Totally agree.. hmmm.. I think the first time I read "Epstein class" it was in a Heather Cox RIchardson Letter from an American. Just want her to get her due if that is true. :)
Affordability, ICE, and the Epstein files fits into the slogan you came up with months ago - Chaos, Cost, and Corruption.
A talented politician like Jon Ossoff can weave these themes together into a compelling message. And he did it while being plainspoken —calling Trump out as a Klansman—without a lame-sounding injection of cuss words as so many Democrats do now.
Great stuff from Dan, as we have come to expect. Absolutely agree on the necessity of using Ossoff’s (and AOC’s) approach.
But I do have to take issue with Dan’s statement about Trump.. “I never really bought that argument; it presumes a level of rationality and strategic thinking that Trump has never once demonstrated in his eight decades on this planet.”
I think it’s clear that we have underestimated Trump’s intellect at our own peril. Underestimating him has allowed him to take all the power he has, which is, you know, quite fucking considerable.
Yes, he has never been an intellectually curious man and has displayed genuine stupidity more times than anyone can count, and fortunately not every evil scheme he has attempted has been successful, but we should not ignore his unparalleled success as a conman. He is still very much a force to be reckoned with, not one to be dismissed for cathartic reasons.
Whatever he has planned for the midterms could easily make January 6th look like a Christmas pageant.
With you until that last bit, as I think we've already seen what he's up to, and it's not working out for him. Mid decade redistricting has been a net loss, he hasn't gotten voter data from blue states, even Emmer is rejecting "nationalization" of elections, ICE is too small and too widely hated for Bannon's plan to have a chance of working. 2020 was a nasty and disorienting surprise, as nothing on that scale had been attempted before, the relevant actors are all forewarned this time.
But you're right that people confuse Trump's hostility to learning with stupidity, as Rex Tillerson did when Trump 'went off' on his briefers at the Pentagon in 2017 (the occasion of his "f'ing moron" comment). Trump is very knowledgeable and canny about bullying and manipulation, I have no doubt he regards people who don't get what he's doing as "f'ing morons".
The trap is to conceive of intelligence as a thing, when it's many things.
Essentially with you, as well. But in addition to the well known election meddling, despite the unpopularity of ICE, I think we will see widespread voter intimidation and suppression, ballot boxes being seized, MAGA Mike refusing to swear Democrats who legitimately win into office, straight up election fraud where they can get away with it, obviously voter ID laws, voter rolls being purged.. really no limits on what they will try to prevent any checks on their power. Note what just happened in Georgia. They will flood the zone with heinous assaults on our electoral system. Similar to Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election, we should anticipate a multi-faceted barrage of attacks, untethered by legality and precedent.
I’m sure there are Dem lawyers working on this, but Johnson’s term ends when the Clerk of the House convenes the new Congress. Once roll is called, the first order of business is electing a Speaker. Importantly, newly-elected and re-elected members are there because their individual states certified their election. (States have a time limit to certify, and Democratic lawyers have been very active on holding states to these timelines).
No one person has the power to decide to seat or not seat a member. Only a majority vote in the House can do that.
If a losing candidate wants to appeal the seating of their winning rival, he or she has to file an appeal with the House Clerk, and a process then takes place.
I am not sure why podcasters and others keep raising this issue. The real exposure, to me, is in safeguarding the integrity of the state certification processes.
My expectation is, Trump will by then not have the popular support required to mount such efforts, because the officials he will need to collaborate will be unwilling, or afraid, to do so. His minions aren't numerous or capable enough on their own. The DOJ seems headed for collapse, for example. And note, said minions are not actually openly and explicitly defying court orders. The Supreme Court has stayed a number of injunctions, but it has not (yet) actually ruled for Trump, afaik.
Even putting Trump aside, there's value in associating billionaires with pedophiles. Maybe Americans will finally fall out of love with them and we can create a more equitable tax system to make government work again.
