Discussion about this post

User's avatar
W. Michael Johnson's avatar

Thanks for presenting these analyses (good work) as newsletters rather than podcasts. I do not care to hear people talk. I like my disaster news quiet, and on my time.

Tom Levenson's avatar

A valuable look at the coverage. One point of disagreement--or at least difference in interpretation--though. On WaPo's piece re D identity, I found G. Elliott Morris's analysis (which I found via Brad DeLong) very helpful. (https://www.gelliottmorris.com/i/178051880/democrats-affordability-message-worked-regardless-of-nominee-ideology) At that link Morris argues that while Spanberger, Sherrill and Mamdani all ran from different ideological starting points, they had in common a clear and intense focus on affordability, with a shared diagnosis and responses/solutions shaped by their different electorates. Add the freedom theme (people really don't like the idea of masked thugs grabbing people out of homes and cars) and you have a shared starting point from which to build a range of D candidacies in different settings. The D brand may be down (Morris thinks so) but a D identity built around those pillars is not just a possibility; the results from yesterday show us that it's already taking shape.

80 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?