I don’t think the chart shows what you are claiming it shows. I’ve seen reporting about polling on issues, on position and when no party is linked to the particular policy position, the issues that Democrats are trying to achieve are very popular. The electorate just doesn’t associate those positions with the Democratic Party. Similarly, when the public got wind of project 2025, the Republican candidate had to disown it because it was so toxic. MAGA voters are still saying that Project 2025 has nothing to do with the president-elect.
I think the problem is how the parties were defined during the election and how they presented their "platforms." Dems really need to frame themselves as more moderate and make it clear their positions are designed to help the working class economically to restore those votes to their column.
The GOP has lost 3 out of the last four elections. This was an inflation election. Let's see how Trump's tarriffs and mass deportations help with that ....
I'm a lifelong Democrat but, because of my wife's employment situation, I routinely socialize with working class folks who tend to favor Trump. Based on casual conversations over the years and over the beers, my recommendation for my fellow Dems is to move to the left on economic issues and to the right on cultural issues. There is a surprising amount of agreement between Progressives and MAGA members (not their leaders) on economic policies like health care, minimum wage, income inequality and so forth. The hostility toward the Democratic party primarily flows from issues around identity politics, immigration, gun control and so forth. The cultural issues tend to be more decisive in determining how someone will vote.
If we want to be successful politically going forward, I'd suggest that we emphasize and defend left wing economic policies while, as much as possible, minimizing our cultural differences.
This!!! I have MAGA friends and family who are good, thoughtful people. I'm extremely anti-MAGA. You'd think we'd disagree on most things, but that's not true. We agree on most economic issues. We're all progressive on this. (minimum wage, healthcare, tax the rich, regulate corporate gouging/collusion) We disagree slightly on social issues where I'm left of them, but we're not so far apart that we'd fight over the gap. The problem is that the Democratic party is slightly left of me on social issues and doesn't convey progressive economic positions clearly. They also don't make it clear that the economic policy is a priority. MAGA people I know believe Trump prioritizes economic issues and will help them. (This point we fight over.)
Good point! You probably would enjoy the book "Where have all the Democrats gone?" by Teixiera and Judis. A great read that spells out how the Dems have lost the working class voters that used to be a core constituency.
Harris lost the election because she was a black woman. And a bunch of cognitive dissonance. Voters thought that was worse than being a convicted criminal. Congressional Democrats actually did great. And better than her in many districts. So not a brand issue.
This left wing brand nonsense is Republican bs. You keep coming back to the brand thing. But there’s no evidence of it. Remember Harris only lost by 1.5 %.
Unpopular Incumbents typically lose far more seats than Democrats did this cycle. There were so many senate Democrats up for reelection in red states, it was always going to be tough for them. In the House, didn’t Democrats gain? And despite a gerrymandered North Carolina. Which cost them the leadership.
You can’t just ignore the wider context of what’s really going on so you can fit in your narrative. Progressive Democrats like AOC are increasingly popular. Democrats have been outperforming in special elections since 2022. All these things don’t point to a brand issue.
Black women candidates are always going to lose points when competing against white males. Is it conceivable that this accounts for Harris loss in swing states. Vs a shortened 3 month campaign, lingering inflation, attachment to an unpopular incumbent. I’d say yes. She should have lost by more than 1.5 %. With all these other factors.
Going forward though, Trump Republicans bizarre behavior is setting the tone for the next administration. They are actually setting up their own brand problem. When they should be helping Americans to lower living costs.
Chris, Biden WON in 2020, in which the Dem primary was far more left-progressive than the campaign that Kamala ran (which was NOT focused on identity politics or left-progressive issues). Also, while Beshear is seen as a moderate, he is unabashedly "left" on many issues like Medicaid expansion, criminal justice reform, and (against) right-to-work laws.
Harris was successfully defined as a left wing California liberal by the Republicans. They were able to do that because of the Progressive positions that she took in the primary four years earlier and her voting record in the Senate.
Or, was it because so many gullible people believed 2.0's lies about the economy, and transgender, and crime, and the border, without bothering to look it up to learn the actual facts?
YES! But the "brand" for the 2024 campaign was defined for the Democrats by the GOP. The Democrats seem to be clueless on the "branding" issue. Sure, their core values are inclusivity, etc, but they gave the GOP the space to pervert the message. They have extremely poor discipline within the party and even worse messaging (and "branding") capability.
Agreed 💯! Chris: you want us to believe that “this is the chart that every Democrat should look at”, and when you’re called out on it being woefully out-of-date, you throw a halfassed comment about the election loss instead?!
