Poor Ms. Katz is wrong, Democrats "have always had to do both". What's different now is that they've been handed a notarized target board with Donald Trump's face on it signed, "Donny & Jeff, Pedo Pals". The Democrats needed to get a billion-pound bomb delivered to their doorstep before they decided to take a shot at the god-king on the grand scale.
Epstein is going to be their best issue next year, in 2027, 2028, 2029, until however long it takes for my party to pull down the Trump banners and set them on fire.
There's not much to qualitatively say about the issue; pedophilia is bad, not a thorny cause that's tough to find a comfortable side to sit on. It will take 30 minutes before Democrats run out of anything substantive to say. They *have* to be pugilistic or they simply can't mobilize the issue.
I've been saying that Democrats need to go on offense against Trump, so I will cop to the idiom that this hammer that I'm holding makes everything look like a nail. But, family, brothers and sisters. I think it's a hammer. And, I think that's a nail. You have to swing.
>>"I’m going to chat tomorrow with Maryland state Sen. Bill Ferguson for Bulwark Takes."
Ask him why he thinks it's smart to bring pillows to knife fights with the Republicans?
The Republicans understand one thing, power. When you're weak and impotent they scoff at you. When you fight back, the Republicans crumble. If the Democratic representatives allow the Republicans to gain congressional seats by cheating and the Dems do nothing, that is seen by the Republicans as a green light to cheat even more.
Lauren, Thanks for the reporting and commentary. You put yeoman work into this piece. Why are Dems afraid of talking about immigration? There was a border bill passed by 70 Senators that Lindsey Graham said was the best outcome conservatives could dream of getting. It would have passed in the House too, but Trump, the original monkey wrench, killed it.Now it seems it should be resurrected and the Dems could float that it should be enhanced with that ICE money that is being wasted on those masked thugs terrorizing our citizens.
The thing to do is focus on issues where voters can easily understand why they should care. That works for both kitchen-table issues and for attacking Trump on his corruption. Nobody likes the idea of someone enriching themselves at your expense. If it were up to me, I would say yes, keep talking about affordability and abundance, and also go after Trump and company hammer and tongs for enriching themselves in a way so obvious that even people like Mike Cernovich are remarking on it.
Throw every thing at the wall and if nothing sticks? You wind up with a dirty wall. There is still no effective opposition to Project 2025 which is still on track to install a Unitary Executive (also known as a Fuhrer in some quarters) at which point the flinging becomes moot.
Just got to your piece Lauren, in tandem with Tim Miler's Harris interview. A useful juxtaposition...
... Because the Harris interview bespoke the messaging tension that you and Ro Khanna (among others) remark still haunts the Party's navigation. I've empathy for Kam Harris. I understand that for her, and other elected/former - effectively professional politicians - the DNA inclines them to higher-minded, "serious" pronouncements on actual policy positions/justifications as grist for engaging with voters. That's. Just. Given. In Before Times, it may even have been enough. And indisputably, anything lately pertaining to affordability is, in the face of Trump's counter-factual, fever dream boasts of a thriving, nuth'n-to-worry-about economy, something that does increasingly seem to have traction. Sure, voters have developed callouses after ten plus years of relentless Trumpian dissembling and projection. But in the end (a different place/moment for each of them), voters do have eyes.
So - while I'm first to concede that too many voters found patriotic calls to the ramparts in defense of [for them, practically speaking] abstractions about Constitutional order/rule of law and 'democracy' unmoving, on the other hand Trump 2.0 has become such a bold-faced exercise in autocratic fecklessness and craven corruption, to ignore it lest it distract from the rising price of light bulbs would seem to make us... oblivious. Or, "que sera".
Dems at large still need to coalesce. And that includes coalescing around the urgency of learning to walk and chew gum at the same time.
I'll give Khanna props for pursuing the Epstein files release, but sadly it will likely only blow up in the face of Democrats. Bondi will come up with various bs "national security" reasons for selective disclosures that will only hurt Bill Clinton, Larry Summers et al. and Trump will walk away triumphant once again. It's pathetically predictable.
