10 Comments
User's avatar
Laurence's avatar

“Yeah, so just one point on that. The average swing against incumbent parties in elections held between 2020 and 2024 was about seven points. The swing against Kamala Harris was six points.”

Regarding this point: the FT piece you’re thinking of used vote share for all the incumbent parties. So the swing against the Democratic candidate was three points, not six. https://www.ft.com/content/350ba985-bb07-4aa3-aa5e-38eda7c525dd

Expand full comment
G. Elliott Morris's avatar

thank you for the correction!

Expand full comment
John Petersen's avatar

Excellent conclusion - I'm on the prodemocracy team. Aligns with comment about Bernie's authenticity - principles always in evidence. There is an audience for principled journalism and politics. The question is how can we make that audience larger so that it can compete with the 10 second news crowd. In both journalism and politics (and the world of venture capital) an elevator speech needs to accompany deeper analysis.

Expand full comment
J E Ross's avatar

Really good conversation. I love it when people explain numbers in a way I can understand AND when numbers people are interested in understanding the people behind their numbers. There are a bunch of things that I'd love to see these 2 discuss.

Expand full comment
Larry Shannon's avatar

Thank you for this very thoughtful commentary and set of data points. The observations on the miss reading of Trump‘s sliding popularity is something I have wondered about recently and I think it’s very important and should them bolding people pushing back on his bullying. I also love the comments on the new and emerging methods of delivering information and news Through blog type post. I have been working around public policy for about 40 years, and I tell my friends that sub stack is going to be the key mechanism to disseminate political news and information in 26 and in 28. And yes, I do believe we will have an election in 28. The discussions with Paul make up a fantastic invaluable contribution to our public dialogue.

Expand full comment
Buysider2's avatar

Can I suggest you do a one or two page summary of the key takeaways of this conversation. Few people have the time to read this, and I’m sure there were some interesting insights in this piece.

Expand full comment
Jack Wells's avatar

You discuss the fact that Democrats don’t actually talk about LGBTQ issues much, even though the Republicans claim they do. What’s your take on “identity politics”? I do think that Democrats talk (or at least have talked) about identity politics a lot, celebrating the first black this and the first gay that, and Jaime Harrison recently had a vigorous defense of identity politics in his Substack. Do you think Democrats actually do this, and do you think it’s good politics?

Expand full comment
Jack Wells's avatar

And also the first female this and that.

Expand full comment
Mari O’Donnell's avatar

What would it mean if the bill passed? Wouldn’t more people be upset that they will be paying more for healthcare?

Expand full comment
G. Elliott Morris's avatar

Which bill are you referencing?

Expand full comment