Great post. I have been repeatedly irked by these rhetorical pivots from Dems lately. It looks like a panicked default to the "turn the page/looking forward not backward" messaging that failed last time around, or more bluntly it looks like cowardice. And it's especially maddening because real and sustained accountability is the only way we're going to build something durable, something that's less susceptible to the 2 and 4 year cycles of obstruction and theater the GOP always uses when they're out of power.
I don't want to vote for anyone who isn't willing to scour as much rot as they can, and shine a light on what's left. It's the only way we'll get past this godforsaken stupid chapter of our history with anything left to build on. I don't see how some of our "leaders" don't see it. I guess they're still waiting for the fever to break.
This is exactly the analysis Democrats need to hear. The problem isn’t that voters are too dumb or apathetic—it’s that too many Democrats treat them that way. Brian nails the core issue: bland, consultant-driven messaging that fears clarity more than failure. Voters respond to boldness, to moral stakes, to someone who actually gives a damn. Enough triangulation. Enough “both sides” hand-wringing. The path forward isn’t safer messaging—it’s sharper messaging rooted in truth and courage. If Democrats want to win, they need to stop fearing their own shadow and start trusting voters to recognize—and reward—real leadership. Bravo.
I wholeheartedly agree. Some people in a group chat were talking enthusiastically about a senate candidate who had been their state representative. I felt heartened until I saw him in a tv interview. So bland, packaged, and predictable. Even giving him some allowance for trying to to squeeze his pitch into a brief segment, my immediate reaction was disappointment. Same ol’, same ol’ is not going to cut it. He should listen to the town halls not the consultants. In this climate voters will respond to courage and action. We’re sick of politicians who come bubble-wrapped in standard rhetoric.
The Democratic condescension towards constituents, as if nobody reads the news, is palpable and it's a big source of their basic brand problems; people think they are inauthentic and their ideas are bad because they lack the courage to respond normally to the news of the day and say what they think about it.
Democrats should be the anti-"Trump Party" party. It's not just Trump that's the problem. At federal and state levels, Republican organizations are bastions of hate, corruption and resentment. Potential Democratic voters do not like corruption or base dishonesty. Ethical values and a sense of fairness and justice still resonate.
The vulgar Marxism of centrist Democrats constantly discount this. One result is to drain a good deal Democratic rhetoric of righteous anger or incisive mockery (hello, Gov. Walz!).
Every Democratic official should find a way to insert the words "corrupt" or "corruption" into almost every pubic comment. "Corrupt" should be the Democratic "woke." Donald Trump is not merely dishonest. He is corrupt. Corrupt to the core. He is surrounded by corruption. He bathes in corruption.
Also, migrants who have done no real wrong and shipped off to El Salvador were not "accidentally" or "wrongfully arrested." They were" kidnapped." Indeed, they are "hostages" to MAGA hatred.
Senate or House Republicans who are propping up Trump are not our "colleagues across the aisle." They are our "opponents" or "rivals." Some are even "corrupt."
The biggest thing that these old-timey consultants miss is that in todays comms, you have :06 to make a impression, and message has to be consistent, clear and easy to digest to break thru… nuanced conversations can be for the talk show, we live in the age of thumb swipes and social media
Use this spreadsheet to call/email/write any of our representatives as often as possible. Not just your own state reps, reach out to those in other states. Be as loud as you can and share this. Use your voice and make some “good trouble.”
With Trump II politically we're as far from Clinton/Obama politics and successful tactics as 1988-2016 was from New Deal politics. We're going to have to accept that some of our faves are going to be lost at sea and unable to take us to the promised land.
It's about priorities. The post reminded me of Liz Cheney. She decided to vote for Harris, a candidate with whose every policy she disagrees. Because fundamental values were at stake. Compared to those policy differences were not important. Likewise for Dems differences between rigorous free-traders and mild protectionists are irrelevant for the time being. It's about restoring the Republic
I don't understand any Dem who ignores, or isn't aware of, one simple fact: Trump never does or says anything in good faith. He thinks good faith itself is for suckers. Whether it's from calculation or via his pathology, it doesn't matter. You cannot reach a deal with him, because he interprets the mutuality of such a deal as a defeat. He *has to* betray everyone he interacts with, because only then does it feel like "winning" to him. Shame on Whitmer. She should know better.
So where do we either find better people to represent us or get those who already do to stop listening to the consultants? From Carville and his *play dead* strategy to whomever is filling these people’s minds with the fact that a lot of those swing voters they’re trying to appeal to are just as pissed off as those of us who didn’t vote for Donald. I guess my question is, how do we get our pols to pay attention to reality?
