Hey Theo, great post! Your parents shared the link to this on another platform and I commented there. I am commenting here on an aspect that, in an overall good piece, deserve more analysis and consideration -- and that is to put a race and gender analysis squarely back on the table. There's a bit more credence and critical consideration of the narrower box most black women need to operate in, let alone the black lady who was given 100 days to do this. For Presidential politics, someone who tacks left in the ways so many have suggested probably needs to have white and male privilege to succeed (note the unprecedented attacks against the “Squad” when Bernie gets a pass). The Dem senators that eeked out wins in states (and still counting for several "squeaker" Congressional district) that otherwise went for Trump are not — to a fault — all hard left on all those issues. What they were was local (and local matters) and white (and that REALLY matters). And that is an indictment of certainly race that cannot be totally ignored. Where Kamala “failed”, white candidates could still eek out a win on suspiciously similar “meh” policies? Take a look at some of those margins between Harris and the white Dem eeking it out in many of those races. Several examples of milquetoast white Dem governor or Senator eeking it out (virtually no appreciable policy distinction between Harris and them except a better grasp on local issues - but not “oh my goodness - they are blowing me away with their progressive bonafides”) America still has some reckoning to do on that front. This election leaves a lot of black women nowhere, and at some point Dems need to come back to that before moving on to whatever “Bernie Bro” 2.0 candidate folks come up with next time to save the Dems where the black lady failed, OR instead of commentary after commentary to understand rural white voters or how the Dems failed to present the right mix of economic messages and commitments, folks will have endless think pieces to understand why the backbone of the Dem party (who, to keep this real, have the most to lose economically when the policies to address folks' economic pain do not manifest) sat their behinds at home in 2028. Race does not explain all of it certainly, but to not acknowledge it at the margins won’t serve us well either. There is a totally different conversation happening in black circles and some consideration of those might add a dimension here — but overall, really thoughtful piece.
I wholeheartedly belive that a combination of racism, sexism and xenophobia put DT over the top in that election. And it's pretty clear that the democratic party hasn't done enough to address the needs of too many economically disenfranchised people, for too long. And then there's the totally fractured media environment, fanning the flames. The data gives us lots of different people to blame and lots of different explanations to entertain, but not a lot of great solutions. I hope all is well in Chicago, Alicia - my best to the whole fam.
For sure, though, I wonder if, instead of focusing on what's happening with MAGA-influenced folks, if we might focus sustained attention and effort on folks who are the most winnable? And to do that, we might actually study the one group of folks who, despite experiencing the same economic conditions as EVERYONE ELSE, despite being among the groups most proximal to be biggest economic risks in a complex economy with widening inequality, STILL voted for Harris in overwhelming numbers? And that group is black folks. What is it about being black that serves as a relatively strong "protective factor" against the misinformation; the tendency to either ignore, dismiss or make one's peace with the worst impulses of xenophobia; the willingness to see nuance and complexity in the range of policy levers that might be used to solve our collective economic woes; and just the ability to see competence and incompetence for what it is? 8 in 10 (men) to 9 in 10 (women) voters, all with robust capacity to resist what the majority could not, even though they have the most to lose economically if the country calls it wrong. Those are the questions I'll be asking. That's the part of the electorate I'm most interested in, and wondering if others have enough curiosity to model their efforts to win over or win back (or whatever we think we're doing these next 4 or more years) folks and infuse some of those "protective factors." Black folks, writ large, are no more or less moral than any other group, so it would seem to me that whatever Black folks were able to access when faced with such a choice should be possible to access for other groups. I'm interested in what can we learn for the creative, inclusive future -- and I actually think very little inspiration will come from rehashing what more we can learn from Trump voters, and instead of leaning out from black folks and towards other groups for answers, give some of those other groups some of whatever black folks have post-haste. No easy answers. Be as well as you can!
Great post Theo! Quite a persuasive case. I wonder how media plays into this as well— to what degree is the messaging problem the fault of dems vs the fault of the Murdoch media empire?
Your insight about the media is real and based, but it unfortunately falls into the category of things we and the DNC have no control over, and I fear that liberal elites are already too fixated on these kinds of things (blaming voters, blaming Russia, blaming misinformation, blaming Trump's lies).
Agree - great post Theo, Canadian spelling and all. But I agree with Humam as well - if we can't do anything to break down the information silos folks live in, which is going to get a lot harder now, it's hard to see a way out of the problem through good messaging or even good policy making.