To me, this is the fatal flaw in populism. While it certainly has positive attributes, its practitioners always end up making arguments that pit one class against another. Is this much different from Romney condemning 47% of the population as users and takers?
I agree partially. I wish there was no need to pit people against each other, but there are two reasons why it's necessary. First, people are unhappy with the decline in the standard of living in the country. If you want to gain people's support for your leadership, they need to buy into your worldview as to why they're in this situation. An anti-billionare narrative is clean, clear, and there is lots of evidence that the wealth hoarding at the top is a big part of what's going on. Second, the class warfare rhetoric is already flowing from the opposite direction. Every time the right fights to destory the social safety net, they are pitting classes against each other. Not fighting back leaves you defenseless.
Politicians have been talking about unfairness and trying to fix it for a long time without pitting groups of people against one another. Think the Civil Rights struggle.
The right has been attacking and damaging people for a century. It’s one of the reasons to avoid it.
Bernie—a great activist but a poor politician—uses this type of populist appeal almost exclusively. To me it is just lazy and shallow, and the reason he can get masses of people stirred up, but never formulate or pass real legislation. There are only “concepts of a plan” behind his resentments.
If the shoe fits though... when the ultra-wealthy hoard excessive wealth, that is necessarily at the expense of the poor, working class, and society as a whole ultimately
I totally agree, but can I make a request? Can the term "elites", used as a pejorative, be retired? Please?
Sure, it can refer to Epstein and any number of people named in the files. Trump attended private school, a military academy, Fordham, and Wharton, and is super wealthy. An elite? Not when he uses the word, clearly.
Ted Cruz? Princeton, Harvard, SCOTUS clerk. JD Vance? Harvard Law, worked for Peter Thiel. Gavin Newsom? Letter of recommendation to university from Jerry Brown and began what turned out to be a very successful business with backing from a Getty.
And let's be fair: most of us who're commenting here are probably middle class and up, many college educated. Dan, you went to Georgetown and worked in the White House.
"Elite" means everything, and nothing. At this point using it only foments hatred of whomever the speaker dislikes, and it's fundamentally anti-education. Its use in these discussions should be scrapped.
My point is that "elites" is both inaccurate as currently used and meaningless at this stage. "Epstein class" certainly refers to some people, but that's entirely separate from Dan's and others' use of "elites".
The link between Americans' economic anxiety and the Epstein class is that both are the result of a system that supports predatory behavior on the part of the powerful.
We are all prey, and the institutions that were designed to protect us are now largely controlled by the predators.
I saw another person noted that nothing was done under the Biden admin about the Epstein files -and there is a good counter to this. Biden didn't campaign on releasing them, and Epstein was convicted and died under Trump 1.
I think that campaign messages should have the chaos, cost, and corruption message, but also incorporate mutual aid in local communities. Since the midterms are more local, it's going to be important for candidates to connect on a deeper level than town halls and facebook posts. They are going to need to wade in like folks in Minnesota have done. Bad shit is happening everywhere - there's just so much of it that only the huge chaos is making the news. We will have to do an everything, everywhere, all at once approach and get some help to people in desperate need.
“Most Democrats view messaging as a binary choice: You either run on issue A or issue B. You have to pick one, and to be honest, much of our party has been paralyzed by that choice for a long time.”
You hit the nail on the head here.
Until Dems understand that they need to tie the corruption, cruelty, cover ups and the general republican platform to making the rich richer (Epstein class) and screwing everyone else (the ‘affordability crisis’) they’re going to continue to come up short in elections.
They also need to stop pandering to republicans in hopes of looking bipartisan as, you mentioned, republicans will likely come home even if it means voting for a corrupt sex predator felon. They need to work to bring back dem & independents voters, but also the millions of non voters. Hammer home that the GOP only cares about the Epstein class and that dem policies will help a large majority or the country.
