If the Democrats take the house, nothing's going to get done because all they're going to do is impeach, investigate, impeach, investigate on and on and on. I want to see a pledge from Democrat potential leaders to investigate what need to be investigated, but also get the people's business done. Impeachment will be a waste of time because even the most optimistic predictions don't project a Senate margin that would get a conviction and removal from office.
Trump does not have to win any more elections. He only needs to control the vote count. Election interference has never hurt him, it has only served to help him.
i think we need to understand that political actions by Americans is to organize from the bottom community by community and city by city to reorganize the top. these organizations need to change radically.
Lauren, your opening - "It’s crystal clear that voters are fed up with Republican rule and ready to kick them to the curb." ... is sadly only half the electoral proposition.
Because we're Democrats. AKA - if there's some way to trip ourselves up, you can be sure we'll find it. ... As in the example of Schumer's machinations in Maine. About which he seems to be defiantly more myopic and stubborn every day.
The Democratic Party’s penchant for ideological purity and chasing rainbows is the reason that I have been a registered independent my entire life (1970 ff.) I don’t vote for Republicans but I am sick of Republicans being elected by hanging culture wars around liberal necks. Nobody would call me a progressive and nobody would call me a right winger. But if you look at my agenda, which I believe is shared by many in the middle, it looks pretty progressive.
Here’s my agenda: BE PRAGMATIC! Fix the tax structure, improve healthcare funding up to and including single payer, lift the cap on Medicare taxes, stop lowballing Social Security COLAs, eliminate student loan debt, free college and med school (so we can graduate doctors who can afford to go into primary care and practice in rural areas), maintain a strong defense against China and rebuild NATO, don’t start stupid wars, start working on ways to find decent jobs for people and see what you can do about housing. In fact, pick just one of those and get it done. Voters are sick to death of political shows, and not just the Trump version. It’s how all politics is conducted today.
I’d be delighted to live in a European social welfare state but we can’t get there from here. It’s 50-100 years off (absent a complete economic and political catastrophe on the order of post-WWII Europe and Japan.).
And BTW, Stop giving Israel a free ride on human rights — it is not antisemitic to object to creeping annexation of the West Bank or the devastation of Gaza. I had great sympathy for Israel up until perhaps 1995-2000, but it is now a country for which policy is set by small political parties of religious zealots. I didn’t vote for them.
“Of those polled, 55% told Elon that they were dissatisfied with Trump’s performance as president. When asked a year earlier, 42% of North Carolinians polled were satisfied and 45% were dissatisfied.”
NOTE: That’s a 10 point swing in a year. Ted Budd won his Senate seat by 3% in 2022. Cooper should crush it.
“As for congressional approval, 58% believe Trump should have sought permission before launching the Iran war and attacking Venezuela.”
“When it came to tariffs, 53% said they were impacted negatively, which is up from the 46% who felt that way in September. Only 12% thought tariffs had a positive effect.”
“Fifty-five percent of those polled said the national economy has gotten worse since Trump took office. Another 25% thought the economy stayed the same, while 20% thought it had improved.”
TRANSLATION: 25% think Trump is as bad on the economy as Biden-Harris and 55% think he’s worse in a southern state Trump carried by 3%.
Implication: As in TX, Republicans weakened their majorities in other districts to move Dems out of Don Davis in NC-1. Not only is Davis looking better with every penny added to gas and fertilizer prices, other off the radar seats may have been put in play.
In the Carolina Journal poll, Dems lead in generic Congressional ballot:
“When asked whether they plan to vote for a Democratic candidate or a Republican candidate in US congressional races, Democrats (48.3%) came out 4.5 points ahead of Republicans (43.8%).”
"Or he could get a bump in approval should he bring a quicker end to the war."
Or the Iranian regime could collapse, letting Trump brag about how he brought down a threat that would still be present if the Democrats had their way.
Or he could invade and topple them from inside. If done properly (and who really thinks this regime capable of that?) the late stage Iraq occupation issues might not surface until after the midterms. A lot of things are possible in this weird war.
