What a night! In this week’s chat, Anat and I unpacked some of the massive Democratic victories on Tuesday (and big thanks to Anat for showing up while under the weather).
In one sense, I called these results right after the election last year when I pointed out that in the 21st century, the best way to win the next election is to lose the last one. But this isn’t about the impersonal “thermostatic” dynamics you hear about from political scientists—this is in response to real events. The sheer magnitude of these wins, and the massive surge in (Democratic) turnout that produced them, shows that people are furious about what Trump and MAGA are doing. And it shows just how badly we were misled by poll-driven takes declaring that Americans supported Trump’s cruel mass deportation plans.
We also discussed:
What worked for Mamdani: the magnetism of it all, and perhaps most critically his use of existing organizing infrastructure (like the DSA volunteer base and the taxi drivers he helped organize) to get people excited to talk to other people about his candidacy. He will need that same organizing energy to help make his ambitious policy promises a reality.
What worked in the challenging narrative battle for Prop 50 in California—”taking our power back” won out over the opposition’s appeal to “fairness.”
The significance of school board victories in Bucks County, PA, a former Moms for Liberty stronghold.
What the polls missed, and why it drives me nuts when people ask what the polls missed. Quibbling about point estimates distracts us from the more important question: whether the polls predicted (or mislead us on) what the election would be about.
A reminder that “turnout” is not like the tides: “low turnout” doesn’t hurt Democrats unless Democratic turnout is low. And “less-engaged” voters tend to become engaged voters when they understand and believe what Trump and MAGA will do (as opposed to who Trump is as a person).
A reminder that the Roberts Court majority “justices” are not hacks for Trump/Republicans, but hacks for the interests that bought their seats on the court. If they strike down Trump’s tariffs, they won’t be standing up to him—they will be doing what much of the business community wants.
