I am so sick of the whole comparison of the mayoral election to these gubernatorial races… It’s apples to oranges, and I find all the comparisons lazy and misleading
As for Sliwa being a spoiler… that just feels lazy to minimize Mamdani’s win. I it was clear that Cuomo was the one who got a republican boost just because NYC Republicans didn’t want Mamdani
John… your bias is shining through here. I have no problem with you having a bias (I am not on board with all of Mamdani’s policies either), but it feels like this segment was meant to present an argument/analysis based on facts, and it really felt more like your personal spin
Mamdani ran in the primary against a creep/failure of a governor, a crook/failure of a sitting mayor and some normal dems. He moved on to the general to run against the same clowns plus a goofball republican and I should find these folks less ridiculous than Earle-Sears? I just can't get there.
One way to settle whether Democratic Socialism or moderation is more popular is pairwise-rated voting. Using New Jersey as an example, Mike Sherrill and a Democratic Socialist could both run. All voters would rate both Sherrill and the Democratic Socialist, and we would count whether more voters rated Sherrill higher than the Democratic Socialist or vice versa. The result of that counts would provide what is needed to answer the question as to which is more supported by the public: simultaneously running both ideologies in the same election with all voters weighing in.
Dems... The great ones accomplished much that is now taken for granted. FDR, and LBJ were transformative. Were they middle of the road bores who said let's not stir things up? Sure, they both had flaws and made some terrible decisions, such as internment camps and the tragedy of Vietnam, but they changed America for the better in so many ways from Social Security to labor laws, to Medicare, to voting rights, to civil rights to saving democracy worldwide. They were not Chuck Schumer, bores who gave us a fascist trump twice, a GOP House, a GOP Senate, a corrupt, conservative SCOTUS and most state legislatures. America needs more boring, triangulating, squiahy, squeamish, and weak dems? Playing it safe gets you trump, maga, anti-democratic power brokers who feed the wealthy at the cost of making people poorer en masse? Dems need to fight for the people, not for the middle of nothing. More Bernie,less Schumer, more AOC, less Jeffries. I am tired of seeing America becoming a kleptocracy because dems don't want to offend anyone. As FDR noted, Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. 'They are unanimous in their hate for me—and I welcome their hatred.' More fight, less fright from bland dems, please!
As I mentioned, Schumer dems gave us trump twice, a GOP house, a GOP Senate, a corrupt conservative supreme court, and most state legislatures being republican. I am not sure I would call that an accomplishment. Schumer bowed to GOP in the first CR which accepted all of GOP and trump agenda items. Whatever Schumer accomplished during the Biden term has been upended by GOP. Renewable tax credits gones, infrastructure funds withheld, Ukrainian aid halted, ACA being undone. trump should have been in jail after j/6 but instead, because of inexcusable slowness of Justice Dept, trump goes free and becomes president! And dems have the most clumsy messaging of any political entity. The province of Ontario got under trump's thin skin with a Reagan tariff ad, but dems can't seem to do anything similar?
Nice to see dems standing strong for a change. It will only help their chances going forward. I actually heard Jeffries say, GOP is keeping the House in recess to protect pedophiles! Hooray! More of that attack style will go a long way towards regaining respect as a party. Did you know that 35% of respondents think favorably of GOP congress, but just 23% think positively of dems? I didn't create those number,s dems did by their weakness. Tomes change but dems don't. Republicans changed, for the worse, but retain political control. Dems need to change for the better and take power back. Bernie and AOC have been screaming into a void of corporate dems who like the status quo. But there are some dems who have a fighting spirit and know that the good old days of compromise are gone and that it is winner take all.
Dems are the only real democratic party in the country, so they need to be fighters from now on. Connect with the people, not with the corporate donor class.
AOC and Bernie being in the spotlight and lighting up social media is what keeps them relevant and household names. They know how to work the media landscape. Be there. Be loud. Be for the people. Be against the oligarchs. Tax the wealthy, feed the poor instead of feed the wealthy tax the poor.
Bernie from AI:
Key legislation authored by Bernie Sanders
Health care: The "Medicare for All" bill, which he has introduced multiple times, proposes a government-run, single-payer system with no out-of-pocket costs and includes coverage for dental, vision, and long-term care.
Health care workforce: He has sponsored legislation to expand and strengthen the healthcare workforce, including the Health Care Workforce Expansion Act of 2025 and the Head Start for America's Children Act.