Most likely mode of collapsea would be a domestic uprising with the suppression being inhibited by American and Israeli intervention.
It is unfortunate that such a task is being left in the hands of an absolute imbecile. If his talk, instead of focusing on the infrastructure that he would destroy absent reopening the Strait of Hormuz, which is a war crime, would turn to how the Iranian people will come for after their regime, aided by Israel eliminating hundreds of Basijis, he could boost the chances of such an uprising. However, he's too self-centered to consider such a tack.
We couldn't be in worse hands in this situation. The entire cabal is incompetent and just the worst, most inexperienced people. In war, experience matters more than just about anything.
That said, I disagree that targeting bridges and power plants is a war crime. In WWII (and in most wars) both sides targeted power and infrastructure targets. It's one way you suppress enemy morale and win wars.
My problem in this case is not with the moral implications, but with the fact that it probably makes it even less likely the evil mullahs capitulate. They aren't motivated the same way as Euro-centric westerners. Also, they have nowhere to go when defeated, so they have nothing to lose by fighting to the death.
The sad fact is that to end this war, and this regime's threat to the world, these cretons are probably going to have to be bought-off. As disgusting as that is to the sensibilities, it's not unprecedented in history. It's been done in the middle east before, in Asia, by the Romans, and by the Saxons with the Vikings. Pay them enough that they can't afford to cross us in the future. Their "religious conviction" is a fraud anyway, so I'm sure they are for sale for the right price. Maybe Obama had the right idea afterall?
First, attacks on civilian infrastructure were declared to be war crimes after the experience of WWII. Second, attacking the civilian population did not break its morale, it hardened it on all sides. I reject any claim that deliberate firebombing of German or Japanese cities such as Dresden or Tokyo is morally justifiable.
I don’t care how you label it, deliberately targeting non-combatants (directly or indirectly) is immoral, against our national interest and flat out unacceptable.
I suppose anything is possible. If the Market crashes like in 2008, and layoffs start in earnest, I could see a world where Democrats pick-up 30-40 seats in the House, and win the Senate. Otherwise, I see a solid, if unspectacular Dem majority in the House, the GOP hanging on in the Senate. You can't trust these polls, not because they are inaccurate snapshots in time, but because the voters who matter aren't really paying attention, yet. Unlike presidential races, which start almost two years before they occur, these midterms are amorphous to most voters until around mid-summer or later.
As bad as Trump is, and as unpopular as this war is right now, if the election was held tomorrow, I'd suspect the GOP comes out no worse than net-2 loss (Maine and NC). I think Ohio is fool's gold for Dems (it's not that they like the GOP, it's that they don't see Dems as a viable alternative), and with time, I can see the GOP money machine slowly degrading Mary Petula in Alaska, until she cannot win. Dems don't have a strong candidate in Iowa, and Texas, like Florida, is a firewall for the GOP, even in a bad election year - see 2018.
All this also presupposes that the Dems hold in Georgia and NH. The GOP has a strong candidate in NH (and NH has recently elected a GOP governor), and Georgia is still a pink-red state. Lose either of those, and there is no chance at a majority. Will black voters turnout in sufficient numbers to save Ossoff in a midterm? Maybe. Maybe not. It's also possible Trump ends this Iran madness and the Market surges back up to 50,000 throughout the summer, which would cause Fox and the MSM to declare the economy A-OK.
So, keep snorting the hopium. I'll get serious about this in about 4-5 months.
Unfortunately, I don't do drugs, especially not hopium. I remember the red wave of 2022. The polls at this time that year looked far worse for Dems than these polls look for Republicans. Then we got supply chain chaos and 9% inflation that summer, and no real ground-shifting reaction to Dobbs. Biden went into those midterms around 39% approval. We expected Dems to be massacred.
But, they weren't. I'm not saying this won't be a bad GOP year - I expect it to be. But, I am starting to believe that we are just too polarized as an electorate to have a 1994, 2006, 2010 wave election again. There just aren't that many persuadable voters.