In your article asking we subscribers what the definition of “journalist” is, one reader said something to the effect of “journalists” do their research, and if wrong, own up to it, and “pundits” just move on.
Which definition do you think your rash answer falls under? Do better, Chris.
As I mentioned in an earlier comment, you *could* have been more magnanimous to ALL the readers that called you out on using an old chart by saying “You’re right, it’s old, but it’s still valuable now, maybe even more so”. Responding honestly and reasonably to your PAID subscribers seems like the best attitude to have as a small business owner.
Likely you’ve never owned nor run a business before, but you might want to consider a bit of “customer service” in the future…
And if you want to talk about identity politics, let's talk about 2.0's picks for his cabinet and administration based solely on their loyalty to him over loyalty to our Constitution. That is identity politics.
I'm gonna say it and you can kick me off your page if you don't want me here.
It doesn't matter if the majority of folks don't want trans folks to do...whatever.
It doesn't matter if progressive white folks are more into civil rights than many black folks.
It doesn't matter if more working class voters care less about occupational health and safety than progressive folks do.
Showing us chart after chart to prove that we are not in the mainstream doesn't mean much to us.
I'm never giving up on fair wages, equal protecting to all, treating gay and trans folks like human beings, and being a decent human. It really doesn't matter to me if it appears I (we) are in the minority right now.
I believe a majority of Germans thought Hitler was in the right until the Allies summarily destroyed Germany.
We get it, our views are not popular, shared by many of our neighbors, and certainly not winning elections. We don't have an answer on this. For example, most of the folks who oppose higher minimum wages would be the same ones to get more or benefit from better worker safety rules. Explain that one. You can't.
Well said. I struggle with this same stream of thoughts. Will not compromise my values to get in sync with the fellow citizens that voted for Trump. Just can't do it. So, if that means I spend the next few election cycles in the wilderness with folks like you, Rocket Master Man, I'm ok with that.
I'd rather be on the losing side and maintain my values than ever succumb. I'm a hippie liberal from the 60's. I don't care what my fellow citizens do with their private lives. I do care about gays, trans, immigrants and minorities, and, of course, women.
I don't understand the America I am living in right now, having lived through the 60's and 70's. We're going backward after all that was fought for and won during those turbulent decades. America has survived a lot. Hope she's up for the next four years.
Chris, I believe that the Right defines the Left only on the far left issues, as such it is a Pox on the entire Democrat electorate. Look at the trans issue. Trump campaign spent more money on anti-trans ads than all the other “important” issues combined — the economy, the border, etc. I’ve been non-partisan for the 50 years I’ve been a voter, but have very left leaning family members and friends, and you’d be surprised to learn that we do not sit around at night discussing pronouns, or our desire to indoctrinate school kids into gay or trans lifestyles, or how cool it is to be so “woke”, etc. The Right media are the ones that are super-focused on the far left woke issues, not the vast majority of Democrats who sit firmly in the middle somewhere. Unfortunately, the Right is very good at this, and has 49.9% of the country convinced of it…..
I agree with you and have had the same experiences! But I think this is the point Chris is making. While we "Joe Average" democrat Americans aren't focusing on this stuff, the elitist power players in the Democratic Party are. That's what gives the Right their ammo to brand Dems as crazy leftists. The difficulty he identifies is trying to get all of us aligned behind the Dem voter more moderate views.
I agree the GOP propaganda machine has weaponized a culture war that does not even exist in real life. I also believe Pete Buttigieg is the best bet for democrats to put at the top of the ticket going forward. Nobody on the far left can dispute that he’d care about LGBTQ issues and he does not need to advertise it. He’s known to be very moderate on economic issues, a veteran and the parties strongest communicator. Scott Bessent and Peter Theil are proof being a gay man is not a hurdle. Pete Buttigieg is our guy.
Can you point to Harris-Walz messaging that relates to wokeness and identity politics? I don’t blame Dems for the propaganda of the Trump campaign. They lost because of branding, I agree with you, but it’s because they allowed the right to brand them without pushing back enough. Not from anything they were talking about, as far as I could see. We can argue whether “opportunity economy” or “a new way forward” worked but …it wasn’t about identity politics.
Harris did a good job not repeating her more leftist 2019 positions, but she never explicitly rejected them or had a Sister Souljah moment. It created an opening for Republicans which they ran right through.
