Raphael Warnock knows the way forward

[superrific]

Opinion | I’m the Governor of Kentucky. Here’s How Democrats Can Win Again.

I won re-election last year in a state that Trump just carried by 30 points. Here’s how.

www.nytimes.com

Having been around the block a few times, I get weary of this stuff. It is hardly novel. Let's go through the process.

1. The GOP doesn't bat 1.000 in gubernatorial elections, even in the South. It can't help but occasionally nominate disaster candidates like Mark Robinson or the guy who Beshear first beat -- Matt Bevin, an incredibly unpopular and corrupt governor. So we end up batting .100 in these elections, give or take. Then the Dems who eke out these hits love to come forward to tell us what works, as if it's some magical formula that nobody else has tried. Dems pour into the state, seeking to replicate the magic. Then the law of averages comes around, the new fresh thing gets beaten, often badly, and then we look around for our next red state MAGA whisperer.

2. Here's an example of that. In 2017, the Dems gave the State of the Union response to a red state governor who was going to share his magic formula with us and regain credibility among the rural folks. His name was -- WAIT, IT WAS ANDY BESHEAR'S DAD? Steve Beshear? No, can't be. Andy has a magic formula for us, and surely it's not just "be the son of a former governor"?

As it turns out, it's not just that. It's a bit more. Steve Beshear was a guy who had been in Kentucky politics forever, back when KY had Dem Senators. He retired, and then came out of retirement in 2007 to challenge a corrupt governor who, IIRC, went to jail for cronyism. And anyway, eventually the Pubs won, with a guy named Matt Bevin, who promptly engaged in another rash of corruption and became the most unpopular governor in the country. So actually, Andy Beshear's secret sauce was being the son of a guy who beat a corrupt incumbent, then beat a corrupt incumbent, and then beat a black guy in Kentucky.

All this time, while the Beshears were kicking ass, they must not have been sharing their secrets. Dems haven't been within spitting distance of winning any statewide federal office. We even lose to Rand Paul by double digits.

3. It gets worse. Another secret to Beshear's success is that he's run in off-year elections. He won in 2019 (in a very blue wave environment) and in 2023 (again, a blue wave environment). So it turns out that Dems have become the party of high propensity voters -- the type who vote in special elections and off-year elections. Basically, it used to be that Dems would win in presidential years and Pubs would clean house in the midterms. The tables seem to have flipped.

Anyway, I don't think we need to know how to win elections in odd year numbers. We need help in the even-year elections, and in particular the ones divisible by 4.

4. Beshear is not the only Dem who competes in state offices in red states. Plenty of red states, for some reason that I don't entirely understand, have interparty competition at the state level. Remember Steve Bullock in Montana? Really popular guy. Won a couple of governor's races. Did he give a SOTU response? Anyway, Dems poured in to hear his secret sauce. Then he lost in 2020.

Heidi Heitkamp was a Dem governor of ND. She somehow won a Senate seat in 2012. And Dems started to elevate her and we all asked, what can Heidi teach us? And then she lost in a blue wave election by 11 points.

When do we get to hear from Jon Bel Edwards?

5. I like Andy Beshear. I would not have minded seeing him as the VP choice. I just don't think Andy Beshear has anything to teach us about winning presidential elections. Nothing about his experience -- nothing at all -- is translatable.

 

[Paine]

Having been around the block a few times, I get weary of this stuff. It is hardly novel. Let's go through the process.

1. The GOP doesn't bat 1.000 in gubernatorial elections, even in the South. It can't help but occasionally nominate disaster candidates like Mark Robinson or the guy who Beshear first beat -- Matt Bevin, an incredibly unpopular and corrupt governor. So we end up batting .100 in these elections, give or take. Then the Dems who eke out these hits love to come forward to tell us what works, as if it's some magical formula that nobody else has tried. Dems pour into the state, seeking to replicate the magic. Then the law of averages comes around, the new fresh thing gets beaten, often badly, and then we look around for our next red state MAGA whisperer.

2. Here's an example of that. In 2017, the Dems gave the State of the Union response to a red state governor who was going to share his magic formula with us and regain credibility among the rural folks. His name was -- WAIT, IT WAS ANDY BESHEAR'S DAD? Steve Beshear? No, can't be. Andy has a magic formula for us, and surely it's not just "be the son of a former governor"?

As it turns out, it's not just that. It's a bit more. Steve Beshear was a guy who had been in Kentucky politics forever, back when KY had Dem Senators. He retired, and then came out of retirement in 2007 to challenge a corrupt governor who, IIRC, went to jail for cronyism. And anyway, eventually the Pubs won, with a guy named Matt Bevin, who promptly engaged in another rash of corruption and became the most unpopular governor in the country. So actually, Andy Beshear's secret sauce was being the son of a guy who beat a corrupt incumbent, then beat a corrupt incumbent, and then beat a black guy in Kentucky.