Dan, this framing seems inevitable, but there's something that needs to be said before Democrats try to own this issue: the Epstein files were sitting there during the Biden years and nobody touched them. Voters are going to notice that. The cover-up story doesn't begin with Trump — most people are going to trace it back to the night Epstein died and ask why, through democrat and republican administrations, nobody ever actually opened the door. That's not a right-wing talking point, it's just the timeline.
And that's before you get to the Biden health situation. Voters already believe that Democrats covered up Biden's capacity to govern. Voters aren't going to draw a clean line between the Epstein Class and the people who covered for Biden. In their minds those circles are going to overlap pretty significantly.
I think this is going to be the political message of our time but it's only going to work for Democrats if it comes from those who genuinely weren't in the room for any of this. Its going accelerate a changing of the guard to younger and reform focused set of leaders or its going pass the Democratic Party by.
Epstein was prosecuted in 2019. Maxwell was convicted in 2021. Courts seal grand jury and victim materials by law.
If someone claims there was a cover-up, they should point to specific evidence of obstruction—not just the absence of new public documents.
The current Epstein File storm is about the release of the files (an incredibly rare occurrence for any crime). This is a self-inflicted wound as MAGA and their enabler’s vociferously demanded the release of the files. Then when they were in a position to do so, started acting like they were cagily covering things up.
A talented communicator could make the distinction. No one ignored the Epstein files. When a defendant dies before a verdict, the case is closed and the presumption of innocence remains.
The current storm comes from the demand to release the files (this is exceedingly rare), wholly brought about by MAGA and other right wingers when they were out of power, combined with their ham-fisted behavior afterwards.
Not sure that “what about-ism” works for MAGA as a credible defense.
Chiming in with a very basic problem: Dems are not a working class party, working class voices are pretty marginal in party councils. Dems are not a professional class party, though the professional classes are an essential part of the Dem coalition. Dems want to raise money from The Epstein Class. Ask Nancy Pelosi. Ask the Clinton Global Initiative. We have a long history of taking donations from pretty much anybody. They rode on the plane even if they didn't get the massages.
Right now the Trumpistas are in the cross hairs and it is good clean fun to fire off some rounds (metaphor only!). But to make this an effective issue the Dems would have to exile The Epstein Class from their councils and Epstein Class dollars from their campaign funds. I have seen no appetite for this.
Dan's framing really rings true. I remember Bryan Stevenson saying that our judicial system treats you better if you're rich and guilty than if you're poor and innocent. The Epstein abomination is that on steroids.
There is another framing that is less malleable into a campaign argument, but is also true: The Epstein class is a network built on carnal depravity and rapacious greed for money and power. We, in our neighborhoods and communities, and exemplified by the people of Minneapolis, have networks built on respect, equality, freedom, and simple human decency.
Their network is a protection racket; our networks are communities of mutual support. We have what the Epstein class never will, and they know it.
100% agree. Tying lack of affordability to the special treatment the Epstein class has long been afforded is a winning message because at its core it’s about fairness, which is a concept everyone intrinsically gets. But the Dems need an effective messenger to communicate this. The person who is currently in the best position to be that messenger is Chuck Schumer because of the power of the filibuster. But “let’s make a deal, any deal, because deals are intrinsically great even if they are one sided against my team” Chuck is incapable of carrying that message. Even now we hear him spouting nonsense about how the Republicans can be persuaded to make a reasonable deal regarding ICE. There is no reasonable deal on the table other than ICE must be made to conform with standard police force behavior, period. But Chuck will cede the moral high ground the Dems occupy on this issue as sure as the sun will rise in the morning. Without an effective messenger, no message, no matter how correct, will break through
I agree with much of what you say. But Schumer and Jeffries have found themselves suddenly forced into Chief Messenger roles because we are out of power in the presidency and Congress.
If leadership were being chosen from scratch, the ideal would be someone who combines procedural mastery, caucus management, strategic discipline, and media agility. That combination is rare. More often, parties balance those skills across multiple figures rather than concentrate them in one. But in those times when we control neither the House, the Senate, nor the Presidency we don’t have a natural focus.