Hey Theo, great post! Your parents shared the link to this on another platform and I commented there. I am commenting here on an aspect that, in an overall good piece, deserve more analysis and consideration -- and that is to put a race and gender analysis squarely back on the table. There's a bit more credence and critical consideration of the narrower box most black women need to operate in, let alone the black lady who was given 100 days to do this. For Presidential politics, someone who tacks left in the ways so many have suggested probably needs to have white and male privilege to succeed (note the unprecedented attacks against the “Squad” when Bernie gets a pass). The Dem senators that eeked out wins in states (and still counting for several "squeaker" Congressional district) that otherwise went for Trump are not — to a fault — all hard left on all those issues. What they were was local (and local matters) and white (and that REALLY matters). And that is an indictment of certainly race that cannot be totally ignored. Where Kamala “failed”, white candidates could still eek out a win on suspiciously similar “meh” policies? Take a look at some of those margins between Harris and the white Dem eeking it out in many of those races. Several examples of milquetoast white Dem governor or Senator eeking it out (virtually no appreciable policy distinction between Harris and them except a better grasp on local issues - but not “oh my goodness - they are blowing me away with their progressive bonafides”) America still has some reckoning to do on that front. This election leaves a lot of black women nowhere, and at some point Dems need to come back to that before moving on to whatever “Bernie Bro” 2.0 candidate folks come up with next time to save the Dems where the black lady failed, OR instead of commentary after commentary to understand rural white voters or how the Dems failed to present the right mix of economic messages and commitments, folks will have endless think pieces to understand why the backbone of the Dem party (who, to keep this real, have the most to lose economically when the policies to address folks' economic pain do not manifest) sat their behinds at home in 2028. Race does not explain all of it certainly, but to not acknowledge it at the margins won’t serve us well either. There is a totally different conversation happening in black circles and some consideration of those might add a dimension here — but overall, really thoughtful piece.
I wholeheartedly belive that a combination of racism, sexism and xenophobia put DT over the top in that election. And it's pretty clear that the democratic party hasn't done enough to address the needs of too many economically disenfranchised people, for too long. And then there's the totally fractured media environment, fanning the flames. The data gives us lots of different people to blame and lots of different explanations to entertain, but not a lot of great solutions. I hope all is well in Chicago, Alicia - my best to the whole fam.
For sure, though, I wonder if, instead of focusing on what's happening with MAGA-influenced folks, if we might focus sustained attention and effort on folks who are the most winnable? And to do that, we might actually study the one group of folks who, despite experiencing the same economic conditions as EVERYONE ELSE, despite being among the groups most proximal to be biggest economic risks in a complex economy with widening inequality, STILL voted for Harris in overwhelming numbers? And that group is black folks. What is it about being black that serves as a relatively strong "protective factor" against the misinformation; the tendency to either ignore, dismiss or make one's peace with the worst impulses of xenophobia; the willingness to see nuance and complexity in the range of policy levers that might be used to solve our collective economic woes; and just the ability to see competence and incompetence for what it is? 8 in 10 (men) to 9 in 10 (women) voters, all with robust capacity to resist what the majority could not, even though they have the most to lose economically if the country calls it wrong. Those are the questions I'll be asking. That's the part of the electorate I'm most interested in, and wondering if others have enough curiosity to model their efforts to win over or win back (or whatever we think we're doing these next 4 or more years) folks and infuse some of those "protective factors." Black folks, writ large, are no more or less moral than any other group, so it would seem to me that whatever Black folks were able to access when faced with such a choice should be possible to access for other groups. I'm interested in what can we learn for the creative, inclusive future -- and I actually think very little inspiration will come from rehashing what more we can learn from Trump voters, and instead of leaning out from black folks and towards other groups for answers, give some of those other groups some of whatever black folks have post-haste. No easy answers. Be as well as you can!
Great post Theo! Quite a persuasive case. I wonder how media plays into this as well— to what degree is the messaging problem the fault of dems vs the fault of the Murdoch media empire?
Thank you!
Your insight about the media is real and based, but it unfortunately falls into the category of things we and the DNC have no control over, and I fear that liberal elites are already too fixated on these kinds of things (blaming voters, blaming Russia, blaming misinformation, blaming Trump's lies).
Agree - great post Theo, Canadian spelling and all. But I agree with Humam as well - if we can't do anything to break down the information silos folks live in, which is going to get a lot harder now, it's hard to see a way out of the problem through good messaging or even good policy making.