Social Security: Sanders has sponsored the Social Security Expansion Act and the Keep Billionaires Out of Social Security Act.
Climate change: He has proposed legislation to address climate change, such as the Polluters Pay Climate Fund Act of 2025 and the Climate Emergency Act of 2021.
Taxes and economy: Legislation includes the Tax Excessive CEO Pay Act of 2025, the Corporate Tax Dodging Prevention Act, and the For the 99.5 Percent Act.
Other: He has sponsored bills on topics like reparations for African Americans and the admission of Washington, D.C., as a state.
We both want dems to win, so let's leave it at that. I just wish they had a better and more forceful approach. I have spent thousand$ supporting dems, and I prefer to support fighters with strength. Have a good evening..
IMO, Graham Platner will fail due to opposition research, even that coming from inside the dem house. Because- sorry- but that's the way it works nowadays. Janet Mills is old, but has an admirable record of accomplishment. However, she will be damaged by the same brute politics, as a failure to release her medical records. The most important thing to understand about about ZM in NYC is that in no way does he represent the kind of candidate who will- and must appeal- to the broad coalition of democratic voters, evaluating elections in many other contests, at both nationally and statewide. levels.
That's the thing we must not forget, however seductively brilliant this one winning NYC mayoral campaign. NYC is the greatest city on earth, yes. But it is NOT the only place on earth where elections must be won. Waged among all kinds of candidates, who must suit their own voter terrain. Far from NYC.
I'm looking forward to a new younger generation of Dems like say mamdami who have a deal to just about do anything to get us out of this straight into ground drive we're in...
A handful of comments/ observations come to mind. 1. Will Rogers said he was not a member of any organized political party he was a democrat. Another way of thinking about this is the saw that Democrats fall in love and Republicans fall in line. The last love affair was with Obama. Biden was a candidate of necessity. I will skip 2024 except to say that if anyone was naive enough to believe a black woman could win they should have bought a bridge. 2. The pragmatic approach would be to remember that all politics are local. Thus, crafting a campaign to your neighborhood would see to be the way to go. 3. Regarding Platner, I think there are two reasons he seems surviving and maybe thriving is that his response to the oppo research was to get on social media and say he was mad as hell and he wasn’t going to take it anymore. He also represents people’s desperate desire for something new. Mamdani and Cuomo have persuaded me to vote for Republican for first time since I reached my majority 45 years ago. Reasons being Cuomo’s record of sexual harassment and Mamdani’s antisemitism. I can’t abide either. Finally, a friend of mine, when we are talking about candidates used to ask who was waiting for that candidate. In the case of Rahm Emanuel its an emphatic NO.
Re Janet Mills. If you wish to run for office and decline to share your medical records, it's a no go.
While I do not believe there's a law that says candidates should share such info, nothing screams "I'm not fit for office" more than @ 77 declining to share their health profile. If you've got nothing to hide, then show it. Have we learned nothing from John Fetterman? In his case, it's not about age but indeed about serious mental and physical health issues.
This is a bit wearisome to me. All the pundits constantly talk about the bickering among the Democrats. It is really a question that is pushed by the inside the beltway crowd. I’ve nothing against inside the beltway but what I’m saying is the establishment seems more concerned.
Look running on issues sounds great. But haven’t candidates run on universal child care, raising the minimum wage, free and fair elections, jobs, building an economy for the future, union solidarity, paid family leave, climate change, addressing the border crisis, basic human rights, and on and on. What did the voters base their decisions on? The border, transgender hysteria, commies, fear and hatred. Most voters don’t really think through “issues”. They don’t vote with knowledge, they vote with reaction. Kamala Harris presented many issues. Solid ideas. No one gave a shit. She was a black woman and they preferred a madman. They chose chaos.
It doesn’t take a genius to see the myriad of flaws in Donald Trump. From grabbing pussy to stoking an insurrection. And everything in between. This piece blames the Democrats for not having a clear message. I blame voters for believing lies, allowing themselves to be manipulated. I blame voters because it seems we have a lot of closet racists, misogynists, and a plethora of white nationalists.
How do you present issues and policies that will be heard? Gavin Newsom, Jasmine Crockett, AOC, Bernie, Chris Murphy, and Beto. They are out there pushing against the lawlessness and corruption. In my opinion we need to run against billionaires. Even more than Republicans. Pound on it. Our election process is corrupted by the wealthy and corporations. Run against the corporate greed that exploits the workers while the stock holders get richer. Show how the wealthy billionaires are buying our government. Both parties.
