The New York Times today used the phrase "bitter, vitriolic midterm election season", and I want to say a word in defense of the Democratic candidates running in our congressional elections, who are unfairly maligned by this reflexive both-sidesism.
-
Show this thread
-
I've listened to a lot of stump speeches this year. I can recite a few verbatim. What you hear when you go into districts is candidates talking about health care, jobs, and campaign finance. Even those running against a toxic opponent do not have harsh words to say.
1 reply 5 retweets 33 likesShow this thread -
I don't know if they would put it this way, but Democrats in competitive races have identified drama and discord as powerful weapons for the right. Even those running against *indicted opponents* are keeping their cool. Only to get kneecapped by national figures like Joe Biden
1 reply 5 retweets 28 likesShow this thread -
The only time I heard Trump even *mentioned* in a House race was when Bernie Sanders visited a district and gave what amounted to a 2020 presidential stump speech. Otherwise candidates focus on the local effect of Trump's policies, not the national political melodrama
1 reply 3 retweets 23 likesShow this thread -
The distance between national coverage of the midterms—which is obsessed with whatever is going on in DC, trying to squeeze more data out of polls, and identifying key demographics—and the reality (health care, health care, health care) could not be more unsettling
1 reply 11 retweets 36 likesShow this thread
Democratic candidates in tough districts are not saints, but I believe they recognize that our hope of victory rests in turning out people who would not vote, or who would not otherwise vote for them, and bitterness and drama are poison to such voters. The vitriol is all in DC
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.