Trump filled an inside straight in 2016. Then there was a shift, and Biden won close, but by a slightly bigger margin in 2020. In 2024, there was another small shift, and Trump won every swing state, but he won them all within the MOE. I think this is what we're looking at for at least the near future. The polarization has made huge shifts almost impossible. But,...we'll see, I guess.
Also, Sue Collins is not dead yet. Dems are going to nominate Platner, and he is a treasure trove of Oppo-research and campaign fodder. He's also an inexperienced asshat, who is vulnerable to making a big mistake. Sue just might make mincemeat out of him in the GE campaign with the somewhat risk-averse Maine electorate.
She is a very effective campaigner, and she has gobs and gobs of cash and decades of goodwill in Maine. It's an uphill battle for her in a blue state in this anti-Trump environment, but she is close enough in the polls to suggest she has a chance - and given a chance, candidates like her often find a way to win.
America has shown the world just how bad democracy can be. Ok for a small country that can’t mess up the whole world, but a global power needs a steady hand not subject to whims of the mob.
Ron - I won't disagree with you. Two generations of my family spent their working lives in public schools & higher ed. I extend your view well beyond classrooms and education institutions.
Over my 7 decades I observe slippage in passing on what we in olden times called 'civic virtues' if not just plain 'virtues.' Honesty, fairness, equality, doing right by one's neighbors, duty & obligation that comes with living in a free society - we all have something to contribute to that, within our gifts & abilities. I was there for "if it feels good do it" (and man, did I... probably too much). I saw "greed is good" grow in popularity. Churches & bowling leagues shrink. Front porches abandoned for patios. Screens replace f-2-f. Our evolution seems more toward entropy
"In the past, this information has been suppressed... Oh Dad, we're ALL Devo!"
Idk, I kind of look at the fundraising and campaign spending in 2026 a bit like the US / Russian military versus Iranian / Ukrainian drones right now. Basically - between podcasts, social media, streaming, and actual on the ground organizing, you can do a lot with less money. To make an analogy, the Republicans have the patriot missiles that cost $1-2M a pop, but the democrats could pivot into Shaheed Drones and overwhelm those systems.
TV Ads are expensive, and yet, almost all of us tune TV ads out. And fewer and fewer of us are watching TV. That means the ROI has been decreasing on ad spends for a long time. At the same time, there's more and more guerrilla tactics that can do a lot of damage on a budget.
We also know that some of the Republican fundraising advantage is because of our current state of authoritarian capture, oligarchy, and kleptocracy. There really isn't the equivalent Democratic megadonors who can go dollar-for-dollar with the Elon Musk's of the world. Especially when we see all of the world's richest men have kissed Trump's ring.
So:
(1) Dems can win without a fundraising advantage because there are new tools or weapons that better fit the current media age, and these are cheap and/or free. Things like podcasting, streaming, short form vertical video, and on the ground, organizing should take precedence over TV ads. Take a note from the suburban moms of Minneapolis who built extremely effective mutual aid networks on a literal shoestring budget. Dems should try to build that. Then turn it out in November.
(2) Dems will need to win without a fundraising advantage because we live under conditions of oligarchy, and our oligarchs are aligned with the Republican Party.
Kotzsu - ya know I'm gonna like your hopium-tinged 2 points... but I'm gonna worry if #1 overestimates Dems ability to reach lo-info/lo-involvement voters and so-called independents. The online tools are so much better developed by the MAGA & right-wing & vibes bro operators, exploited as those are by both oligarchs & malign foreign adversaries behind the curtain.
You're right about the beautiful self-organizing in Minneapolis - power to the people! People got the power! My kvetch is that those many, many individuals likely felt some personal motivation to act. So many of our fellow potential voters are complacent and/or dispirited. Unless they see ICE kicking down their beloved neighbor's door or shooting an innocent neightbor (NOT the motivator we want repeated!!), I don't know how we get them off their couches. Ideas welcome! That's one reason I read comments here 🩵
The Demopublican strategy of too little and too late still delivering even with massive assistance from the current administration currently engaged in a failing war with Iran in order to prop up Netanyahu and divert attention from what is actually in the Epstein Files. All while Project 2025 nears full implementation. Let us instead hope that "No Kings" does not turn into "No Voters".
