Post

Does "center-left pundit" mean anything now besides "traditionally raised" clout seeker? Someone described Ezra Klein as that. It's now my go-to for anyone who is more centrist that Bobo, Douthat, or Friedman, but basically useless. A dark line separates these folks and pundits worth our time.

I wonder, after today's NO KINGS protest, if you could write about how many on the right think the idea of Trump being king is a great idea, and maybe how right-wing pundits seek to delegitimize the passion of the protests because of how many older Americans participated. The left isn't the problem.

Having worked for an accomplished left-wing politician, I appreciate and endorse the ideas of this piece. Leahy would tack center on tactics and timeline, never on values. You can make those known while still acknowledging not everyone agrees with you yet.

Thanks for pointing out "there’s often little evidence that these pundits have any special insight into winning elections." I don't take political advice from people who never practiced politics or actual policy formulation and implementation. They just sit up in the bleachers gawking at the game.

If you asked one of those writers to run a practice, draw up plays, choose a roster, or heaven forbid coach a real game.... No clue. They would freeze. Just keyboard jockeys with big egos.

I would take their advice if they were frequently correct in their strategic counsel and their predictive insight. But basically, as Philip Bump observes, they're not. They're often wrong in both the particulars and the generalities and never held accountable for it.

Is/was the DNC butthurt about Obama winning? They really seem to believe deeply that milquetoast is the way to go, which may be true for their local elections and for cabinet positions, but the last actual success the party had nationally was due to an individual and message not machine candidate.

Most Dems have a "top-down" idea of what's good for us. The evidence? When Mamdani dominated NYC mayoral race, Democrats in DC visibly panicked. The 'center left' walking arm in arm with Liz Cheney just sounds like desperate propaganda persuading Dems to take the place of old guard Republicans.

Weird, I viewed Dems joining with Cheney as "staking out a moral position" to support our form of government rather than agreeing with her on policy issues. Cheney spoke out against very specific attacks on our democracy.

It could have been that, if Harris had coupled “save the democracy” with a wider appeal to the full breadth and depth of the party, but she *intentionally* did not do that. And when Trump did start attacking the democracy, Schumer dropped “save the democracy” entirely. It came across as insincere.

When did Trump "start" attacking our democracy? From my perspective the coup never ended. One of the problems with efforts to support democracy is that you have work within the confines of the institutions of democracy. I think the bigger problem is the media environment that fails to inform and

After the 2024 election, I saw what you're talking about now clearly than I ever did. It was never so clear they weren't exactly "with us", and it took the rest of the first year for them to begin to listen.

I'm 65. WHAT ACTUALLY MAKING SHIT WORK MATTERED? instead of programs defined by contorted & convoluted, exceptions & exemptions, gotchas & getchas?? Just cuz public sector senior managers aren't pillaging para$ite$ like private sector, that does NOT mean decades of fucking excuses are excusable.

I don't think it's out of touch to support the rule of law, our Constitution, and efforts to make it very clear how Trump and the Republican Party worked to subvert our democratic institutions. Though they could have done more to focus on the Republican Party.