I could go on. But I already have. Schumer and Jeffries are feckless. The DNC needs a makeover.
Cam Kasky got it right the other day when he characterized the Bulwark comments section as “Bulwark Reddit.” I know the big cheeses here have really sought to avoid that. But things are devolving …
Back to substance: Each race is different, and a candidate for mayor of NYC says little about what sort of candidate (and platform) is appropriate for, say, a Senate race in MI. The DNC should not be even attempting to form a top-down platform for these races, or for the midterms. Pushing back against Trumpian abuses and excesses is enough. I’d really be worried if the Dems appeared on the surface to be unified beyond just that plank, because it would mean the DNC was controlling the narrative.
I make a variation of this comment on every single one of Ms. Egan’s articles.
This is exactly right. Spanberger's lead in VA has been accomplished by meeting VA voters where they are -- not NYC voters. The success (fingers crossed ) of both Spanberger and Mamdani ought to be the basis of any analysis of any path forward. We have to stop pretending that there is one magic campaign or candidate that will rescue the party.
Yes, indeed. I think we should view the Democratic party in parliamentary terms. In those systems, any single faction usually lacks the ability to form a government; they do so only in coalition.
So aside from being “not-Trump,” I hope that Democrats coalesce around truly universal healthcare, in the first instance. The coalition can work from there on other issues. UBI could be another one, but we’ll have to see.
The broader objective is, get rid of these authoritarian sickos! And there are many factions in *that* grotesque movement who are waiting to devour each other.
Still full speed ahead for the Demopublican strategy of too little and too late, apparently. RINO coalition in opposition to the T. Rump criminal enterprise, anyone?
In order for American democracy to endure, Democrats will need to bat a thousand in these big races. Failure is not an option.
Hence, in 2028, they will need a presidential candidate like Mamdani who has outstanding character, is charismatic and articulate, focuses on affordability, calls for national unity and is capable of reawakening the dormant sense of idealism among the American people.
And at the same time, it has to be someone who is electable in most of the country and does not alienate middle-of-the road-voters, like Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear, for example.
Maybe James Talarico would be that “perfect” candidate, if he wins his 2026 Texas Senate election. He is a former Texas elementary school teacher, must like LBJ was. And he is also a family man and an evangelical Christian who frequently quotes the Bible verbatim.
We will see. You may very well be right, or wrong. But Democrats will need his voters, as well as a lot of “centrist” voters, to win and save American democracy.
Let me respectfully disagree with you here. There are literally tens of millions of Americans who Mamdani’s message appeals to.
The U.S. has a fascist President partly because many of these “progressive” voters opted not to vote in 2024 due to Gaza and, to some extent, affordability.
Dems will somehow have to appeal to them without alienating most “centrist” voters. They won’t be able to throw the Palestinians under the bus, or suck up to big moneyed interests, any longer.
If they do, these “progressives” simply won’t participate.
"because many of these “progressive” voters opted not to vote in 2024 due to Gaza" - so cave to progressives because they're so stupid? That is how the GOP turned into the party of Trump.
"If they do, these “progressives” simply won’t participate." - and if the Dems end up looking like Hamas supporters, the middle will abandon them.
Somehow, Dems are going to find way to appeal to these “progressive” voters, who are concerned about of the plight of the Palestinians, without alienating the “middle.”
There is a chance that it may not be possible and we permanently lose our democracy over the issue, if enough Americans who oppose Trump and MAGA do not act reasonably around it.
This article is extremely on point. The problem for me is not that the far left has opinions, it is that those opinions are given entirely too much weight.
It is a living example of the person who shouts the loudest must be right. The far left gets all the media coverage not because their vision is the best representation of Democrats. They get that airplay not because their view is popular but because their views are controversial and controversy gets clicks
I am so sick of the whole comparison of the mayoral election to these gubernatorial races… It’s apples to oranges, and I find all the comparisons lazy and misleading
As for Sliwa being a spoiler… that just feels lazy to minimize Mamdani’s win. I it was clear that Cuomo was the one who got a republican boost just because NYC Republicans didn’t want Mamdani
John… your bias is shining through here. I have no problem with you having a bias (I am not on board with all of Mamdani’s policies either), but it feels like this segment was meant to present an argument/analysis based on facts, and it really felt more like your personal spin
Spanberger is blessed to be running against a ridiculous opponent.... and Mamdani isn't???
