With a fixture (Clyburn) of both the Dem establishment that keeps losing elections and the party's gerontocracy in the news, worth coming back to this @adambonica.bsky.social piece. A better party is possible. data4democracy.substack.com/p/the-democr...
The only thing popularists fear more than an unpopular idea from the left is a popular one that might actually threaten billionaires.
These plots shows the highest-leverage policies that win back defectors on both the left and right:
- Increase pay for public sector
- Decrease cost of bus and train tickets
- Wealth tax on billionaires
and the winnable left bloc is bigger than the right
It’s not because the public is against it—only 20% of Americans oppose ICC membership. It’s because bipartisan opposition in the Senate makes it a non-starter, leaving the US to sit alongside authoritarian holdout states that don’t want accountability when their leaders start wars.
A functioning opposition party would respond to this moment by committing to join the ICC when they return to power.
Democrats won’t. And it’s for the same reason they failed to hold Trump accountable after Jan 6. Shielding elites from accountability is a depressingly bipartisan project in DC.
Strongly recommend this excellent piece. It actually understates the US failure: Brazil and S. Korea aren’t outliers. Quite the opposite. Since 2010, 31 democracies have convicted or banned leaders from office. Accountability is the democratic norm. America is the sole outlier.
This is devastating, tragic, and powerful reporting. Underneath it all, it’s remarkable to see what Iranians will risk to be free.
A reminder of how much we have left to lose and why it’s worth fighting for—and that once we reclaim our democracy, we’ll have an obligation to help others do the same.
Coups generally succeed on second or third attempts.
(Comparativists know this)
Donald Trump won in 2016 and 2024 because anti-system voters flocked to him.
Democrats need a strategy for competing with anti-system voters in 2028.
This is, in some ways, a very strong case for nominating someone like AOC over Newsom.
www.gelliottmorris.com/p/meet-ameri...
My undergrads are so damn good. Not in their taste in music so much, but in their dedication to social science and moral commitments. Really tired of how they get unfairly maligned by the punditry.
"Democratic politicians urgently need to adopt the GOP view of public opinion—that it’s movable, and it’s their job to move it." newrepublic.com/article/2058...
This tracks closely with the argument I’ve made about the U.S.: scarcity is litigated, not regulated.
Civil law countries have much more regulation but far fewer lawsuits. The housing crisis isn’t about too many rules; it’s about who can afford to sue over them.
weird that americans think corruption is rampant, where would they get such a wacky idea
Epstiarchy (n.) — a corrupt system of rule in which oligarchs maintain power through extreme wealth, mutual protection, and the capture or abuse of legal and political institutions; marked by egregious crimes that are widely known yet go unpunished.
Syn: The Epstein Class; Oligarchs of the Island
“The claim that Republican anti-trans ads and rhetoric are winning over Democratic and independent voters is simply not true. Moreover, the assumption that abandoning trans rights will have no negative ramifications for Democrats is mistaken.” @juliaserano.bsky.social
This part of our response essay is where I'm at. Boiling down all of politics to electoralism has been absolutely terrible for resisting rising authoritarianism.
www.bostonreview.net/forum/how-no...
Please read the article you are citing. I reported the 1.4pt as the Times’ result (not ours) from their own data, then showed it would have flipped zero seats. The follow-up article shows the 1.4pt effect is clearly a statistical artifact.
very excited to have my response included in the latest Boston Review forum against Democratic moderation! here it is, my best argument for why Dems shouldn't "moderate" on transgender rights & LGBTQ issues more generally (as they are inextricably linked): www.bostonreview.net/forum/how-no...
anyhoo, it seems that we're doomed to run through this cycle once every few months until the end of time
“We have been asked to call the centrist response to this presidency “moderation.” Recent events make it clear we should recognize it as appeasement.”
Excellent piece by @rauchway.bsky.social about the importance of building an enduring coalition capable of recovery and reform.
🔥 from @amandalitman.bsky.social
Candidate recruitment and party management is the harder, more crucial work than poll-following
We have a Boston Review Forum out today on the Democratic Party in a time of authoritarianism
www.bostonreview.net/forum/how-no...
when you're to the right of jim rogan
Perennial reminder of this excellent paper about how secret police forces are swamped with underachievers
“We don’t want clever people. We want mediocrities.”
(Ungated summary here ajps.org/2019/10/08/w...)
In our current turbulent situation, Perkins is a brilliant lighthouse to lead us away from the rocks and sandbars.
She is one of very few historic persons for who my respect grows with everything new I learn about her.
The thought of her helps keep my hope for the future alive.
I can’t believe that memo. Searchlight Institute is way behind the times. Abolish ICE is the most popular position now. Their attempt to compare it to defund the police, which never even reached 30% support, is misleading and insane
I'm currently reading Kristin Downey's excellent The Woman Behind the New Deal. At the head of the Labor Dept (where immigration was housed) Perkins was a strong voice for Jewish refugees, creatively navigating and subverting the limits imposed by a strongly anti-refugee Congress and State Dept ...
In 1939, when Sec. of Labor Frances Perkins pushed back on pressure to ideologically deport Australian-born labor leader Harry Bridges, she faced impeachment by Congress.
Perkins insisted on upholding the rule of law & ensuring it was appropriately applied to Bridges.🗃️
Ch. 4 in "Threat of Dissent"
11/ For an excellent history of Perkins immigration reforms, see "Labor Secretary Frances Perkins Reorganizes Her Department's Immigration Enforcement Functions, 1933–1940: 'Going against the Grain'" by Neil Hernandez:
muse.jhu.edu/article/8759...