The Dems are maddening. They are in the most favorable political climate for them in my lifetime, running against an odious and profoundly un-American foe, and they are just positively giddy about the prospect of winning as many as 52 Senate seats! Wow!
They should be setting their target at 75 Senate seats. Or 90. That is doable, but they need to kill some of their darlings...
I probably overstated the case. It's "doable" in the sense that it's theoretically feasible to concoct a platform that would assemble that kind of majority.
It is not doable on a 2026- or even 2028- timeframe. And it's certainly not doable with this Democratic party. I have my doubts that they can even win a majority in the Senate.
My point, though, is that it's not even their *ambition*.
Probably? It's never been "doable" in the 250 years of the Republic. Sure it's "theoretically feasible" since there are 100 seats. It's theoretically feasible for your favorite baseball team to go 162-0.
When the Dems were the Southern racist party (which the Republicans have become) before passing the Civil Rights Acts in '64, they had 60+ senators.
The country is divided about 50/50 with MAGA white and "Christian" nationalists, anti-vaccers, a majority of bllionaires and their money, and Fox News controlling the Republican party. A thin sliver of that 50/50 is genuinely independent. Another thin sliver can be swayed by economic distress, overwhelming corruption, the phases of the moon, or what have you. Because each state gets two senators, Senate elections are highly skewed in favor of smaller Red States. Hopefully--Trump will alienate enough independents and a sliver of his base to give the Democrats the Senate.
There is no such thing as a "Democratic platform" for the mid-terms. There are good Democratic candidates who, if they're smart, will hammer affordability, healthcare, and stupid wars. And not preach to the choir about MAGA. Let Trump and his cult keep digging their own hole deeper.
Meanwhile, stop whining about "this Democratic party". Focus on candidates who can win and support them.
B. People have to stop whining about Schumer and Jeffries. Especially if Dems win the Senate, I agree that a Chris Murphy or an Adam Schiff or whoever should become the Majority Leader. But minority leaders in the House and Senate are limited. Jeffries has done a great job and is getting credit for it. Schumer has managed his caucus well. Neither is a good public face of the Democratic Party--although Jeffries has the potential. Pelosi was such a face--but her accomplishments in the minority were comparable to Jeffries'. And the Republicans demagogued her. Schumer/Jeffries are not the issue. Trump/MAGA/White Xian Nationalism/virulent anti-intellectualism--those are the issues. Trump has done more for us in the last year+ than Jesus Christ could have done as the face of the party.
And FWIW: This take --"...the arrogance, condescension, and complacency of institutional Democrats that lost the 2016 and 2024 elections, alienated 75% of this country, and created the out of touch gerontocracy we have today."--is as counter-factual as MAGA. The country is basically split 50/50--not 75/25. Trump won with 48%+/- in '16, 50%+/- in'24. The problem is the electoral college (plus the Civll Rights Acts of '64--which we should all be proud of). And we have a ton of up and coming young, committed, articulate Democrats--the old guys are retiring.
Good article. Good info. If any Dem 'operatives' and 'strategists' are indeed huffing hopium, they need to keep it to themselves. The last thing we need is the arrogance, condescension, and complacency of institutional Democrats that lost the 2016 and 2024 elections, alienated 75% of this country, and created the out of touch gerontocracy we have today.
If the Democrats take the house, nothing's going to get done because all they're going to do is impeach, investigate, impeach, investigate on and on and on. I want to see a pledge from Democrat potential leaders to investigate what need to be investigated, but also get the people's business done. Impeachment will be a waste of time because even the most optimistic predictions don't project a Senate margin that would get a conviction and removal from office.
Trump does not have to win any more elections. He only needs to control the vote count. Election interference has never hurt him, it has only served to help him.
i think we need to understand that political actions by Americans is to organize from the bottom community by community and city by city to reorganize the top. these organizations need to change radically.