I disagree that this has a chance to "blow up in the face of the Democrats." If Bondi only goes after Dems and hides the documents on Trump and his friends, the Democratic caucus is well positioned to expose the cover-up. Remember BENGHAZ!1!! and "her emails"? What smoking gun was ever found? Nothing. But the Republicans kept banging away on it without finding anything, but they made it seem like there was corruption.
Everyone with eyes can see the Epstein Files are corrupt and Trump is up to his neck in it. If Trump and Bondi try to pull a Watergate Cover-up, that will blow up in their faces.
I believe that rather than sitting around, talking among themselves about what they should or should not emphasize, Democratic strategists should be asking the people who the party have lost over the past 60 years (like young males, working class, less educated, etc.) what is and is not important to them, and emphasize election strategies based on their responses. Issues like climate, crisis, DEI, trump being immoral, etc. are not going to get more votes than they now have. Democratic candidates should (and will) focus on these issues once elected, but I don't think they should be major talking points in campaigns.
“Cutting SNAP while you build a gold ballroom is some pretty Marie Antoinette vibes,”
--Yes, this! In an article yesterday, one of your writers referenced running against the "Epstein class." That's exactly right and should be obvious, because it's justified. Dems would run the board in '26 and '28 if they finally figure out to have a thing they believe in, and this should be it, or why are you even a Democrat?
I feel the "right" messaging is a real layup right now and it's astonishing that it's still up for debate from Dem leadership. It's us vs the billionaires and all the corruption.
In addition, I also think there are real opportunities to take the ground from Republicans and weave in that we are the true party of law and order; we are the real patriots who love America.
We need to emphasize that we are the party of law and order who are against having ICE thugs spread fear - let's fund the police, defund ICE. The party of law and order where criminals aren’t pardoned, Presidents don’t openly accept bribes from billionaires and foreign countries and pedophiles aren’t protected.
We need to take the ground as the real patriots who still love America and will uphold the Constitution, where First Amendment rights still exist and there isn’t a designated enemy within and don't need masked ICE thugs in our streets. Those are the messages that each candidate should embrace on an "authentic" basis and how they see those messages enacted should be up to them based on where they are running. (Can't we proactively get this messaging out in 2026 as part of our 250th anniversary?)
Finally, I'm no historian, but I feel the parallels to the 1920's are there now - a gilded age that has benefited only a few and people ready for change. I'm not forecasting another Great Depression, but with Dem success in 2026 (likely) and with the "right" candidate emerging in 2028 (maybe), I actually think America could be ready for a "New" New Deal environment. Trump and his regime will double down on their craziness in 2026, like a cornered rat, so strap in, because we're not out of the woods yet. But emerging out of this with real momentum is not out of the question and will Dems press our advantage that is now emerging or agonize and just play it safe and play defense like we tend to do?
The Democrats just need to talk like normal humans. When I hear Dem strategists and consultants speak it sounds like they have never had a conversation with a normal person before.
Cost? Too expensive and the Republicans are making it worse.
ICE raids? Republicans are deporting children instead of criminals.
Epstein? Trump is covering up that his best friend was a pedophile.
Maxwell? Republicans are protecting a pedophiles instead of being tough on crime.
Pardons? Republicans are protecting global elite scammers instead of being tough on crime.
Ballroom? The worst waste of your taxpayer money ever. How can Republicans afford this but they can’t help you afford groceries?
I’d hire you as a Dem consultant and fire the lot of so-called experts who royally screwed the Dems in 2024 by completely avoiding the border issue, gaslighting people about inflation, and embracing the amorphous term Democracy as their touch point without putting any meat on those bones
Thanks man but the Dems don’t want to hear what I have to say. I am just a normal guy in my 20s trying to start a family in a messed up economy. They don’t care about us. If Trump wasn’t a fascist I would probably still be a Republican like most of the guys my age. I don’t like fascists so I am here.
I'm curious about this. Good faith question, but I'm quite a bit older than you and so interested in your perspective. Putting aside Trump, why would you otherwise be drawn to Republicans?
To be upfront with you, the first president I remember is Reagan.