I’m not defending Schumer or Jeffries. But while we’ve had several people in both jobs who were masterly at the legislative side of the job, I can’t really think of one who was an effective messenger. Certainly not Pelosi, who was perhaps the most effective Speaker in history, but never a polished messenger to the voters.
You’re correct that it’s asking too much of one person to be adept at all 4 of the skills you outline. Upon reflection, I think what irks me most about Schumer, and to a lesser extent Jeffries, is their refusal or inability to change strategy, to recognize that you don’t combat Trump and Trumpism with strategies that were used with George W for example. And you certainly don’t abandon a winning hand, namely the moral high ground on DHS/ICE/CBP, just because you think it’s irresponsible not to make a deal. Instead you continue to exert pressure, because you have the leverage to do so, until you get every condition for continued funding met.
I agree with you. Schumer seems to play poker with his cards facing outwards. Jeffries is a stiff. It remains to be seen if either can control their caucuses under pressure, as Pelosi did so well.
I’d say Schumer is a no in that regard and Jeffries is a yes for now if only because his caucus loathes Speaker Holy Mike with the power of a thousand suns
The Middle Class has long been the center of the American narrative. But the Working Class has always been the actual heart and soul of the country. Thanks to the Epstein Class, the Middle Class is quickly melding into the Working Class. Now all we have to do is get our collective clASSes in gear and take care of business.
I hope Ossoff's speeches are a wakeup call for every Dem running for office. Epstein's crimes are horrible, but it worries me more that we're still living in the "greed is good" 80s. It's really not and I hope tying it to how greed hurts everyone not raking in the big bucks works.
Totally agree.. hmmm.. I think the first time I read "Epstein class" it was in a Heather Cox RIchardson Letter from an American. Just want her to get her due if that is true. :)
I think it was originally featured in a speech Senator Jon Ossoff made.
Ro Khanna coined it, afaik, Osoff immediately saw its potential, and picked it up
Affordability, ICE, and the Epstein files fits into the slogan you came up with months ago - Chaos, Cost, and Corruption.
A talented politician like Jon Ossoff can weave these themes together into a compelling message. And he did it while being plainspoken —calling Trump out as a Klansman—without a lame-sounding injection of cuss words as so many Democrats do now.
Great stuff from Dan, as we have come to expect. Absolutely agree on the necessity of using Ossoff’s (and AOC’s) approach.
But I do have to take issue with Dan’s statement about Trump.. “I never really bought that argument; it presumes a level of rationality and strategic thinking that Trump has never once demonstrated in his eight decades on this planet.”
I think it’s clear that we have underestimated Trump’s intellect at our own peril. Underestimating him has allowed him to take all the power he has, which is, you know, quite fucking considerable.
Yes, he has never been an intellectually curious man and has displayed genuine stupidity more times than anyone can count, and fortunately not every evil scheme he has attempted has been successful, but we should not ignore his unparalleled success as a conman. He is still very much a force to be reckoned with, not one to be dismissed for cathartic reasons.
Whatever he has planned for the midterms could easily make January 6th look like a Christmas pageant.
David Axelrod calls him a “feral genius”, which seems to fit. He’s not the idiot people claim he is. To me he is sly but almost deliberately ignorant.
With you until that last bit, as I think we've already seen what he's up to, and it's not working out for him. Mid decade redistricting has been a net loss, he hasn't gotten voter data from blue states, even Emmer is rejecting "nationalization" of elections, ICE is too small and too widely hated for Bannon's plan to have a chance of working. 2020 was a nasty and disorienting surprise, as nothing on that scale had been attempted before, the relevant actors are all forewarned this time.
But you're right that people confuse Trump's hostility to learning with stupidity, as Rex Tillerson did when Trump 'went off' on his briefers at the Pentagon in 2017 (the occasion of his "f'ing moron" comment). Trump is very knowledgeable and canny about bullying and manipulation, I have no doubt he regards people who don't get what he's doing as "f'ing morons".
