1. Again, this gets things upside down. As long as there are enough swing voters in purple or soft red districts, the kind of polarization we have in House districts makes triangulation more sensible politically, not less.https://twitter.com/HeerJeet/status/1152252330345193472 …
-
-
People vote (especially in midterm elections) because they have a strong belief about something. Logically speaking they would vote for other people with strong beliefs, not people always trying to split the difference
-
Then why did all these moderates who supposedly have no agenda win the Dem primaries and then the general election in their districts, while lefty candidates struggled outside of deep-blue districts?
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Well, that may be true. But Pelosi obviously thinks differently. And I’m not sure why I would trust Eric’s political judgment over hers.
-
Sure, but by that logic, we should all give up punditry! More seriously, it's quite possible that Pelosi's formation in the politics of Clinton-Bush-Obama era doesn't quite prepare her for what is needed against someone like Trump.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Also, a huge risk of Pelosi’s triangulation —which I call unprincipled cowardice—is that it dampens enthusiasm among the most active Dems. These dems still will vote but their activism will degenerate on voter turnout efforts etc. Pelosi’s calculation here is way off IMO
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Moderate Democrats intend to stick with their losing strategy until they've lost every political office except their own.
-
True—the 38 HOR seat swing and wipeout of Republicans in Orange County was brutal. Dems never learn.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.