I think the disconnect between us two is that very little is drawing me to either party. The first elections I remember were McCain / Obama and Romney / Obama. Both elections had good men disagreeing on policy. We haven’t had a good candidate even come close to winning a primary since 2012. That is half of my lifetime. How could I not be disillusioned at this point.
Disillusioned, I totally get that. Been feeling that way myself since W. won reelection. I was referring more to you saying you identified as Republican. What drew you and your friends to that? I ask because from my perspective W was a disastrous president, and I can't understand how anyone that claimed to be libertarian still voted Republican. And R stewardship of the economy has been miserable. I don't get why the "working class" supports the party that, in my lifetime, has always sabotaged them. So the only people I can understand that identify as Republican are wealthy, because I get that they want lower taxes. I don't agree with it, but I get it. As a woman, I always leaned Democrat because I am single issue on bodily autonomy. (In college, I thought I leaned libertarian, but I can't be consistent there because I support a social safety net.)
Honestly, I was too young to have real opinions about W’s presidency so I can’t really comment much on it. Growing up I would have considered myself a Republican because 99% of the people I knew were Republican. I went to church, had a mostly conservative education, and watched my parents work 50-60 hours a week to provide for our family. None of the safety nets programs that the Dems support have ever helped my family. I am glad they exist but I don’t get that money. My family was not poor and I am not currently poor. I grew up somewhere between middle class to upper-middle class in exurban America. My parents grew up between poor to middle class in rural America. I have been blessed beyond belief because of my families hard work and I plan to do that for my children (We learned last week that my wife is pregnant with our first).I don’t love JD Vance but I have way more in common with him than I do Kamala Harris. He gets us and Kamala does not. I voted for Kamala over Trump but I would probably vote for JD against her.
Mamdani doesn’t sway me that much tbh. Socialists just take money away from people that pay taxes with real jobs. The other two just seem like regular politicians.
I think Israel is where I am too far away from him. I don’t think the Israeli government is without some blame, but Hamas are terrorist and they attacked first. I don’t feel like getting into a big debate with anyone about Israel, but that is just my feelings on it. Platner is certainly a normal guy which is nice. My friend told me Platner called himself a communist on Reddit which is a red flag, but I think he apologized about it. I would take him over most traditional politicians. I think a great candidate for me would be someone in between him and Fetterman on most issues. What are your thoughts on him?
That was a lot to read but I hear you. I don’t have problems with safety nets programs and I agree with you on the problems with billionaires and unrestricted wealth. My only counter is that those people will always get away with it. Unless people like Bernie can find a way to make those people pay their fair share that money for programs has to come from somewhere. When the government realizes they need money they either borrow it or they go after us because we don’t have a team of a dozen lawyers and accountants cooking our books.
It’s as if Dems figured out that pointing out Trump’s racism/misogyny for three cycles and not moving the needle isn’t the same as pointing out he’s a pal/protector of pedophiles. Huh. 🤔
(Note to Dems: even most unrepentant bigots HATE pedophiles 🤷🏻♀️)
Pretend that Republican identified problems are real (even when they are not) and be ready with solutions to problems that don't exist and don't try to explain why they aren't really problems. Trying to win the culture wars is futile.
Remember that a Democratic majority may not be as big as hoped for (especially in the Senate) so don't over-promise which will set you up for consistent under delivery. From 2027-2029 everything passed will require some bipartisan support and the Republican signature of Trump or Vance.
Do not try to explain the nuanced differences between socialism, democratic socialism and social democracy.
The economy is likely to crash hard before the next election. Don't fall into the blame game and finger pointing and don't celebrate it as the political opportunity for which you have all been hoping. Republicans will be caught flat footed about how to respond and Trump's incompetence will be self-evident. Get out there and tell how the Democrats can rebuild the economy. How the Democrats will lead a BIPARTISAN recovery not wave magic wands with politically impossible plans.
Oh, yes, and stop complaining about and blaming capitalism for all the problems we confront. Capitalism isn't going anywhere.
Poor Ms. Katz is wrong, Democrats "have always had to do both". What's different now is that they've been handed a notarized target board with Donald Trump's face on it signed, "Donny & Jeff, Pedo Pals". The Democrats needed to get a billion-pound bomb delivered to their doorstep before they decided to take a shot at the god-king on the grand scale.
