🔥The 9th Round of Easy Loan, Earn $40 Reward is in progress❗️ ⏰ Promotion Period: January 15th - Feburary 15th, 2025 👉 Register now and check more details at gate.io/campaigns/358

I think the middle ground here is that there's a difference between Harris's attempt at centrism (appealing to anti-Trump types) and what people like Golden successfully do (appeal to literal Trump voters). Problem is it's easier to do that as a House candidate with local ties.

Maybe it's because of my east coast bias, but I've literally never thought of Gavin Newsom as a national figure (other than an occasional TV talking head) and I can't even fathom the idea of him becoming a presidential candidate.

The incumbent party hasn't won a presidential election since 2012. The last time we had three incumbent party defeats in a row was 1884-1888-1892.

The polling will continue until morale improves

The Bernie types and the Biden and Harris types will fight it out. That's fine: parties ought to fight amongst themselves a bit after losing. But the 2028 primary will likely feature a whole new generation of Democratic politicians and that will be a welcome change.

Genuinely, if you're a political professional or "strategist" and this kind of thing is all you have to offer today, give up. Do something else. You're not interested in winning. And it's whatever. Politics isn't for everybody. That's fine. Other folks can take it from here.

I didn't think Marie Gluesenkamp Perez was going to hold on, but apparently she is and I think there's a lesson here: swing voters demand more Reed College grads

People wanted it to be 2012, but it was 2004

Oh wow I just learned the Governor-elect of Washington, Bob Ferguson, is a USCF national master, although he hasn't played a rated chess game since 2007

Almost no one wants to engage with the real reason Democrats lost—dissatisfaction with the economy and anti-incumbent sentiment—because it means Democrats could do almost anything and win 2028 if Trump is unpopular by then (or lose it if he's popular) for the same macro reasons

I think it's plausible/likely that Harris replacing Biden saved Democrats a handful of Senate seats. But counterfactually, if Biden had stayed in what was the realistic floor? I do think he'd have performed worse, but I actually wonder how low the floor is in this polarized era.

There's long been an abstract ethical argument against using Twitter, but by far the worst part of Twitter in terms of user experience is how people can pay money to get a more prominent place in the replies. Basically completely ruined discussion on Election Twitter, for example

I feel like people want this "some liberals are denying the results" thing to be bigger than it is. Look, some people are just paranoid lunatics. But no influential person is grabbing onto it and most liberals are accepting a defeat their usual way: via internalized self-loathing

God it's so boring, but sadly I think the strong over-performance of both Jon Tester and Sherrod Brown suggests that there are multiple ideological pathways to expanding the Democratic coalition.

Classic case of the resist liberals being annoying, but also Trump actually being as bad as they say

RFK doesn't look like that because he avoids vaccines and drinks raw milk. It's because he's very wealthy and has access to the fanciest TRT and steroids on the market. There's this entire subculture of right-wing guys obsessed with "health" who are just roided to the gills.