Yes but Harris did far better than Biden himself would have done, his approval rating was dreadful and at least her approval rating was positive! Inflation and an out of control border were too much for her to overcome in a too short of a campaign.
I'd compare the far left of the Democratic party to the libertarian wing of the Republican party. They each have strong beliefs that are outside the mainstream (get your think tanks to convince the broader public).
Ultimately it comes down to you can't make change if you don't have power - so 70% of something is better than 100% of nothing. Those who seek purity tests for their candidates may feel better but it's a losing game.
Purity tests have purged sensible politicians from both parties and the country is much worse off because of that. Dare to follow your conscience on an issue that the extremists in your party hold dear and you will be primaried and beaten.
I don’t see the “move to the center” concept as a practical reality.
I’m no PLO lover; hardly. But the sight of the wreckage and dead children of Gaza doesn’t please me, either. So, in that context to be a “Leftist” or “Rightist” means what, exactly? If that wreckage pleases me, does that makes me a ”Rightist”? It probably pleases some Israeli “Rightists”. But I don’t hate Muslims simply because they’re Muslims. So, does that make me a “Leftist”?
Same with DEI. Or “Woke”. I acknowledge both as essentially valid. Right-wing thinking essentially doesn’t. It denies past American discrimination based on sex and race. I admire Caitlin Clark’s basketball skills. She’s amazing. But in earlier eras they could never have become evident because there was no WBNA to allow it. Showcase it. No NBA team would have allowed her to play because they discriminated against women players. So, does my approving the creation of athletic opportunities for women make me a “Leftist”?
I believe the spate of shootings ripping America apart could be curbed by prohibiting sale of military-style assault weapons. After all, their sole purpose is to commit mass murder of human beings. Civilians have no conceivable need for such devices. But does that make me a “Leftist”?
I admire Rep. Liz Cheney, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Former Trump White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson for their courage and outspokenness. But does that make me a “Leftist”?
Trump’s frequently outrageous behavior disgusts and appalls me. Does that make me a “Leftist”?
I don’t think in “Left/Right” terms. If the rest of the country does, I think the problem is with its simplistic thinking.
Great chart - thanks for sharing. I see what you are saying, but I also see that the GOP doesn't have that long tail, in fact, it was smaller than the general electorate as well. That shows the GOP as being more concentrated, but that can also show it as unable to move. I won't deign to tell Dems what to do, but that lack of a long tail is as interesting as anything else.
Let’s be clear. Kamala did not run a campaign of wokeness. In fact, what she ran on was a somewhat muddled message as she tried to renounce very liberal positions that she took back in 2019 when nearly the entire Democratic field was trying to one up each other on who was more liberal. You are correct about the activist and donor base of the Dems being far to the left of the voters. This is a problem on social issues. What it is not a problem with is economic issues. The centrist neoliberal consensus that ruled both parties for 40 years is dead. Any candidate who runs on the platform will lose. The real tragedy of the Biden Presidency is that the policies he enacted are favored by the majority of voters when asked about the policy divorced from the candidate. If inflation hadn’t spiked, Biden would have been regarded as a successful President. And, as we all know, inflation was a worldwide problem and was much less so in the US. The ideal Dem candidate to win in 2028 is one who is an economic populist-favors government investment in cutting edge industries of the future, supports unions, busts the nimby regulations that limit new housing development, has policies that will lift the millennial and gen z generations into home ownership, and addresses critical issues like childcare. At the same time they will jettison identity politics because it turns out the groups the Dems treat as having a monolithic identity don’t like being grouped that way. They will speak like a normal human and not hector and shame people who don’t identify with terms like Latinx, and people of color. And they will take moderate positions on abortion, and especially transgender people. So the Dem who can win is an economic populist who is viewed as being on the side of the average working person while speaking clearly and simply about social issues without adopting the off-putting rhetoric of the far left. And the country will be ripe for such a candidate after Trump screws all the working class people who voted for him
Have any idea who that candidate might be? I'd love to start spreading the word about what an awesome president we have coming in 4 years. (Honestly looking for actual names here.)
"The centrist neoliberal consensus that ruled both parties for 40 years is dead. Any candidate who runs on the platform will lose. The real tragedy of the Biden Presidency is that the policies he enacted are favored by the majority of voters when asked about the policy divorced from the candidate. If inflation hadn’t spiked, Biden would have been regarded as a successful President."
Exactly and even Trump seems to be disowning neoliberalism big time!
Unfortunately, his policy goal seems to be cut programs that help the working class, poor, elderly and veterans to fund further tax cuts for the rich. How he manages to convince working people he's on their side is completely beyond me.