Epstein is going to be their best issue next year, in 2027, 2028, 2029, until however long it takes for my party to pull down the Trump banners and set them on fire.
There's not much to qualitatively say about the issue; pedophilia is bad, not a thorny cause that's tough to find a comfortable side to sit on. It will take 30 minutes before Democrats run out of anything substantive to say. They *have* to be pugilistic or they simply can't mobilize the issue.
I've been saying that Democrats need to go on offense against Trump, so I will cop to the idiom that this hammer that I'm holding makes everything look like a nail. But, family, brothers and sisters. I think it's a hammer. And, I think that's a nail. You have to swing.
>>"I’m going to chat tomorrow with Maryland state Sen. Bill Ferguson for Bulwark Takes."
Ask him why he thinks it's smart to bring pillows to knife fights with the Republicans?
The Republicans understand one thing, power. When you're weak and impotent they scoff at you. When you fight back, the Republicans crumble. If the Democratic representatives allow the Republicans to gain congressional seats by cheating and the Dems do nothing, that is seen by the Republicans as a green light to cheat even more.
Lauren, Thanks for the reporting and commentary. You put yeoman work into this piece. Why are Dems afraid of talking about immigration? There was a border bill passed by 70 Senators that Lindsey Graham said was the best outcome conservatives could dream of getting. It would have passed in the House too, but Trump, the original monkey wrench, killed it.Now it seems it should be resurrected and the Dems could float that it should be enhanced with that ICE money that is being wasted on those masked thugs terrorizing our citizens.
The thing to do is focus on issues where voters can easily understand why they should care. That works for both kitchen-table issues and for attacking Trump on his corruption. Nobody likes the idea of someone enriching themselves at your expense. If it were up to me, I would say yes, keep talking about affordability and abundance, and also go after Trump and company hammer and tongs for enriching themselves in a way so obvious that even people like Mike Cernovich are remarking on it.
Throw every thing at the wall and if nothing sticks? You wind up with a dirty wall. There is still no effective opposition to Project 2025 which is still on track to install a Unitary Executive (also known as a Fuhrer in some quarters) at which point the flinging becomes moot.
Just got to your piece Lauren, in tandem with Tim Miler's Harris interview. A useful juxtaposition...
... Because the Harris interview bespoke the messaging tension that you and Ro Khanna (among others) remark still haunts the Party's navigation. I've empathy for Kam Harris. I understand that for her, and other elected/former - effectively professional politicians - the DNA inclines them to higher-minded, "serious" pronouncements on actual policy positions/justifications as grist for engaging with voters. That's. Just. Given. In Before Times, it may even have been enough. And indisputably, anything lately pertaining to affordability is, in the face of Trump's counter-factual, fever dream boasts of a thriving, nuth'n-to-worry-about economy, something that does increasingly seem to have traction. Sure, voters have developed callouses after ten plus years of relentless Trumpian dissembling and projection. But in the end (a different place/moment for each of them), voters do have eyes.
So - while I'm first to concede that too many voters found patriotic calls to the ramparts in defense of [for them, practically speaking] abstractions about Constitutional order/rule of law and 'democracy' unmoving, on the other hand Trump 2.0 has become such a bold-faced exercise in autocratic fecklessness and craven corruption, to ignore it lest it distract from the rising price of light bulbs would seem to make us... oblivious. Or, "que sera".
Dems at large still need to coalesce. And that includes coalescing around the urgency of learning to walk and chew gum at the same time.
I was with you until you said “Rahm.”
I'll give Khanna props for pursuing the Epstein files release, but sadly it will likely only blow up in the face of Democrats. Bondi will come up with various bs "national security" reasons for selective disclosures that will only hurt Bill Clinton, Larry Summers et al. and Trump will walk away triumphant once again. It's pathetically predictable.
I disagree that this has a chance to "blow up in the face of the Democrats." If Bondi only goes after Dems and hides the documents on Trump and his friends, the Democratic caucus is well positioned to expose the cover-up. Remember BENGHAZ!1!! and "her emails"? What smoking gun was ever found? Nothing. But the Republicans kept banging away on it without finding anything, but they made it seem like there was corruption.