Mamdani ran in the primary against a creep/failure of a governor, a crook/failure of a sitting mayor and some normal dems. He moved on to the general to run against the same clowns plus a goofball republican and I should find these folks less ridiculous than Earle-Sears? I just can't get there.
To Adam- A) You are correct Cuomo is splitting the vote; B) You are wrong that this is ‘lazy political analysis.’
I don’t live in NYC- but I know it well enough.
I hope Cuomo is preparing a concession speech. He and his family loom large in the great state of New York.
But- it’s time for a change. And if New Yorkers are displeased with the Mamdani administration, they will let them know.
But above all else- let’s protect the right to vote. And argue the consequences later.
Lauren- great article.
One way to settle whether Democratic Socialism or moderation is more popular is pairwise-rated voting. Using New Jersey as an example, Mike Sherrill and a Democratic Socialist could both run. All voters would rate both Sherrill and the Democratic Socialist, and we would count whether more voters rated Sherrill higher than the Democratic Socialist or vice versa. The result of that counts would provide what is needed to answer the question as to which is more supported by the public: simultaneously running both ideologies in the same election with all voters weighing in.
Dems... The great ones accomplished much that is now taken for granted. FDR, and LBJ were transformative. Were they middle of the road bores who said let's not stir things up? Sure, they both had flaws and made some terrible decisions, such as internment camps and the tragedy of Vietnam, but they changed America for the better in so many ways from Social Security to labor laws, to Medicare, to voting rights, to civil rights to saving democracy worldwide. They were not Chuck Schumer, bores who gave us a fascist trump twice, a GOP House, a GOP Senate, a corrupt, conservative SCOTUS and most state legislatures. America needs more boring, triangulating, squiahy, squeamish, and weak dems? Playing it safe gets you trump, maga, anti-democratic power brokers who feed the wealthy at the cost of making people poorer en masse? Dems need to fight for the people, not for the middle of nothing. More Bernie,less Schumer, more AOC, less Jeffries. I am tired of seeing America becoming a kleptocracy because dems don't want to offend anyone. As FDR noted, Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. 'They are unanimous in their hate for me—and I welcome their hatred.' More fight, less fright from bland dems, please!
As I mentioned, Schumer dems gave us trump twice, a GOP house, a GOP Senate, a corrupt conservative supreme court, and most state legislatures being republican. I am not sure I would call that an accomplishment. Schumer bowed to GOP in the first CR which accepted all of GOP and trump agenda items. Whatever Schumer accomplished during the Biden term has been upended by GOP. Renewable tax credits gones, infrastructure funds withheld, Ukrainian aid halted, ACA being undone. trump should have been in jail after j/6 but instead, because of inexcusable slowness of Justice Dept, trump goes free and becomes president! And dems have the most clumsy messaging of any political entity. The province of Ontario got under trump's thin skin with a Reagan tariff ad, but dems can't seem to do anything similar?
Nice to see dems standing strong for a change. It will only help their chances going forward. I actually heard Jeffries say, GOP is keeping the House in recess to protect pedophiles! Hooray! More of that attack style will go a long way towards regaining respect as a party. Did you know that 35% of respondents think favorably of GOP congress, but just 23% think positively of dems? I didn't create those number,s dems did by their weakness. Tomes change but dems don't. Republicans changed, for the worse, but retain political control. Dems need to change for the better and take power back. Bernie and AOC have been screaming into a void of corporate dems who like the status quo. But there are some dems who have a fighting spirit and know that the good old days of compromise are gone and that it is winner take all.
Dems are the only real democratic party in the country, so they need to be fighters from now on. Connect with the people, not with the corporate donor class.
AOC and Bernie being in the spotlight and lighting up social media is what keeps them relevant and household names. They know how to work the media landscape. Be there. Be loud. Be for the people. Be against the oligarchs. Tax the wealthy, feed the poor instead of feed the wealthy tax the poor.
Bernie from AI:
Key legislation authored by Bernie Sanders
Health care: The "Medicare for All" bill, which he has introduced multiple times, proposes a government-run, single-payer system with no out-of-pocket costs and includes coverage for dental, vision, and long-term care.
Health care workforce: He has sponsored legislation to expand and strengthen the healthcare workforce, including the Health Care Workforce Expansion Act of 2025 and the Head Start for America's Children Act.
Social Security: Sanders has sponsored the Social Security Expansion Act and the Keep Billionaires Out of Social Security Act.
Climate change: He has proposed legislation to address climate change, such as the Polluters Pay Climate Fund Act of 2025 and the Climate Emergency Act of 2021.