I know the frequent commenters here lean more left themselves - many probably being some of those who so deeply believe in progressive principles. And it is good to have strong principles, based on one's moral code.
But for purposes of analyzing one's position - either literally/physically or metaphorically/ideologically - it's much harder to tell where you are relative to your surroundings when you're observing from your own vantage point, as opposed to looking at an overhead view of the entire map. That's why maps at shopping malls and theme parks always have a "you are here" marker on the map. So you can properly orient your position relative to your surroundings.
My point, is that each individual has a disadvantage in understanding one's ideological position on the spectrum, because there's no way to get a purely unbiased "you are here" marker on that ideological spectrum. But I do think it's a little easier for someone like Chris to make such an observation than for us to notice it about ourselves.
People who are far right generally don't think they're far right. People who are far left generally don't think they're far left.
I'm one of those conservatives of the Dispatch/Bullwark/Never-Trump ilk (oversimplification: Reagan good, Trump evil and dangerous), and though I realize my position within the political spectrum makes it difficult to orient myself relative to people immediately around me, I do think it makes it easier to make observations about those much farther away from me, on the far right and far left.
And, to me, I think Chris and the chart he cites, seem pretty accurate.
I actually think I have a pretty solid viewpoint because I've lived several years in 4 different areas as an adult (rural Ohio, Seattle, Montana, Colorado). I know my positions are reasonably moderate because in Ohio and Montana I was considered that wild liberal and while living in Seattle I was considered that moronic conservative. (In Colorado the politics get messy as evidenced by Polis comments on RFK.) From my position (neoliberalism and Trump both blow, but both parties contain extremist wingnuts) the chart is too simplistic to offer clear direction because it merges all policies into one blob. I'm not in denial and I think the chart does offer encouragement to look closely at where the Dems are relative to the middle. I just think it needs more nuance to be honestly enlightening.
All fair points and good observations. I've similarly lived in a variety of areas (including Seattle and Montana, coincidentally!) and just outside the DC Beltway.
Each party has its 5-10% of extremists at the fringes. These folks are often the loudest and most public of us. The difference between parties though is that the left can not bring them selves to put their crazies in check for fear of breaking the coalition, where as the right can treat their crazies as what they are.
I don't know that the right treats their crazies as what they are. "Stand back and stand by," and an invitation to dine together is not pushing them aside.
One reservation I have about many analyses along these lines is an overstatement of the changed landscape. Compare these two non-Covid inflected election results on popular vote:
2016: Trump 45.93%; Clinton 48.02% [conservative 3rd party: 3.80%]
2024: Trump 49.76; Harris 48.21% [conservative 3rd party: 0.42%] (as of today--I left out RFK)*
This is not an earthquake in voter sentiment. Trump basically picked up the voter group that went Libertarian/McMullin in 2016. I think the urgency to develop a new Democratic political strategy is very high--the electoral college is real. But I don't think we should overstate the degree to which voters are newly alienated from the party.
Boy! I don't know what you were watching, but the "identity politics" I saw in 2024 was primarily from the GOP. I certainly don't recall the Harris campaign running on "wokeness," DEI, etc. To the contrary. It was the Trump campaign that used those "issues" to define the Democrats.
As I'm sure any number of the comments will point out, the policies the Democrats ran on (and that the current administration has executed,) when separated from the Democratic "brand" are, in fact, quite popular with most of the electorate.
I think you're spinning a popular narrative that would ultimately leave the Democrats going down the wrong path.
I don’t think the chart shows what you are claiming it shows. I’ve seen reporting about polling on issues, on position and when no party is linked to the particular policy position, the issues that Democrats are trying to achieve are very popular. The electorate just doesn’t associate those positions with the Democratic Party. Similarly, when the public got wind of project 2025, the Republican candidate had to disown it because it was so toxic. MAGA voters are still saying that Project 2025 has nothing to do with the president-elect.
I think the problem is how the parties were defined during the election and how they presented their "platforms." Dems really need to frame themselves as more moderate and make it clear their positions are designed to help the working class economically to restore those votes to their column.
Which isn’t precisely what Chris wrote about. Isn’t his assertion that the Democratic Party is out of touch with the American people?
Whistle on past the graveyard
What graveyard?
The GOP has lost 3 out of the last four elections. This was an inflation election. Let's see how Trump's tarriffs and mass deportations help with that ....