Lauren, your opening - "It’s crystal clear that voters are fed up with Republican rule and ready to kick them to the curb." ... is sadly only half the electoral proposition.
Because we're Democrats. AKA - if there's some way to trip ourselves up, you can be sure we'll find it. ... As in the example of Schumer's machinations in Maine. About which he seems to be defiantly more myopic and stubborn every day.
The Democratic Party’s penchant for ideological purity and chasing rainbows is the reason that I have been a registered independent my entire life (1970 ff.) I don’t vote for Republicans but I am sick of Republicans being elected by hanging culture wars around liberal necks. Nobody would call me a progressive and nobody would call me a right winger. But if you look at my agenda, which I believe is shared by many in the middle, it looks pretty progressive.
Here’s my agenda: BE PRAGMATIC! Fix the tax structure, improve healthcare funding up to and including single payer, lift the cap on Medicare taxes, stop lowballing Social Security COLAs, eliminate student loan debt, free college and med school (so we can graduate doctors who can afford to go into primary care and practice in rural areas), maintain a strong defense against China and rebuild NATO, don’t start stupid wars, start working on ways to find decent jobs for people and see what you can do about housing. In fact, pick just one of those and get it done. Voters are sick to death of political shows, and not just the Trump version. It’s how all politics is conducted today.
I’d be delighted to live in a European social welfare state but we can’t get there from here. It’s 50-100 years off (absent a complete economic and political catastrophe on the order of post-WWII Europe and Japan.).
And BTW, Stop giving Israel a free ride on human rights — it is not antisemitic to object to creeping annexation of the West Bank or the devastation of Gaza. I had great sympathy for Israel up until perhaps 1995-2000, but it is now a country for which policy is set by small political parties of religious zealots. I didn’t vote for them.
Raleigh News & Observer on Elon University poll:
“Of those polled, 55% told Elon that they were dissatisfied with Trump’s performance as president. When asked a year earlier, 42% of North Carolinians polled were satisfied and 45% were dissatisfied.”
NOTE: That’s a 10 point swing in a year. Ted Budd won his Senate seat by 3% in 2022. Cooper should crush it.
“As for congressional approval, 58% believe Trump should have sought permission before launching the Iran war and attacking Venezuela.”
“When it came to tariffs, 53% said they were impacted negatively, which is up from the 46% who felt that way in September. Only 12% thought tariffs had a positive effect.”
“Fifty-five percent of those polled said the national economy has gotten worse since Trump took office. Another 25% thought the economy stayed the same, while 20% thought it had improved.”
TRANSLATION: 25% think Trump is as bad on the economy as Biden-Harris and 55% think he’s worse in a southern state Trump carried by 3%.
https://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/politics-columns-blogs/under-the-dome/article315280697.html
Implication: As in TX, Republicans weakened their majorities in other districts to move Dems out of Don Davis in NC-1. Not only is Davis looking better with every penny added to gas and fertilizer prices, other off the radar seats may have been put in play.
In the Carolina Journal poll, Dems lead in generic Congressional ballot:
“When asked whether they plan to vote for a Democratic candidate or a Republican candidate in US congressional races, Democrats (48.3%) came out 4.5 points ahead of Republicans (43.8%).”
https://www.carolinajournal.com/polls/march-2026-roy-cooper-leads-michael-whatley-in-senate-race-by-nearly-8-points/
"Or he could get a bump in approval should he bring a quicker end to the war."
Or the Iranian regime could collapse, letting Trump brag about how he brought down a threat that would still be present if the Democrats had their way.
Or he could invade and topple them from inside. If done properly (and who really thinks this regime capable of that?) the late stage Iraq occupation issues might not surface until after the midterms. A lot of things are possible in this weird war.
Most likely mode of collapsea would be a domestic uprising with the suppression being inhibited by American and Israeli intervention.
It is unfortunate that such a task is being left in the hands of an absolute imbecile. If his talk, instead of focusing on the infrastructure that he would destroy absent reopening the Strait of Hormuz, which is a war crime, would turn to how the Iranian people will come for after their regime, aided by Israel eliminating hundreds of Basijis, he could boost the chances of such an uprising. However, he's too self-centered to consider such a tack.