Taxes and economy: Legislation includes the Tax Excessive CEO Pay Act of 2025, the Corporate Tax Dodging Prevention Act, and the For the 99.5 Percent Act.
Other: He has sponsored bills on topics like reparations for African Americans and the admission of Washington, D.C., as a state.
While Bernie supports taariffs, he doesn't support arbitrary, foolish, across the board tariffs that are stupid and harmful: https://www.sanders.senate.gov/press-releases/news-sanders-statement-on-trump-tariff-announcement/
We both want dems to win, so let's leave it at that. I just wish they had a better and more forceful approach. I have spent thousand$ supporting dems, and I prefer to support fighters with strength. Have a good evening..
IMO, Graham Platner will fail due to opposition research, even that coming from inside the dem house. Because- sorry- but that's the way it works nowadays. Janet Mills is old, but has an admirable record of accomplishment. However, she will be damaged by the same brute politics, as a failure to release her medical records. The most important thing to understand about about ZM in NYC is that in no way does he represent the kind of candidate who will- and must appeal- to the broad coalition of democratic voters, evaluating elections in many other contests, at both nationally and statewide. levels.
That's the thing we must not forget, however seductively brilliant this one winning NYC mayoral campaign. NYC is the greatest city on earth, yes. But it is NOT the only place on earth where elections must be won. Waged among all kinds of candidates, who must suit their own voter terrain. Far from NYC.
I'm looking forward to a new younger generation of Dems like say mamdami who have a deal to just about do anything to get us out of this straight into ground drive we're in...
One battle at a time. He's going to have his hands full being relentlessly attacked by Trump. Or ...this is what I think. But he's young n energetic.
A handful of comments/ observations come to mind. 1. Will Rogers said he was not a member of any organized political party he was a democrat. Another way of thinking about this is the saw that Democrats fall in love and Republicans fall in line. The last love affair was with Obama. Biden was a candidate of necessity. I will skip 2024 except to say that if anyone was naive enough to believe a black woman could win they should have bought a bridge. 2. The pragmatic approach would be to remember that all politics are local. Thus, crafting a campaign to your neighborhood would see to be the way to go. 3. Regarding Platner, I think there are two reasons he seems surviving and maybe thriving is that his response to the oppo research was to get on social media and say he was mad as hell and he wasn’t going to take it anymore. He also represents people’s desperate desire for something new. Mamdani and Cuomo have persuaded me to vote for Republican for first time since I reached my majority 45 years ago. Reasons being Cuomo’s record of sexual harassment and Mamdani’s antisemitism. I can’t abide either. Finally, a friend of mine, when we are talking about candidates used to ask who was waiting for that candidate. In the case of Rahm Emanuel its an emphatic NO.
Re Janet Mills. If you wish to run for office and decline to share your medical records, it's a no go.
While I do not believe there's a law that says candidates should share such info, nothing screams "I'm not fit for office" more than @ 77 declining to share their health profile. If you've got nothing to hide, then show it. Have we learned nothing from John Fetterman? In his case, it's not about age but indeed about serious mental and physical health issues.
This is a bit wearisome to me. All the pundits constantly talk about the bickering among the Democrats. It is really a question that is pushed by the inside the beltway crowd. I’ve nothing against inside the beltway but what I’m saying is the establishment seems more concerned.
Look running on issues sounds great. But haven’t candidates run on universal child care, raising the minimum wage, free and fair elections, jobs, building an economy for the future, union solidarity, paid family leave, climate change, addressing the border crisis, basic human rights, and on and on. What did the voters base their decisions on? The border, transgender hysteria, commies, fear and hatred. Most voters don’t really think through “issues”. They don’t vote with knowledge, they vote with reaction. Kamala Harris presented many issues. Solid ideas. No one gave a shit. She was a black woman and they preferred a madman. They chose chaos.
It doesn’t take a genius to see the myriad of flaws in Donald Trump. From grabbing pussy to stoking an insurrection. And everything in between. This piece blames the Democrats for not having a clear message. I blame voters for believing lies, allowing themselves to be manipulated. I blame voters because it seems we have a lot of closet racists, misogynists, and a plethora of white nationalists.
How do you present issues and policies that will be heard? Gavin Newsom, Jasmine Crockett, AOC, Bernie, Chris Murphy, and Beto. They are out there pushing against the lawlessness and corruption. In my opinion we need to run against billionaires. Even more than Republicans. Pound on it. Our election process is corrupted by the wealthy and corporations. Run against the corporate greed that exploits the workers while the stock holders get richer. Show how the wealthy billionaires are buying our government. Both parties.
