Okay, so... I see five lessons from last night as the smoke begins to clear. I'm still nervous about the state of the Democratic primary. But now I have EXCITING, NEW reasons to be nervous! (1/x)
-
Show this thread
-
First: it turns out 2020 looks a lot like 2004 after all. 2004 has always been the backdrop to this race. That was the last time Dems faced an incumbent Republican who we HATED. It creates the "electability" demand that everyone has fretted so much about. (2/x)
10 replies 45 retweets 330 likesShow this thread -
Electability is a bit of a paradox. We can't actually know which candidate is most electable. But, also, the thing that voters *genuinely care most about* is choosing a candidate who can beat Trump. They care more about that than policy specifics or personal traits. (3/x)
3 replies 26 retweets 253 likesShow this thread -
And that's a structural dynamic of the 2020 race, just like it was in 2004. We fight more about policy or personality in 2008 or 2016, when we have an open race and no singular opponent uniting us against a status quo government. They're more salient topics in those years. (4/x)
4 replies 14 retweets 176 likesShow this thread -
And yes, I know, John Kerry lost in 2004. Noting that 2020 feels like 2004 doesn't exactly inspire confidence. And like I said, I'm still *nervous.* But it is what it is. Dem voters acted last night like in 2004. They weren't duped by a billionaire or controlled by the media.
12 replies 23 retweets 255 likesShow this thread -
Dem voters were looking for a candidate who they believed could represent the party and beat Trump. They have become convinced (in only the past ~5 days) that Biden is that candidate. And they swarmed to him! Yikes! That escalated quickly. Let's pause to evaluate. (6/x)
5 replies 21 retweets 214 likesShow this thread -
Going into last night, the Sanders campaign had two paths to the nomination. There was a good path and a bad path. The bad path just evaporated. The good one is looking less likely. (7/x)
1 reply 9 retweets 120 likesShow this thread -
The bad path had Sanders winning a huge plurality of delegates without demonstrating the ability to win more than 30-40% of the vote in any primary. It was *very possible* that Sanders could have won 90% of California's delegates with, like 32% of the vote. (8/x)
1 reply 11 retweets 134 likesShow this thread -
That's a bad way to win. It's a recipe for party in-fighting. But it could easily have happened, simply b/c there were 7 viable candidates + a 15% threshold for earning delegates. That didn't happen. If he becomes the nominee, he'll do so by building a majority coalition. Good.
3 replies 10 retweets 186 likesShow this thread -
The trouble for Sanders is that his *good* path for the nomination also looks much rockier now. Sanders's candidacy is premised on transforming the electorate, bringing in a huge wave of new young and working class voters. That hasn't materialized yet. (10/x)
5 replies 19 retweets 201 likesShow this thread
And it's very unlikely ever to materialize.
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.