Stories like Teachout's are reminders that elections are shaped by the political environment of the moment. Anti-establishment progressives say Dems lost in Obama years because they didn't focus on ideas. But if that's true, why did Teachout lose by 9 points in 2016?https://twitter.com/ryangrim/status/986263191402549248 …
-
It basically evened out when you factor in that she got a better rate as a candidate. My point is that if candidates who have lost before are somehow tainted and never should run again, then shouldn't Teaachout be discounted and cast aside?
Discounted, definitely. Cast aside is case by case. (The counter-argument is that the the top of the ticket sets the tone around ideas. It is hard for a House challenger to break thru past a presidential candidate.)
-
-
Very true. Which is why the progressive argument against some of the 2016 candidates that lost and are running again is also in bad faith.
-
Unless they ran on the exact same messaging that failed at the top of the ticket, then it's good faith
-
Performance relative to the top of the ticket matters too, of course.
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.