in point Detroit had a population high point of about 2.5 million. It currently has less than 1 million. Rather than necessarily building more housing can we look at why don't people live in this area any more? Lets fix that because the infrastructure is already there for people to live here. In many ways transit IS housing because it increases how far you can go in the same 30 min which creates flexibility.
I agree NIMBYism can be problematic but don't think we should blame the high cost of housing entirely on this phenomenon. For one thing, unregulated growth may not be wise in the parts of the west that rely on increasingly tenuous water supplies due to climate change.
In addition, a well-run regulatory process can better resolve potential issues with a proposed development, such as mitigating traffic congestion or blockage of solar to existing buildings with solar panels.
I didn't say I blame the problem entirely on NIMBYism. I believe it's a large factor, but as you said there are lots of other roadblocks to housing reform.
I agree, there’s a lot of voters that are happy with the status quo in these places.
Many of Trump's followers fall for the three greatest attributes of a snake oil salesman...
Charismatic Persuasion: They possess a natural charisma and persuasive communication skills, allowing them to convince others of the value of their product, even if it's worthless. They are adept at reading their audience and adjusting their pitch to evoke trust and excitement.
Confidence and Showmanship: A successful snake oil salesman exudes confidence, often to the point of being theatrical. Their showmanship can captivate audiences, making their claims seem more credible, and instilling a sense of urgency to buy.
Manipulative Storytelling: They craft compelling stories that resonate emotionally with their audience, often claiming miraculous benefits or invoking fear of missing out. They weave these narratives in a way that taps into people's desires, fears, or insecurities, making the product seem like an indispensable solution.
But Trump's Super Power is...
He knows that to sell a lie, you need Repetition. In the same way, advertisements reinforce a product through repetition, even one with questionable attributes.
Repetition is a key tactic for a snake oil salesman—or anyone trying to convince others of something questionable. Repeating a lie often enough can give it a sense of familiarity, leading people to perceive it as truth, a psychological phenomenon known as the "illusory truth effect." The repetition makes the information easier to process.
The number of impressions needed to turn a lie into a "truth" varies, depending on factors like the audience's existing beliefs, their trust in the source, and the context in which the message is repeated. However, research suggests that even just three to six repetitions can significantly increase the perceived truthfulness of a statement, especially if the audience doesn't have prior information to contradict it.
Why do you think Trump speaks so long at so many rallies? Roy Cohen taught him well.
Actually speeches at rallies are the least consequential form of communication—I wasn’t under the impression that Trump actually repeated himself that much in rally speeches. There’s also more to it than repetition, you’ve got to start with something that will resonate. If you keep repeating something that offends people, you’ll just piss them off.
How many times do you think Trump repeated the big lie that the election was stolen over the past four years? Enough to turn it into truth for his "pied pipers?"
Yeah honestly part of me is just like. Lie. We need to lie. All the time. Repeatedly. Everywhere. Say whatever people want to hear.
And you say you’re a lawyer?
It works for *them*.
Thanks. This is a good start to conversations we must have. The loss at the top of the ticket feels overwhelming even though, as you say, it wasn't a landslide like Reagan or Nixon. (Part of the reason it feels so horrible is that, unlike Reagan and Nixon, Trump was a convicted felon who had been found liable for sexual assault and has used violent and disgusting rhetoric about political rivals and marginalized groups.) I also think it's worth looking at the races we did win -- in North Carolina and Wisconsin we broke super majorities in their state legislatures; in NY, we flipped 3 Congressional seats and passed Prop 1 despite millions of dollars spent against us; we are sending superb leaders like Ruben Gallego and Andy Kim to the Senate. The information environment is key. There is a generation of young men being raised on a diet of far right podcasts and I don't think we offer any alternative yet. I'm also concerned about Prager U radicalizing young kids in schools. Looking forward to reading more of your thoughts. In the meantime, there are elections in 2025 to work on.
Hey Dan, can you write a bit about the growing role/opportunity for independent candidates in heavily Red states? You’ve mentioned the damage the D brand has taken over the years and one area where it’s really glaring is in ballot initiatives and the performance of independent state wide candidates in red states.
In the past several cycles we’ve seen democratic policies as ballot measures perform extremely well despite Dems in statewide races doing really poorly, and in the case of Evan McMullin and Dan Osborn, we now have two data points showing swings of between (depending on your benchmark) 12-22 points better than Dems in those states.
At some point, if we’re really in an existential crisis here but still looking for a political solution to retake power, shouldn’t we take a look at this dynamic and recognize that to be competitive we need to ditch the D brand in states like Strong R states like Iowa, Tennessee, Kentucky, and otherwise non-competitive senate states coming up in 2026? Can state parties get the national party’s blessing to break off, or rebrand in a way that allows them to keep some modicum of political infrastructure while running away from the party as a brand in its marketing and messaging?
Here’s a crazy idea—what if we went back to the original name of the party, the “Democratic-Republican” party? If nothing else, it would confuse the hell out of a lot of people and offend the hell out of leftists, but maybe that’s not a bad thing? At least not in a lot of places.
We have a flourishing and popular party here in MN. The Democratic Farmer and Labor party. Seems pretty apt, and would give the party a much needed rebranding. Why no one is looking at our purple state and adapting our moderate in the streets liberal in the sheets model is just beyond me. It's not just a coincidence we vote blue in a sea of red.
Thank you Dan. As much as this sucks, being in the opposition is also liberating. We don't have to "defend" any politician or policy and can be in 100% attack mode. I believe we really need (1) get much louder, (2) paint MAGA leadership as a bunch of elite billionaires (which is true), and (3) embrace a "radical" populist agenda, which means huge taxes on the ultra wealthy and getting money out of politics. This may ruffle the feathers of the rich donor class, but frankly if their money isn't helping us win, then why are we embracing them? Our biggest strength is our ability to mobilize a huge grassroots army and our biggest weakness is losing control of the conversation due to the loudness gap. If we can fix the latter (not easy) then the former becomes an even more powerful asset. Not giving up, let's go!