We couldn't be in worse hands in this situation. The entire cabal is incompetent and just the worst, most inexperienced people. In war, experience matters more than just about anything.
That said, I disagree that targeting bridges and power plants is a war crime. In WWII (and in most wars) both sides targeted power and infrastructure targets. It's one way you suppress enemy morale and win wars.
My problem in this case is not with the moral implications, but with the fact that it probably makes it even less likely the evil mullahs capitulate. They aren't motivated the same way as Euro-centric westerners. Also, they have nowhere to go when defeated, so they have nothing to lose by fighting to the death.
The sad fact is that to end this war, and this regime's threat to the world, these cretons are probably going to have to be bought-off. As disgusting as that is to the sensibilities, it's not unprecedented in history. It's been done in the middle east before, in Asia, by the Romans, and by the Saxons with the Vikings. Pay them enough that they can't afford to cross us in the future. Their "religious conviction" is a fraud anyway, so I'm sure they are for sale for the right price. Maybe Obama had the right idea afterall?
First, attacks on civilian infrastructure were declared to be war crimes after the experience of WWII. Second, attacking the civilian population did not break its morale, it hardened it on all sides. I reject any claim that deliberate firebombing of German or Japanese cities such as Dresden or Tokyo is morally justifiable.
I don’t care how you label it, deliberately targeting non-combatants (directly or indirectly) is immoral, against our national interest and flat out unacceptable.
Yeah, well, war is hell. My only beef with his strategy is that I don’t think it will work.
I suppose anything is possible. If the Market crashes like in 2008, and layoffs start in earnest, I could see a world where Democrats pick-up 30-40 seats in the House, and win the Senate. Otherwise, I see a solid, if unspectacular Dem majority in the House, the GOP hanging on in the Senate. You can't trust these polls, not because they are inaccurate snapshots in time, but because the voters who matter aren't really paying attention, yet. Unlike presidential races, which start almost two years before they occur, these midterms are amorphous to most voters until around mid-summer or later.
As bad as Trump is, and as unpopular as this war is right now, if the election was held tomorrow, I'd suspect the GOP comes out no worse than net-2 loss (Maine and NC). I think Ohio is fool's gold for Dems (it's not that they like the GOP, it's that they don't see Dems as a viable alternative), and with time, I can see the GOP money machine slowly degrading Mary Petula in Alaska, until she cannot win. Dems don't have a strong candidate in Iowa, and Texas, like Florida, is a firewall for the GOP, even in a bad election year - see 2018.
All this also presupposes that the Dems hold in Georgia and NH. The GOP has a strong candidate in NH (and NH has recently elected a GOP governor), and Georgia is still a pink-red state. Lose either of those, and there is no chance at a majority. Will black voters turnout in sufficient numbers to save Ossoff in a midterm? Maybe. Maybe not. It's also possible Trump ends this Iran madness and the Market surges back up to 50,000 throughout the summer, which would cause Fox and the MSM to declare the economy A-OK.
So, keep snorting the hopium. I'll get serious about this in about 4-5 months.
RBR - This hard truth is no fun. Couldn't you please just lie to me a LITTLE? 😉
Unfortunately, I don't do drugs, especially not hopium. I remember the red wave of 2022. The polls at this time that year looked far worse for Dems than these polls look for Republicans. Then we got supply chain chaos and 9% inflation that summer, and no real ground-shifting reaction to Dobbs. Biden went into those midterms around 39% approval. We expected Dems to be massacred.
But, they weren't. I'm not saying this won't be a bad GOP year - I expect it to be. But, I am starting to believe that we are just too polarized as an electorate to have a 1994, 2006, 2010 wave election again. There just aren't that many persuadable voters.
Trump filled an inside straight in 2016. Then there was a shift, and Biden won close, but by a slightly bigger margin in 2020. In 2024, there was another small shift, and Trump won every swing state, but he won them all within the MOE. I think this is what we're looking at for at least the near future. The polarization has made huge shifts almost impossible. But,...we'll see, I guess.