I'm a lifelong Democrat but, because of my wife's employment situation, I routinely socialize with working class folks who tend to favor Trump. Based on casual conversations over the years and over the beers, my recommendation for my fellow Dems is to move to the left on economic issues and to the right on cultural issues. There is a surprising amount of agreement between Progressives and MAGA members (not their leaders) on economic policies like health care, minimum wage, income inequality and so forth. The hostility toward the Democratic party primarily flows from issues around identity politics, immigration, gun control and so forth. The cultural issues tend to be more decisive in determining how someone will vote.
If we want to be successful politically going forward, I'd suggest that we emphasize and defend left wing economic policies while, as much as possible, minimizing our cultural differences.
This!!! I have MAGA friends and family who are good, thoughtful people. I'm extremely anti-MAGA. You'd think we'd disagree on most things, but that's not true. We agree on most economic issues. We're all progressive on this. (minimum wage, healthcare, tax the rich, regulate corporate gouging/collusion) We disagree slightly on social issues where I'm left of them, but we're not so far apart that we'd fight over the gap. The problem is that the Democratic party is slightly left of me on social issues and doesn't convey progressive economic positions clearly. They also don't make it clear that the economic policy is a priority. MAGA people I know believe Trump prioritizes economic issues and will help them. (This point we fight over.)
Exactly
Good point! You probably would enjoy the book "Where have all the Democrats gone?" by Teixiera and Judis. A great read that spells out how the Dems have lost the working class voters that used to be a core constituency.
Chris, your chart is from 2021. The right has since moved much further right, and the left as moderated more towards the middle.
To be clear: Democrats LOST this election. Because of their brand issues.
Harris lost the election because she was a black woman. And a bunch of cognitive dissonance. Voters thought that was worse than being a convicted criminal. Congressional Democrats actually did great. And better than her in many districts. So not a brand issue.
This left wing brand nonsense is Republican bs. You keep coming back to the brand thing. But there’s no evidence of it. Remember Harris only lost by 1.5 %.
She lost all 7 swing states. Republicans gained four Senate seats. They kept control of the House.
Seems like you are ignoring all of that.
Unpopular Incumbents typically lose far more seats than Democrats did this cycle. There were so many senate Democrats up for reelection in red states, it was always going to be tough for them. In the House, didn’t Democrats gain? And despite a gerrymandered North Carolina. Which cost them the leadership.
You can’t just ignore the wider context of what’s really going on so you can fit in your narrative. Progressive Democrats like AOC are increasingly popular. Democrats have been outperforming in special elections since 2022. All these things don’t point to a brand issue.
Black women candidates are always going to lose points when competing against white males. Is it conceivable that this accounts for Harris loss in swing states. Vs a shortened 3 month campaign, lingering inflation, attachment to an unpopular incumbent. I’d say yes. She should have lost by more than 1.5 %. With all these other factors.
Going forward though, Trump Republicans bizarre behavior is setting the tone for the next administration. They are actually setting up their own brand problem. When they should be helping Americans to lower living costs.
Chris, Biden WON in 2020, in which the Dem primary was far more left-progressive than the campaign that Kamala ran (which was NOT focused on identity politics or left-progressive issues). Also, while Beshear is seen as a moderate, he is unabashedly "left" on many issues like Medicaid expansion, criminal justice reform, and (against) right-to-work laws.
Harris was successfully defined as a left wing California liberal by the Republicans. They were able to do that because of the Progressive positions that she took in the primary four years earlier and her voting record in the Senate.
Or, was it because so many gullible people believed 2.0's lies about the economy, and transgender, and crime, and the border, without bothering to look it up to learn the actual facts?
YES! But the "brand" for the 2024 campaign was defined for the Democrats by the GOP. The Democrats seem to be clueless on the "branding" issue. Sure, their core values are inclusivity, etc, but they gave the GOP the space to pervert the message. They have extremely poor discipline within the party and even worse messaging (and "branding") capability.
Sloppy reporting, Chris! And revelatory about your own bias.
Agreed 💯! Chris: you want us to believe that “this is the chart that every Democrat should look at”, and when you’re called out on it being woefully out-of-date, you throw a halfassed comment about the election loss instead?!
In your article asking we subscribers what the definition of “journalist” is, one reader said something to the effect of “journalists” do their research, and if wrong, own up to it, and “pundits” just move on.
Which definition do you think your rash answer falls under? Do better, Chris.
Thanks for the lecture!
Snark is not appreciated when you’re clearly missing the point that *many* of your readers are calling you out on, Chris.