The trap is to conceive of intelligence as a thing, when it's many things.
Essentially with you, as well. But in addition to the well known election meddling, despite the unpopularity of ICE, I think we will see widespread voter intimidation and suppression, ballot boxes being seized, MAGA Mike refusing to swear Democrats who legitimately win into office, straight up election fraud where they can get away with it, obviously voter ID laws, voter rolls being purged.. really no limits on what they will try to prevent any checks on their power. Note what just happened in Georgia. They will flood the zone with heinous assaults on our electoral system. Similar to Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election, we should anticipate a multi-faceted barrage of attacks, untethered by legality and precedent.
I’m sure there are Dem lawyers working on this, but Johnson’s term ends when the Clerk of the House convenes the new Congress. Once roll is called, the first order of business is electing a Speaker. Importantly, newly-elected and re-elected members are there because their individual states certified their election. (States have a time limit to certify, and Democratic lawyers have been very active on holding states to these timelines).
No one person has the power to decide to seat or not seat a member. Only a majority vote in the House can do that.
If a losing candidate wants to appeal the seating of their winning rival, he or she has to file an appeal with the House Clerk, and a process then takes place.
I am not sure why podcasters and others keep raising this issue. The real exposure, to me, is in safeguarding the integrity of the state certification processes.
My expectation is, Trump will by then not have the popular support required to mount such efforts, because the officials he will need to collaborate will be unwilling, or afraid, to do so. His minions aren't numerous or capable enough on their own. The DOJ seems headed for collapse, for example. And note, said minions are not actually openly and explicitly defying court orders. The Supreme Court has stayed a number of injunctions, but it has not (yet) actually ruled for Trump, afaik.
Even putting Trump aside, there's value in associating billionaires with pedophiles. Maybe Americans will finally fall out of love with them and we can create a more equitable tax system to make government work again.
To me, this is the fatal flaw in populism. While it certainly has positive attributes, its practitioners always end up making arguments that pit one class against another. Is this much different from Romney condemning 47% of the population as users and takers?
I agree partially. I wish there was no need to pit people against each other, but there are two reasons why it's necessary. First, people are unhappy with the decline in the standard of living in the country. If you want to gain people's support for your leadership, they need to buy into your worldview as to why they're in this situation. An anti-billionare narrative is clean, clear, and there is lots of evidence that the wealth hoarding at the top is a big part of what's going on. Second, the class warfare rhetoric is already flowing from the opposite direction. Every time the right fights to destory the social safety net, they are pitting classes against each other. Not fighting back leaves you defenseless.
Politicians have been talking about unfairness and trying to fix it for a long time without pitting groups of people against one another. Think the Civil Rights struggle.
The right has been attacking and damaging people for a century. It’s one of the reasons to avoid it.
Bernie—a great activist but a poor politician—uses this type of populist appeal almost exclusively. To me it is just lazy and shallow, and the reason he can get masses of people stirred up, but never formulate or pass real legislation. There are only “concepts of a plan” behind his resentments.
If the shoe fits though... when the ultra-wealthy hoard excessive wealth, that is necessarily at the expense of the poor, working class, and society as a whole ultimately
I totally agree, but can I make a request? Can the term "elites", used as a pejorative, be retired? Please?
Sure, it can refer to Epstein and any number of people named in the files. Trump attended private school, a military academy, Fordham, and Wharton, and is super wealthy. An elite? Not when he uses the word, clearly.
Ted Cruz? Princeton, Harvard, SCOTUS clerk. JD Vance? Harvard Law, worked for Peter Thiel. Gavin Newsom? Letter of recommendation to university from Jerry Brown and began what turned out to be a very successful business with backing from a Getty.
And let's be fair: most of us who're commenting here are probably middle class and up, many college educated. Dan, you went to Georgetown and worked in the White House.