I've been pretty mad at the UAW, Slotkin and Whitmer these past few days. A bunch of those workers are almost certainly going to *lose their jobs* over the next few years due to these stupid protectionist policies and these leaders are doing nothing to prepare them for that reality - the opposite, in fact. They're pumping them full of Trumpy false hope!
So disappointed to see my governor, Gretchen Whitmer pandering to him in the oval office. She has been such a good governor for Michigan, but this is very disappointing. I don’t understand why she thinks this would help her political aspirations, I don’t think it will.
Who exactly are these consultants? In much of your writing they come off as a shadowy cabal. Can we name names? Who are the organizations or individuals specifically advising Whitmer, Slotkin, Gallego? I'm not opposed to the hypothesis, but it's getting a little red string on a corkboard honestly ~consultants~
Very good survey, much to say. But just one: “Every accusation is a confession.” The iron rule of the authoritarian Right, but for whatever reason we just can’t keep it in our heads. In this installment, the "globalist elite."
Progressives and other ordinary, decent people want the U.S. to be engaged in the broader world because a world that is culturally, politically and economically healthy enhances the lives that we and our children can live. This is not “globalism,” it’s a broad and pragmatic concept of U.S. interest. The force behind the GOP is stateless, concentrated, autocratic capital. Which of these are the “globalist elites”?
We know that Trump has nothing in his head, except for the tergiversations of a two-year-old’s ego. We know that the forces behind him are not seeking to “bring manufacturing back to the U.S.,” they’re seeking to destroy the dollar and the capacity of the U.S. to engage in the world as an actual nation-state. If the Democrats were able to message generally against this background, they wouldn’t have to settle for a meek “we’re for labor too.” They’d securely hold the position as the last bulwark against the working man never having a job again and the elites controlling all his savings within a privatized currency system.
The pitch is: Trump is a total nut case, bent on destroying the country, plunging it into depression and poverty. He's unconstrained and needs to be impeached and convicted to save us.
Great post. I have been repeatedly irked by these rhetorical pivots from Dems lately. It looks like a panicked default to the "turn the page/looking forward not backward" messaging that failed last time around, or more bluntly it looks like cowardice. And it's especially maddening because real and sustained accountability is the only way we're going to build something durable, something that's less susceptible to the 2 and 4 year cycles of obstruction and theater the GOP always uses when they're out of power.
I don't want to vote for anyone who isn't willing to scour as much rot as they can, and shine a light on what's left. It's the only way we'll get past this godforsaken stupid chapter of our history with anything left to build on. I don't see how some of our "leaders" don't see it. I guess they're still waiting for the fever to break.
This is exactly the analysis Democrats need to hear. The problem isn’t that voters are too dumb or apathetic—it’s that too many Democrats treat them that way. Brian nails the core issue: bland, consultant-driven messaging that fears clarity more than failure. Voters respond to boldness, to moral stakes, to someone who actually gives a damn. Enough triangulation. Enough “both sides” hand-wringing. The path forward isn’t safer messaging—it’s sharper messaging rooted in truth and courage. If Democrats want to win, they need to stop fearing their own shadow and start trusting voters to recognize—and reward—real leadership. Bravo.
@Pete Buttigieg
I wholeheartedly agree. Some people in a group chat were talking enthusiastically about a senate candidate who had been their state representative. I felt heartened until I saw him in a tv interview. So bland, packaged, and predictable. Even giving him some allowance for trying to to squeeze his pitch into a brief segment, my immediate reaction was disappointment. Same ol’, same ol’ is not going to cut it. He should listen to the town halls not the consultants. In this climate voters will respond to courage and action. We’re sick of politicians who come bubble-wrapped in standard rhetoric.
Bingo.
The Democratic condescension towards constituents, as if nobody reads the news, is palpable and it's a big source of their basic brand problems; people think they are inauthentic and their ideas are bad because they lack the courage to respond normally to the news of the day and say what they think about it.
Democrats should be the anti-"Trump Party" party. It's not just Trump that's the problem. At federal and state levels, Republican organizations are bastions of hate, corruption and resentment. Potential Democratic voters do not like corruption or base dishonesty. Ethical values and a sense of fairness and justice still resonate.
The vulgar Marxism of centrist Democrats constantly discount this. One result is to drain a good deal Democratic rhetoric of righteous anger or incisive mockery (hello, Gov. Walz!).