Who was it that calls people out for “bullying” in the Comment section? Sarcasm doesn’t make it any less so.
Hey man. You are entitled to your views on politics. I draw the line when you accuse me of sloppiness and bias. You are wrong -- and I will say so.
As I mentioned in an earlier comment, you *could* have been more magnanimous to ALL the readers that called you out on using an old chart by saying “You’re right, it’s old, but it’s still valuable now, maybe even more so”. Responding honestly and reasonably to your PAID subscribers seems like the best attitude to have as a small business owner.
Likely you’ve never owned nor run a business before, but you might want to consider a bit of “customer service” in the future…
This response is not a great look, far more than the original post.
Perhaps but it’s the brand that is sinking the party
And if you want to talk about identity politics, let's talk about 2.0's picks for his cabinet and administration based solely on their loyalty to him over loyalty to our Constitution. That is identity politics.
It's not helpful to redefine "identity politics" to win a losing argument.
Sorry, choosing someone who has zero qualifications or experience, based simply on their feality to 2.0, IS identity politics.
Oh, and 2.0 chooses the one who "looks the part" which is also identity politics.
I'm gonna say it and you can kick me off your page if you don't want me here.
It doesn't matter if the majority of folks don't want trans folks to do...whatever.
It doesn't matter if progressive white folks are more into civil rights than many black folks.
It doesn't matter if more working class voters care less about occupational health and safety than progressive folks do.
Showing us chart after chart to prove that we are not in the mainstream doesn't mean much to us.
I'm never giving up on fair wages, equal protecting to all, treating gay and trans folks like human beings, and being a decent human. It really doesn't matter to me if it appears I (we) are in the minority right now.
I believe a majority of Germans thought Hitler was in the right until the Allies summarily destroyed Germany.
We get it, our views are not popular, shared by many of our neighbors, and certainly not winning elections. We don't have an answer on this. For example, most of the folks who oppose higher minimum wages would be the same ones to get more or benefit from better worker safety rules. Explain that one. You can't.
But we will never give up what we know is right.
Well said. I struggle with this same stream of thoughts. Will not compromise my values to get in sync with the fellow citizens that voted for Trump. Just can't do it. So, if that means I spend the next few election cycles in the wilderness with folks like you, Rocket Master Man, I'm ok with that.
I'd rather be on the losing side and maintain my values than ever succumb. I'm a hippie liberal from the 60's. I don't care what my fellow citizens do with their private lives. I do care about gays, trans, immigrants and minorities, and, of course, women.
I don't understand the America I am living in right now, having lived through the 60's and 70's. We're going backward after all that was fought for and won during those turbulent decades. America has survived a lot. Hope she's up for the next four years.
Chris, I believe that the Right defines the Left only on the far left issues, as such it is a Pox on the entire Democrat electorate. Look at the trans issue. Trump campaign spent more money on anti-trans ads than all the other “important” issues combined — the economy, the border, etc. I’ve been non-partisan for the 50 years I’ve been a voter, but have very left leaning family members and friends, and you’d be surprised to learn that we do not sit around at night discussing pronouns, or our desire to indoctrinate school kids into gay or trans lifestyles, or how cool it is to be so “woke”, etc. The Right media are the ones that are super-focused on the far left woke issues, not the vast majority of Democrats who sit firmly in the middle somewhere. Unfortunately, the Right is very good at this, and has 49.9% of the country convinced of it…..
I agree with you and have had the same experiences! But I think this is the point Chris is making. While we "Joe Average" democrat Americans aren't focusing on this stuff, the elitist power players in the Democratic Party are. That's what gives the Right their ammo to brand Dems as crazy leftists. The difficulty he identifies is trying to get all of us aligned behind the Dem voter more moderate views.
I agree the GOP propaganda machine has weaponized a culture war that does not even exist in real life. I also believe Pete Buttigieg is the best bet for democrats to put at the top of the ticket going forward. Nobody on the far left can dispute that he’d care about LGBTQ issues and he does not need to advertise it. He’s known to be very moderate on economic issues, a veteran and the parties strongest communicator. Scott Bessent and Peter Theil are proof being a gay man is not a hurdle. Pete Buttigieg is our guy.
Can you point to Harris-Walz messaging that relates to wokeness and identity politics? I don’t blame Dems for the propaganda of the Trump campaign. They lost because of branding, I agree with you, but it’s because they allowed the right to brand them without pushing back enough. Not from anything they were talking about, as far as I could see. We can argue whether “opportunity economy” or “a new way forward” worked but …it wasn’t about identity politics.