I could go on. But I already have. Schumer and Jeffries are feckless. The DNC needs a makeover.
Well said. I don’t agree with everything you said- but you said it well.
If you are anything like me, that would have taken 2 plus hours to write and condense.
If you are not like me and this comes effortlessly to you, use your name and run for higher office.
Haha!!! Thanks!
I so agree with this. Especially running against the billionaires. They stole our government. They stole our money.
Cam Kasky got it right the other day when he characterized the Bulwark comments section as “Bulwark Reddit.” I know the big cheeses here have really sought to avoid that. But things are devolving …
Back to substance: Each race is different, and a candidate for mayor of NYC says little about what sort of candidate (and platform) is appropriate for, say, a Senate race in MI. The DNC should not be even attempting to form a top-down platform for these races, or for the midterms. Pushing back against Trumpian abuses and excesses is enough. I’d really be worried if the Dems appeared on the surface to be unified beyond just that plank, because it would mean the DNC was controlling the narrative.
I make a variation of this comment on every single one of Ms. Egan’s articles.
This is exactly right. Spanberger's lead in VA has been accomplished by meeting VA voters where they are -- not NYC voters. The success (fingers crossed ) of both Spanberger and Mamdani ought to be the basis of any analysis of any path forward. We have to stop pretending that there is one magic campaign or candidate that will rescue the party.
Yes, indeed. I think we should view the Democratic party in parliamentary terms. In those systems, any single faction usually lacks the ability to form a government; they do so only in coalition.
So aside from being “not-Trump,” I hope that Democrats coalesce around truly universal healthcare, in the first instance. The coalition can work from there on other issues. UBI could be another one, but we’ll have to see.
The broader objective is, get rid of these authoritarian sickos! And there are many factions in *that* grotesque movement who are waiting to devour each other.
Still full speed ahead for the Demopublican strategy of too little and too late, apparently. RINO coalition in opposition to the T. Rump criminal enterprise, anyone?
In order for American democracy to endure, Democrats will need to bat a thousand in these big races. Failure is not an option.
Hence, in 2028, they will need a presidential candidate like Mamdani who has outstanding character, is charismatic and articulate, focuses on affordability, calls for national unity and is capable of reawakening the dormant sense of idealism among the American people.
And at the same time, it has to be someone who is electable in most of the country and does not alienate middle-of-the road-voters, like Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear, for example.
Maybe James Talarico would be that “perfect” candidate, if he wins his 2026 Texas Senate election. He is a former Texas elementary school teacher, must like LBJ was. And he is also a family man and an evangelical Christian who frequently quotes the Bible verbatim.
Charles,
We will see. You may very well be right, or wrong. But Democrats will need his voters, as well as a lot of “centrist” voters, to win and save American democracy.
Charles,
Let me respectfully disagree with you here. There are literally tens of millions of Americans who Mamdani’s message appeals to.
The U.S. has a fascist President partly because many of these “progressive” voters opted not to vote in 2024 due to Gaza and, to some extent, affordability.
Dems will somehow have to appeal to them without alienating most “centrist” voters. They won’t be able to throw the Palestinians under the bus, or suck up to big moneyed interests, any longer.
If they do, these “progressives” simply won’t participate.
"because many of these “progressive” voters opted not to vote in 2024 due to Gaza" - so cave to progressives because they're so stupid? That is how the GOP turned into the party of Trump.
"If they do, these “progressives” simply won’t participate." - and if the Dems end up looking like Hamas supporters, the middle will abandon them.
A bit of a sticky situation, no?
Somehow, Dems are going to find way to appeal to these “progressive” voters, who are concerned about of the plight of the Palestinians, without alienating the “middle.”
There is a chance that it may not be possible and we permanently lose our democracy over the issue, if enough Americans who oppose Trump and MAGA do not act reasonably around it.
This article is extremely on point. The problem for me is not that the far left has opinions, it is that those opinions are given entirely too much weight.
It is a living example of the person who shouts the loudest must be right. The far left gets all the media coverage not because their vision is the best representation of Democrats. They get that airplay not because their view is popular but because their views are controversial and controversy gets clicks
Candidates need to have the conversation. What is it you want? Clinton said it years ago, "it's the economy stupid". Nothing's changed.
Get Jeffries and Johnson behind your microphones and in the same room❗️