Every Democratic official should find a way to insert the words "corrupt" or "corruption" into almost every pubic comment. "Corrupt" should be the Democratic "woke." Donald Trump is not merely dishonest. He is corrupt. Corrupt to the core. He is surrounded by corruption. He bathes in corruption.
Also, migrants who have done no real wrong and shipped off to El Salvador were not "accidentally" or "wrongfully arrested." They were" kidnapped." Indeed, they are "hostages" to MAGA hatred.
Senate or House Republicans who are propping up Trump are not our "colleagues across the aisle." They are our "opponents" or "rivals." Some are even "corrupt."
You get the picture.
Already test-driving the "centrist" messaging for 2026...and the Party poobahs don't get why the Democratic Party's brand is in the toilet...smfh.
The biggest thing that these old-timey consultants miss is that in todays comms, you have :06 to make a impression, and message has to be consistent, clear and easy to digest to break thru… nuanced conversations can be for the talk show, we live in the age of thumb swipes and social media
Keep being loud!
Use this spreadsheet to call/email/write any of our representatives as often as possible. Not just your own state reps, reach out to those in other states. Be as loud as you can and share this. Use your voice and make some “good trouble.”
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/13lYafj0P-6owAJcH-5_xcpcRvMUZI7rkBPW-Ma9e7hw/edit
Thank you, I am going to print this list!
With Trump II politically we're as far from Clinton/Obama politics and successful tactics as 1988-2016 was from New Deal politics. We're going to have to accept that some of our faves are going to be lost at sea and unable to take us to the promised land.
Enjoy the farm upstate Gavin and Big Gretch!
It's about priorities. The post reminded me of Liz Cheney. She decided to vote for Harris, a candidate with whose every policy she disagrees. Because fundamental values were at stake. Compared to those policy differences were not important. Likewise for Dems differences between rigorous free-traders and mild protectionists are irrelevant for the time being. It's about restoring the Republic
I don't understand any Dem who ignores, or isn't aware of, one simple fact: Trump never does or says anything in good faith. He thinks good faith itself is for suckers. Whether it's from calculation or via his pathology, it doesn't matter. You cannot reach a deal with him, because he interprets the mutuality of such a deal as a defeat. He *has to* betray everyone he interacts with, because only then does it feel like "winning" to him. Shame on Whitmer. She should know better.
So where do we either find better people to represent us or get those who already do to stop listening to the consultants? From Carville and his *play dead* strategy to whomever is filling these people’s minds with the fact that a lot of those swing voters they’re trying to appeal to are just as pissed off as those of us who didn’t vote for Donald. I guess my question is, how do we get our pols to pay attention to reality?
I've been pretty mad at the UAW, Slotkin and Whitmer these past few days. A bunch of those workers are almost certainly going to *lose their jobs* over the next few years due to these stupid protectionist policies and these leaders are doing nothing to prepare them for that reality - the opposite, in fact. They're pumping them full of Trumpy false hope!
So disappointed to see my governor, Gretchen Whitmer pandering to him in the oval office. She has been such a good governor for Michigan, but this is very disappointing. I don’t understand why she thinks this would help her political aspirations, I don’t think it will.
Who exactly are these consultants? In much of your writing they come off as a shadowy cabal. Can we name names? Who are the organizations or individuals specifically advising Whitmer, Slotkin, Gallego? I'm not opposed to the hypothesis, but it's getting a little red string on a corkboard honestly ~consultants~
Very good survey, much to say. But just one: “Every accusation is a confession.” The iron rule of the authoritarian Right, but for whatever reason we just can’t keep it in our heads. In this installment, the "globalist elite."
Progressives and other ordinary, decent people want the U.S. to be engaged in the broader world because a world that is culturally, politically and economically healthy enhances the lives that we and our children can live. This is not “globalism,” it’s a broad and pragmatic concept of U.S. interest. The force behind the GOP is stateless, concentrated, autocratic capital. Which of these are the “globalist elites”?
We know that Trump has nothing in his head, except for the tergiversations of a two-year-old’s ego. We know that the forces behind him are not seeking to “bring manufacturing back to the U.S.,” they’re seeking to destroy the dollar and the capacity of the U.S. to engage in the world as an actual nation-state. If the Democrats were able to message generally against this background, they wouldn’t have to settle for a meek “we’re for labor too.” They’d securely hold the position as the last bulwark against the working man never having a job again and the elites controlling all his savings within a privatized currency system.
The pitch is: Trump is a total nut case, bent on destroying the country, plunging it into depression and poverty. He's unconstrained and needs to be impeached and convicted to save us.
Emphasis upon 'nut case.'