Everyone with eyes can see the Epstein Files are corrupt and Trump is up to his neck in it. If Trump and Bondi try to pull a Watergate Cover-up, that will blow up in their faces.
I believe that rather than sitting around, talking among themselves about what they should or should not emphasize, Democratic strategists should be asking the people who the party have lost over the past 60 years (like young males, working class, less educated, etc.) what is and is not important to them, and emphasize election strategies based on their responses. Issues like climate, crisis, DEI, trump being immoral, etc. are not going to get more votes than they now have. Democratic candidates should (and will) focus on these issues once elected, but I don't think they should be major talking points in campaigns.
“Cutting SNAP while you build a gold ballroom is some pretty Marie Antoinette vibes,”
--Yes, this! In an article yesterday, one of your writers referenced running against the "Epstein class." That's exactly right and should be obvious, because it's justified. Dems would run the board in '26 and '28 if they finally figure out to have a thing they believe in, and this should be it, or why are you even a Democrat?
is it too much to ask the Dems to chew gum and walk at the same time...?
I feel the "right" messaging is a real layup right now and it's astonishing that it's still up for debate from Dem leadership. It's us vs the billionaires and all the corruption.
In addition, I also think there are real opportunities to take the ground from Republicans and weave in that we are the true party of law and order; we are the real patriots who love America.
We need to emphasize that we are the party of law and order who are against having ICE thugs spread fear - let's fund the police, defund ICE. The party of law and order where criminals aren’t pardoned, Presidents don’t openly accept bribes from billionaires and foreign countries and pedophiles aren’t protected.
We need to take the ground as the real patriots who still love America and will uphold the Constitution, where First Amendment rights still exist and there isn’t a designated enemy within and don't need masked ICE thugs in our streets. Those are the messages that each candidate should embrace on an "authentic" basis and how they see those messages enacted should be up to them based on where they are running. (Can't we proactively get this messaging out in 2026 as part of our 250th anniversary?)
Finally, I'm no historian, but I feel the parallels to the 1920's are there now - a gilded age that has benefited only a few and people ready for change. I'm not forecasting another Great Depression, but with Dem success in 2026 (likely) and with the "right" candidate emerging in 2028 (maybe), I actually think America could be ready for a "New" New Deal environment. Trump and his regime will double down on their craziness in 2026, like a cornered rat, so strap in, because we're not out of the woods yet. But emerging out of this with real momentum is not out of the question and will Dems press our advantage that is now emerging or agonize and just play it safe and play defense like we tend to do?
The Democrats just need to talk like normal humans. When I hear Dem strategists and consultants speak it sounds like they have never had a conversation with a normal person before.
Cost? Too expensive and the Republicans are making it worse.
ICE raids? Republicans are deporting children instead of criminals.
Epstein? Trump is covering up that his best friend was a pedophile.
Maxwell? Republicans are protecting a pedophiles instead of being tough on crime.
Pardons? Republicans are protecting global elite scammers instead of being tough on crime.
Ballroom? The worst waste of your taxpayer money ever. How can Republicans afford this but they can’t help you afford groceries?
I’d hire you as a Dem consultant and fire the lot of so-called experts who royally screwed the Dems in 2024 by completely avoiding the border issue, gaslighting people about inflation, and embracing the amorphous term Democracy as their touch point without putting any meat on those bones
Thanks man but the Dems don’t want to hear what I have to say. I am just a normal guy in my 20s trying to start a family in a messed up economy. They don’t care about us. If Trump wasn’t a fascist I would probably still be a Republican like most of the guys my age. I don’t like fascists so I am here.
I'm curious about this. Good faith question, but I'm quite a bit older than you and so interested in your perspective. Putting aside Trump, why would you otherwise be drawn to Republicans?
To be upfront with you, the first president I remember is Reagan.
I think the disconnect between us two is that very little is drawing me to either party. The first elections I remember were McCain / Obama and Romney / Obama. Both elections had good men disagreeing on policy. We haven’t had a good candidate even come close to winning a primary since 2012. That is half of my lifetime. How could I not be disillusioned at this point.
