The '12 campaign was an exercise in reassembling the Obama coalition: getting a bunch of voters who usually voted D and voted for Obama to vote for him again, despite a mediocre economy. The Shor task is now to *win* votes back.
-
Show this thread
-
According to data from Pew, Midwestern whites have gone from R+6 to R+14 by party ID from pre-12 campaign to post-20. Nationwide, whites without a degree have gone from R+12 to R+23 over the same period This is a formidable obstacle to achieving '12 results again.
6 replies 33 retweets 215 likesShow this thread -
2. Popularism does not seem to have any obvious options for *winning* votes back. It is mainly about *defusing* the issues that hurt Democrats. But if you buy my framing that Democrats need to *win* votes back, they need something powerful to lure back now GOP-leaning voters
12 replies 25 retweets 217 likesShow this thread -
For comparison, think about how Trump *won* these voters. He did not simply 'defuse' Obama' 12 issues. He did not simply raise issue salience. He totally reoriented the GOP toward winning wwc Dems, from trade, immigration, crime, race, China, guns, etchttps://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/30/upshot/how-trumps-campaign-could-redraw-voter-allegiances.html …
11 replies 28 retweets 176 likesShow this thread -
This was a huge reorientation from Romney to Trump. It was a deeply traumatic event for the GOP. And I think if Democrats want to undo the last 10 years, that they would probably need to think on that kind of scale--not just saying a few less unpopular things
6 replies 20 retweets 255 likesShow this thread -
3. You can't rerun '12 in '24. Most obviously, there are huge changes in the Republican Party--just discussed--that cannot be undone. There were two sides of the 2012 campaign, after all: Obama and Romney. You don't get to fight Romney '12 again.
7 replies 24 retweets 196 likesShow this thread -
Less obvious are vast changes on the Democratic side, as well. Obama didn't have to talk much about race in '12 because... it wasn't 2013 yet. Today, there's a large vocal progressive left. It can't simply be undone.
3 replies 12 retweets 164 likesShow this thread -
The shift to the left is driven by long-term changes like rising educational attainment and generational replacement. Dems are liberal now. There are new groups and ideas. They'll have to be placated. There may be tactical ways to do it, but making them go away isn't an option
5 replies 16 retweets 186 likesShow this thread -
It's worth noting that popularism doesn't actually argue for them to go away. It argues for a filter: subject progressive ideas to a poll-based test, and get rid of the least popular things they advocate. That may be an option for campaigns, but it's not for activists
6 replies 18 retweets 210 likesShow this thread -
I think it's totally reasonable to argue that campaigns shouldn't embrace ideas before they are popular. It is not realistic to argue that activists shouldn't advocate for ideas before they're popular.
20 replies 63 retweets 485 likesShow this thread
I actually don't even know what the mechanism for restraining activists would be. Dems are a loose coalition. They can't even control Manchin & Sinema, how can they control outside activists?
-
-
Replying to @HeerJeet @Nate_Cohn
We’re only a loose coalition because of structural disadvantage.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
If The senate was in any way truly representative Dems would have a significant majority and there would be much more room for outliers.
0 replies 1 retweet 1 like
End of conversation
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.