Harris did a good job not repeating her more leftist 2019 positions, but she never explicitly rejected them or had a Sister Souljah moment. It created an opening for Republicans which they ran right through.
Yes but Harris did far better than Biden himself would have done, his approval rating was dreadful and at least her approval rating was positive! Inflation and an out of control border were too much for her to overcome in a too short of a campaign.
I'd compare the far left of the Democratic party to the libertarian wing of the Republican party. They each have strong beliefs that are outside the mainstream (get your think tanks to convince the broader public).
Ultimately it comes down to you can't make change if you don't have power - so 70% of something is better than 100% of nothing. Those who seek purity tests for their candidates may feel better but it's a losing game.
Purity tests have purged sensible politicians from both parties and the country is much worse off because of that. Dare to follow your conscience on an issue that the extremists in your party hold dear and you will be primaried and beaten.
I don’t see the “move to the center” concept as a practical reality.
I’m no PLO lover; hardly. But the sight of the wreckage and dead children of Gaza doesn’t please me, either. So, in that context to be a “Leftist” or “Rightist” means what, exactly? If that wreckage pleases me, does that makes me a ”Rightist”? It probably pleases some Israeli “Rightists”. But I don’t hate Muslims simply because they’re Muslims. So, does that make me a “Leftist”?
Same with DEI. Or “Woke”. I acknowledge both as essentially valid. Right-wing thinking essentially doesn’t. It denies past American discrimination based on sex and race. I admire Caitlin Clark’s basketball skills. She’s amazing. But in earlier eras they could never have become evident because there was no WBNA to allow it. Showcase it. No NBA team would have allowed her to play because they discriminated against women players. So, does my approving the creation of athletic opportunities for women make me a “Leftist”?
I believe the spate of shootings ripping America apart could be curbed by prohibiting sale of military-style assault weapons. After all, their sole purpose is to commit mass murder of human beings. Civilians have no conceivable need for such devices. But does that make me a “Leftist”?
I admire Rep. Liz Cheney, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Former Trump White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson for their courage and outspokenness. But does that make me a “Leftist”?
Trump’s frequently outrageous behavior disgusts and appalls me. Does that make me a “Leftist”?
I don’t think in “Left/Right” terms. If the rest of the country does, I think the problem is with its simplistic thinking.
Well said.
I try.
Great chart - thanks for sharing. I see what you are saying, but I also see that the GOP doesn't have that long tail, in fact, it was smaller than the general electorate as well. That shows the GOP as being more concentrated, but that can also show it as unable to move. I won't deign to tell Dems what to do, but that lack of a long tail is as interesting as anything else.
In this day and age of politics…..isn’t a three year old graph pretty much worthless? Honestly asking…not bashing….
I think what Democrats were talking about over the last few years is pretty consistent and telling
Thanks Chris…
No problem!
Let’s be clear. Kamala did not run a campaign of wokeness. In fact, what she ran on was a somewhat muddled message as she tried to renounce very liberal positions that she took back in 2019 when nearly the entire Democratic field was trying to one up each other on who was more liberal. You are correct about the activist and donor base of the Dems being far to the left of the voters. This is a problem on social issues. What it is not a problem with is economic issues. The centrist neoliberal consensus that ruled both parties for 40 years is dead. Any candidate who runs on the platform will lose. The real tragedy of the Biden Presidency is that the policies he enacted are favored by the majority of voters when asked about the policy divorced from the candidate. If inflation hadn’t spiked, Biden would have been regarded as a successful President. And, as we all know, inflation was a worldwide problem and was much less so in the US. The ideal Dem candidate to win in 2028 is one who is an economic populist-favors government investment in cutting edge industries of the future, supports unions, busts the nimby regulations that limit new housing development, has policies that will lift the millennial and gen z generations into home ownership, and addresses critical issues like childcare. At the same time they will jettison identity politics because it turns out the groups the Dems treat as having a monolithic identity don’t like being grouped that way. They will speak like a normal human and not hector and shame people who don’t identify with terms like Latinx, and people of color. And they will take moderate positions on abortion, and especially transgender people. So the Dem who can win is an economic populist who is viewed as being on the side of the average working person while speaking clearly and simply about social issues without adopting the off-putting rhetoric of the far left. And the country will be ripe for such a candidate after Trump screws all the working class people who voted for him
The person we need to run is Pete Buttigieg.
I agree wholeheartedly!