Also, Sue Collins is not dead yet. Dems are going to nominate Platner, and he is a treasure trove of Oppo-research and campaign fodder. He's also an inexperienced asshat, who is vulnerable to making a big mistake. Sue just might make mincemeat out of him in the GE campaign with the somewhat risk-averse Maine electorate.
She is a very effective campaigner, and she has gobs and gobs of cash and decades of goodwill in Maine. It's an uphill battle for her in a blue state in this anti-Trump environment, but she is close enough in the polls to suggest she has a chance - and given a chance, candidates like her often find a way to win.
America has shown the world just how bad democracy can be. Ok for a small country that can’t mess up the whole world, but a global power needs a steady hand not subject to whims of the mob.
Agree. This is the first time this has ever happened,...and hopefully the last.
So, what’s your alternative? I’ll still take democracy over any form of authoritarianism.
Robust, effective, well-funded public education. Nation-wide. But it’s either too late for that or at least unobtainable in our lifetimes.
Ron - I won't disagree with you. Two generations of my family spent their working lives in public schools & higher ed. I extend your view well beyond classrooms and education institutions.
Over my 7 decades I observe slippage in passing on what we in olden times called 'civic virtues' if not just plain 'virtues.' Honesty, fairness, equality, doing right by one's neighbors, duty & obligation that comes with living in a free society - we all have something to contribute to that, within our gifts & abilities. I was there for "if it feels good do it" (and man, did I... probably too much). I saw "greed is good" grow in popularity. Churches & bowling leagues shrink. Front porches abandoned for patios. Screens replace f-2-f. Our evolution seems more toward entropy
"In the past, this information has been suppressed... Oh Dad, we're ALL Devo!"
Idk, I kind of look at the fundraising and campaign spending in 2026 a bit like the US / Russian military versus Iranian / Ukrainian drones right now. Basically - between podcasts, social media, streaming, and actual on the ground organizing, you can do a lot with less money. To make an analogy, the Republicans have the patriot missiles that cost $1-2M a pop, but the democrats could pivot into Shaheed Drones and overwhelm those systems.
TV Ads are expensive, and yet, almost all of us tune TV ads out. And fewer and fewer of us are watching TV. That means the ROI has been decreasing on ad spends for a long time. At the same time, there's more and more guerrilla tactics that can do a lot of damage on a budget.
We also know that some of the Republican fundraising advantage is because of our current state of authoritarian capture, oligarchy, and kleptocracy. There really isn't the equivalent Democratic megadonors who can go dollar-for-dollar with the Elon Musk's of the world. Especially when we see all of the world's richest men have kissed Trump's ring.
So:
(1) Dems can win without a fundraising advantage because there are new tools or weapons that better fit the current media age, and these are cheap and/or free. Things like podcasting, streaming, short form vertical video, and on the ground, organizing should take precedence over TV ads. Take a note from the suburban moms of Minneapolis who built extremely effective mutual aid networks on a literal shoestring budget. Dems should try to build that. Then turn it out in November.
(2) Dems will need to win without a fundraising advantage because we live under conditions of oligarchy, and our oligarchs are aligned with the Republican Party.
Kotzsu - ya know I'm gonna like your hopium-tinged 2 points... but I'm gonna worry if #1 overestimates Dems ability to reach lo-info/lo-involvement voters and so-called independents. The online tools are so much better developed by the MAGA & right-wing & vibes bro operators, exploited as those are by both oligarchs & malign foreign adversaries behind the curtain.
You're right about the beautiful self-organizing in Minneapolis - power to the people! People got the power! My kvetch is that those many, many individuals likely felt some personal motivation to act. So many of our fellow potential voters are complacent and/or dispirited. Unless they see ICE kicking down their beloved neighbor's door or shooting an innocent neightbor (NOT the motivator we want repeated!!), I don't know how we get them off their couches. Ideas welcome! That's one reason I read comments here 🩵
The Demopublican strategy of too little and too late still delivering even with massive assistance from the current administration currently engaged in a failing war with Iran in order to prop up Netanyahu and divert attention from what is actually in the Epstein Files. All while Project 2025 nears full implementation. Let us instead hope that "No Kings" does not turn into "No Voters".