"Elite" means everything, and nothing. At this point using it only foments hatred of whomever the speaker dislikes, and it's fundamentally anti-education. Its use in these discussions should be scrapped.
Hence, the "Epstein class."
My point is that "elites" is both inaccurate as currently used and meaningless at this stage. "Epstein class" certainly refers to some people, but that's entirely separate from Dan's and others' use of "elites".
The link between Americans' economic anxiety and the Epstein class is that both are the result of a system that supports predatory behavior on the part of the powerful.
We are all prey, and the institutions that were designed to protect us are now largely controlled by the predators.
I saw another person noted that nothing was done under the Biden admin about the Epstein files -and there is a good counter to this. Biden didn't campaign on releasing them, and Epstein was convicted and died under Trump 1.
I think that campaign messages should have the chaos, cost, and corruption message, but also incorporate mutual aid in local communities. Since the midterms are more local, it's going to be important for candidates to connect on a deeper level than town halls and facebook posts. They are going to need to wade in like folks in Minnesota have done. Bad shit is happening everywhere - there's just so much of it that only the huge chaos is making the news. We will have to do an everything, everywhere, all at once approach and get some help to people in desperate need.
“Most Democrats view messaging as a binary choice: You either run on issue A or issue B. You have to pick one, and to be honest, much of our party has been paralyzed by that choice for a long time.”
You hit the nail on the head here.
Until Dems understand that they need to tie the corruption, cruelty, cover ups and the general republican platform to making the rich richer (Epstein class) and screwing everyone else (the ‘affordability crisis’) they’re going to continue to come up short in elections.
They also need to stop pandering to republicans in hopes of looking bipartisan as, you mentioned, republicans will likely come home even if it means voting for a corrupt sex predator felon. They need to work to bring back dem & independents voters, but also the millions of non voters. Hammer home that the GOP only cares about the Epstein class and that dem policies will help a large majority or the country.
Dan, this framing seems inevitable, but there's something that needs to be said before Democrats try to own this issue: the Epstein files were sitting there during the Biden years and nobody touched them. Voters are going to notice that. The cover-up story doesn't begin with Trump — most people are going to trace it back to the night Epstein died and ask why, through democrat and republican administrations, nobody ever actually opened the door. That's not a right-wing talking point, it's just the timeline.
And that's before you get to the Biden health situation. Voters already believe that Democrats covered up Biden's capacity to govern. Voters aren't going to draw a clean line between the Epstein Class and the people who covered for Biden. In their minds those circles are going to overlap pretty significantly.
I think this is going to be the political message of our time but it's only going to work for Democrats if it comes from those who genuinely weren't in the room for any of this. Its going accelerate a changing of the guard to younger and reform focused set of leaders or its going pass the Democratic Party by.
Epstein was prosecuted in 2019. Maxwell was convicted in 2021. Courts seal grand jury and victim materials by law.
If someone claims there was a cover-up, they should point to specific evidence of obstruction—not just the absence of new public documents.
The current Epstein File storm is about the release of the files (an incredibly rare occurrence for any crime). This is a self-inflicted wound as MAGA and their enabler’s vociferously demanded the release of the files. Then when they were in a position to do so, started acting like they were cagily covering things up.
That's a fine legal sounding argument but I think it misses the perception point.
A talented communicator could make the distinction. No one ignored the Epstein files. When a defendant dies before a verdict, the case is closed and the presumption of innocence remains.
The current storm comes from the demand to release the files (this is exceedingly rare), wholly brought about by MAGA and other right wingers when they were out of power, combined with their ham-fisted behavior afterwards.
Not sure that “what about-ism” works for MAGA as a credible defense.
Chiming in with a very basic problem: Dems are not a working class party, working class voices are pretty marginal in party councils. Dems are not a professional class party, though the professional classes are an essential part of the Dem coalition. Dems want to raise money from The Epstein Class. Ask Nancy Pelosi. Ask the Clinton Global Initiative. We have a long history of taking donations from pretty much anybody. They rode on the plane even if they didn't get the massages.