Disillusioned, I totally get that. Been feeling that way myself since W. won reelection. I was referring more to you saying you identified as Republican. What drew you and your friends to that? I ask because from my perspective W was a disastrous president, and I can't understand how anyone that claimed to be libertarian still voted Republican. And R stewardship of the economy has been miserable. I don't get why the "working class" supports the party that, in my lifetime, has always sabotaged them. So the only people I can understand that identify as Republican are wealthy, because I get that they want lower taxes. I don't agree with it, but I get it. As a woman, I always leaned Democrat because I am single issue on bodily autonomy. (In college, I thought I leaned libertarian, but I can't be consistent there because I support a social safety net.)
Honestly, I was too young to have real opinions about W’s presidency so I can’t really comment much on it. Growing up I would have considered myself a Republican because 99% of the people I knew were Republican. I went to church, had a mostly conservative education, and watched my parents work 50-60 hours a week to provide for our family. None of the safety nets programs that the Dems support have ever helped my family. I am glad they exist but I don’t get that money. My family was not poor and I am not currently poor. I grew up somewhere between middle class to upper-middle class in exurban America. My parents grew up between poor to middle class in rural America. I have been blessed beyond belief because of my families hard work and I plan to do that for my children (We learned last week that my wife is pregnant with our first).I don’t love JD Vance but I have way more in common with him than I do Kamala Harris. He gets us and Kamala does not. I voted for Kamala over Trump but I would probably vote for JD against her.
Maybe. But maybe the election of people-Mamdani, Sherrill, Spanberger, all of whom focused on affordability will move the needle in your direction
Mamdani doesn’t sway me that much tbh. Socialists just take money away from people that pay taxes with real jobs. The other two just seem like regular politicians.
Not trying to be super argumentative or pessimistic. I just only have like a handful of politicians that I have some real respect for at this point.
I think Israel is where I am too far away from him. I don’t think the Israeli government is without some blame, but Hamas are terrorist and they attacked first. I don’t feel like getting into a big debate with anyone about Israel, but that is just my feelings on it. Platner is certainly a normal guy which is nice. My friend told me Platner called himself a communist on Reddit which is a red flag, but I think he apologized about it. I would take him over most traditional politicians. I think a great candidate for me would be someone in between him and Fetterman on most issues. What are your thoughts on him?
That was a lot to read but I hear you. I don’t have problems with safety nets programs and I agree with you on the problems with billionaires and unrestricted wealth. My only counter is that those people will always get away with it. Unless people like Bernie can find a way to make those people pay their fair share that money for programs has to come from somewhere. When the government realizes they need money they either borrow it or they go after us because we don’t have a team of a dozen lawyers and accountants cooking our books.
It’s as if Dems figured out that pointing out Trump’s racism/misogyny for three cycles and not moving the needle isn’t the same as pointing out he’s a pal/protector of pedophiles. Huh. 🤔
(Note to Dems: even most unrepentant bigots HATE pedophiles 🤷🏻♀️)
If the Dems running can't tie everything back to affordability, they should get out of politics.
Yes. Everything, everywhere, all at once.
Less outrage and more humor.
Pretend that Republican identified problems are real (even when they are not) and be ready with solutions to problems that don't exist and don't try to explain why they aren't really problems. Trying to win the culture wars is futile.
Remember that a Democratic majority may not be as big as hoped for (especially in the Senate) so don't over-promise which will set you up for consistent under delivery. From 2027-2029 everything passed will require some bipartisan support and the Republican signature of Trump or Vance.
Do not try to explain the nuanced differences between socialism, democratic socialism and social democracy.
The economy is likely to crash hard before the next election. Don't fall into the blame game and finger pointing and don't celebrate it as the political opportunity for which you have all been hoping. Republicans will be caught flat footed about how to respond and Trump's incompetence will be self-evident. Get out there and tell how the Democrats can rebuild the economy. How the Democrats will lead a BIPARTISAN recovery not wave magic wands with politically impossible plans.
Oh, yes, and stop complaining about and blaming capitalism for all the problems we confront. Capitalism isn't going anywhere.