Thanks for the Hopium. As a certified bedwetter, I'll see it when I believe it. But I just gave to my favs on ActBlue to help things along.
The Dems are maddening. They are in the most favorable political climate for them in my lifetime, running against an odious and profoundly un-American foe, and they are just positively giddy about the prospect of winning as many as 52 Senate seats! Wow!
They should be setting their target at 75 Senate seats. Or 90. That is doable, but they need to kill some of their darlings...
It’s not mid-20th century America any more. American voters are uneducated and bigoted.
If you think winning 75 or 90 Senate seats (for either party) "is doable" you are on opium, not hopium.
I probably overstated the case. It's "doable" in the sense that it's theoretically feasible to concoct a platform that would assemble that kind of majority.
It is not doable on a 2026- or even 2028- timeframe. And it's certainly not doable with this Democratic party. I have my doubts that they can even win a majority in the Senate.
My point, though, is that it's not even their *ambition*.
Probably? It's never been "doable" in the 250 years of the Republic. Sure it's "theoretically feasible" since there are 100 seats. It's theoretically feasible for your favorite baseball team to go 162-0.
When the Dems were the Southern racist party (which the Republicans have become) before passing the Civil Rights Acts in '64, they had 60+ senators.
The country is divided about 50/50 with MAGA white and "Christian" nationalists, anti-vaccers, a majority of bllionaires and their money, and Fox News controlling the Republican party. A thin sliver of that 50/50 is genuinely independent. Another thin sliver can be swayed by economic distress, overwhelming corruption, the phases of the moon, or what have you. Because each state gets two senators, Senate elections are highly skewed in favor of smaller Red States. Hopefully--Trump will alienate enough independents and a sliver of his base to give the Democrats the Senate.
There is no such thing as a "Democratic platform" for the mid-terms. There are good Democratic candidates who, if they're smart, will hammer affordability, healthcare, and stupid wars. And not preach to the choir about MAGA. Let Trump and his cult keep digging their own hole deeper.
Meanwhile, stop whining about "this Democratic party". Focus on candidates who can win and support them.
SUCK IT Lauren Egan & your smug and perpetual "Dems in Disarray/ Hopium" defeatism.
Very thoughtful, Sam. Kill the messenger.
I’m with Sam! This messenger can suck it. Her slant is always slanted.
A. More terrific Bulwark reporting/analysis.
B. People have to stop whining about Schumer and Jeffries. Especially if Dems win the Senate, I agree that a Chris Murphy or an Adam Schiff or whoever should become the Majority Leader. But minority leaders in the House and Senate are limited. Jeffries has done a great job and is getting credit for it. Schumer has managed his caucus well. Neither is a good public face of the Democratic Party--although Jeffries has the potential. Pelosi was such a face--but her accomplishments in the minority were comparable to Jeffries'. And the Republicans demagogued her. Schumer/Jeffries are not the issue. Trump/MAGA/White Xian Nationalism/virulent anti-intellectualism--those are the issues. Trump has done more for us in the last year+ than Jesus Christ could have done as the face of the party.
And FWIW: This take --"...the arrogance, condescension, and complacency of institutional Democrats that lost the 2016 and 2024 elections, alienated 75% of this country, and created the out of touch gerontocracy we have today."--is as counter-factual as MAGA. The country is basically split 50/50--not 75/25. Trump won with 48%+/- in '16, 50%+/- in'24. The problem is the electoral college (plus the Civll Rights Acts of '64--which we should all be proud of). And we have a ton of up and coming young, committed, articulate Democrats--the old guys are retiring.
Good article. Good info. If any Dem 'operatives' and 'strategists' are indeed huffing hopium, they need to keep it to themselves. The last thing we need is the arrogance, condescension, and complacency of institutional Democrats that lost the 2016 and 2024 elections, alienated 75% of this country, and created the out of touch gerontocracy we have today.