Right now the Trumpistas are in the cross hairs and it is good clean fun to fire off some rounds (metaphor only!). But to make this an effective issue the Dems would have to exile The Epstein Class from their councils and Epstein Class dollars from their campaign funds. I have seen no appetite for this.
Dan's framing really rings true. I remember Bryan Stevenson saying that our judicial system treats you better if you're rich and guilty than if you're poor and innocent. The Epstein abomination is that on steroids.
There is another framing that is less malleable into a campaign argument, but is also true: The Epstein class is a network built on carnal depravity and rapacious greed for money and power. We, in our neighborhoods and communities, and exemplified by the people of Minneapolis, have networks built on respect, equality, freedom, and simple human decency.
Their network is a protection racket; our networks are communities of mutual support. We have what the Epstein class never will, and they know it.
100% agree. Tying lack of affordability to the special treatment the Epstein class has long been afforded is a winning message because at its core it’s about fairness, which is a concept everyone intrinsically gets. But the Dems need an effective messenger to communicate this. The person who is currently in the best position to be that messenger is Chuck Schumer because of the power of the filibuster. But “let’s make a deal, any deal, because deals are intrinsically great even if they are one sided against my team” Chuck is incapable of carrying that message. Even now we hear him spouting nonsense about how the Republicans can be persuaded to make a reasonable deal regarding ICE. There is no reasonable deal on the table other than ICE must be made to conform with standard police force behavior, period. But Chuck will cede the moral high ground the Dems occupy on this issue as sure as the sun will rise in the morning. Without an effective messenger, no message, no matter how correct, will break through
I agree with much of what you say. But Schumer and Jeffries have found themselves suddenly forced into Chief Messenger roles because we are out of power in the presidency and Congress.
If leadership were being chosen from scratch, the ideal would be someone who combines procedural mastery, caucus management, strategic discipline, and media agility. That combination is rare. More often, parties balance those skills across multiple figures rather than concentrate them in one. But in those times when we control neither the House, the Senate, nor the Presidency we don’t have a natural focus.
I’m not defending Schumer or Jeffries. But while we’ve had several people in both jobs who were masterly at the legislative side of the job, I can’t really think of one who was an effective messenger. Certainly not Pelosi, who was perhaps the most effective Speaker in history, but never a polished messenger to the voters.
You’re correct that it’s asking too much of one person to be adept at all 4 of the skills you outline. Upon reflection, I think what irks me most about Schumer, and to a lesser extent Jeffries, is their refusal or inability to change strategy, to recognize that you don’t combat Trump and Trumpism with strategies that were used with George W for example. And you certainly don’t abandon a winning hand, namely the moral high ground on DHS/ICE/CBP, just because you think it’s irresponsible not to make a deal. Instead you continue to exert pressure, because you have the leverage to do so, until you get every condition for continued funding met.
I agree with you. Schumer seems to play poker with his cards facing outwards. Jeffries is a stiff. It remains to be seen if either can control their caucuses under pressure, as Pelosi did so well.
I’d say Schumer is a no in that regard and Jeffries is a yes for now if only because his caucus loathes Speaker Holy Mike with the power of a thousand suns
The Middle Class has long been the center of the American narrative. But the Working Class has always been the actual heart and soul of the country. Thanks to the Epstein Class, the Middle Class is quickly melding into the Working Class. Now all we have to do is get our collective clASSes in gear and take care of business.
Bumpersticker:
Trump is a Pro
at Quid Pro Quo
I hope Ossoff's speeches are a wakeup call for every Dem running for office. Epstein's crimes are horrible, but it worries me more that we're still living in the "greed is good" 80s. It's really not and I hope tying it to how greed hurts everyone not raking in the big bucks works.
Bravo!!!!!