Have any idea who that candidate might be? I'd love to start spreading the word about what an awesome president we have coming in 4 years. (Honestly looking for actual names here.)
"The centrist neoliberal consensus that ruled both parties for 40 years is dead. Any candidate who runs on the platform will lose. The real tragedy of the Biden Presidency is that the policies he enacted are favored by the majority of voters when asked about the policy divorced from the candidate. If inflation hadn’t spiked, Biden would have been regarded as a successful President."
Exactly and even Trump seems to be disowning neoliberalism big time!
Unfortunately, his policy goal seems to be cut programs that help the working class, poor, elderly and veterans to fund further tax cuts for the rich. How he manages to convince working people he's on their side is completely beyond me.
Chris, I think you're exactly correct.
I know the frequent commenters here lean more left themselves - many probably being some of those who so deeply believe in progressive principles. And it is good to have strong principles, based on one's moral code.
But for purposes of analyzing one's position - either literally/physically or metaphorically/ideologically - it's much harder to tell where you are relative to your surroundings when you're observing from your own vantage point, as opposed to looking at an overhead view of the entire map. That's why maps at shopping malls and theme parks always have a "you are here" marker on the map. So you can properly orient your position relative to your surroundings.
My point, is that each individual has a disadvantage in understanding one's ideological position on the spectrum, because there's no way to get a purely unbiased "you are here" marker on that ideological spectrum. But I do think it's a little easier for someone like Chris to make such an observation than for us to notice it about ourselves.
People who are far right generally don't think they're far right. People who are far left generally don't think they're far left.
I'm one of those conservatives of the Dispatch/Bullwark/Never-Trump ilk (oversimplification: Reagan good, Trump evil and dangerous), and though I realize my position within the political spectrum makes it difficult to orient myself relative to people immediately around me, I do think it makes it easier to make observations about those much farther away from me, on the far right and far left.
And, to me, I think Chris and the chart he cites, seem pretty accurate.
I actually think I have a pretty solid viewpoint because I've lived several years in 4 different areas as an adult (rural Ohio, Seattle, Montana, Colorado). I know my positions are reasonably moderate because in Ohio and Montana I was considered that wild liberal and while living in Seattle I was considered that moronic conservative. (In Colorado the politics get messy as evidenced by Polis comments on RFK.) From my position (neoliberalism and Trump both blow, but both parties contain extremist wingnuts) the chart is too simplistic to offer clear direction because it merges all policies into one blob. I'm not in denial and I think the chart does offer encouragement to look closely at where the Dems are relative to the middle. I just think it needs more nuance to be honestly enlightening.
All fair points and good observations. I've similarly lived in a variety of areas (including Seattle and Montana, coincidentally!) and just outside the DC Beltway.
I agree! And I'm a Dem.
Each party has its 5-10% of extremists at the fringes. These folks are often the loudest and most public of us. The difference between parties though is that the left can not bring them selves to put their crazies in check for fear of breaking the coalition, where as the right can treat their crazies as what they are.
I don't know that the right treats their crazies as what they are. "Stand back and stand by," and an invitation to dine together is not pushing them aside.
That’s because the Dems are a true coalition whereas the R’s are a cult-like monolith
Not only are the left’s crazies not in check, they run universities, nonprofits, HR departments and much of legacy media.
And they are extremely loud on all social media and will call you hateful names for not being as far left as they are on all things.
One reservation I have about many analyses along these lines is an overstatement of the changed landscape. Compare these two non-Covid inflected election results on popular vote:
2016: Trump 45.93%; Clinton 48.02% [conservative 3rd party: 3.80%]
2024: Trump 49.76; Harris 48.21% [conservative 3rd party: 0.42%] (as of today--I left out RFK)*
This is not an earthquake in voter sentiment. Trump basically picked up the voter group that went Libertarian/McMullin in 2016. I think the urgency to develop a new Democratic political strategy is very high--the electoral college is real. But I don't think we should overstate the degree to which voters are newly alienated from the party.
*My source is Dave Leip's site (https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/index.html)
Boy! I don't know what you were watching, but the "identity politics" I saw in 2024 was primarily from the GOP. I certainly don't recall the Harris campaign running on "wokeness," DEI, etc. To the contrary. It was the Trump campaign that used those "issues" to define the Democrats.
As I'm sure any number of the comments will point out, the policies the Democrats ran on (and that the current administration has executed,) when separated from the Democratic "brand" are, in fact, quite popular with most of the electorate.
I think you're spinning a popular narrative that would ultimately leave the Democrats going down the wrong path.