All this time, while the Beshears were kicking ass, they must not have been sharing their secrets. Dems haven't been within spitting distance of winning any statewide federal office. We even lose to Rand Paul by double digits.

3. It gets worse. Another secret to Beshear's success is that he's run in off-year elections. He won in 2019 (in a very blue wave environment) and in 2023 (again, a blue wave environment). So it turns out that Dems have become the party of high propensity voters -- the type who vote in special elections and off-year elections. Basically, it used to be that Dems would win in presidential years and Pubs would clean house in the midterms. The tables seem to have flipped.

Anyway, I don't think we need to know how to win elections in odd year numbers. We need help in the even-year elections, and in particular the ones divisible by 4.

4. Beshear is not the only Dem who competes in state offices in red states. Plenty of red states, for some reason that I don't entirely understand, have interparty competition at the state level. Remember Steve Bullock in Montana? Really popular guy. Won a couple of governor's races. Did he give a SOTU response? Anyway, Dems poured in to hear his secret sauce. Then he lost in 2020.

Heidi Heitkamp was a Dem governor of ND. She somehow won a Senate seat in 2012. And Dems started to elevate her and we all asked, what can Heidi teach us? And then she lost in a blue wave election by 11 points.

When do we get to hear from Jon Bel Edwards?

5. I like Andy Beshear. I would not have minded seeing him as the VP choice. I just don't think Andy Beshear has anything to teach us about winning presidential elections. Nothing about his experience -- nothing at all -- is translatable.

Everything you say is fine other than Beshear having “nothing to teach us.” That’s not the kind of attitude the party can afford to have, frankly.

 

[superrific]

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/02/clinton-brazile-hacks-2016-215774/

The odds were stacked against him, is that a more acceptable way to phrase it?

I just read that piece. It seems like an indictment against the effectiveness of the HRC campaign in the general election. Could you point me to the part where anyone put up such huge obstacles that Bernie lost by 11 points? I did see this:

"I had tried to search out any other evidence of internal corruption that would show that the DNC was rigging the system to throw the primary to Hillary, but I could not find any in party affairs or among the staff. "

 

[Paine]

I just read that piece. It seems like an indictment against the effectiveness of the HRC campaign in the general election. Could you point me to the part where anyone put up such huge obstacles that Bernie lost by 11 points? I did see this:

"I had tried to search out any other evidence of internal corruption that would show that the DNC was rigging the system to throw the primary to Hillary, but I could not find any in party affairs or among the staff. "

Not saying that it’s what caused him to lose the primary. I don’t care to talk about this anymore. It’s 2024 and Donald Trump is going to be in the White House. Again.

 

[superrific]

That’s not the kind of attitude the party can afford to have, frankly.

It's precisely the attitude every good organization has. Learning bad lessons from bad teachers is worse than learning no lessons at all.

I don't know if Andy Beshear's proposed lessons are right or wrong, but I'm pretty sure that Andy Beshear has no epistemic authority. He's a guy with some experience in politics, like a lot of other men and women. If we listen to him over the other voices because he won a couple of elections that have zero predictive power for winning a national presidential election, then we are fucking idiots.

 

[Paine]

It's precisely the attitude every good organization has. Learning bad lessons from bad teachers is worse than learning no lessons at all.

I don't know if Andy Beshear's proposed lessons are right or wrong, but I'm pretty sure that Andy Beshear has no epistemic authority. He's a guy with some experience in politics, like a lot of other men and women. If we listen to him over the other voices because he won a couple of elections that have zero predictive power for winning a national presidential election, then we are fucking idiots.

Cool.

 

[superrific]

Anyway, back to Raphael Warnock. The closing line to his speech -- I mean, am I alone in being tremendously moved by that closing? -- was "Together We Heal The Land!"

That could be the party's slogan in 2026. Together We Will Heal The Land. This is the type of messaging that has been successful for Dems in the post Civil Rights Era.

 

[rodoheel]

Anyway, back to Raphael Warnock. The closing line to his speech -- I mean, am I alone in being tremendously moved by that closing? -- was "Together We Heal The Land!"

That could be the party's slogan in 2026. Together We Will Heal The Land. This is the type of messaging that has been successful for Dems in the post Civil Rights Era.

I think it's fine. I don't think its, like, transformative or anything, but I don't have any problem with it.

Ultimately, though, I think whether sentiment like that plays or not will depend on how badly things go in Trump's term. Frankly, while we all (including me) want to talk about it, it's basically impossible to say what the strategy in the 2026 midterms or the 2028 election should be because we have no idea what the landscape will look like. As Ezra Klein recently pointed out, Democrats got wiped out in 2004 and the conclusion of most pundits at the time was that Dems needed to pivot to a Heartland moderate. Instead, they ended up running "an antiwar Black man with the middle name Hussein whose politics were forged in Chicago" and blowing out Republicans in their greatest triumph in the last 25 years, So, we just don't really know what everyone will be looking for, or what message will resonate.

Opinion | Where Does This Leave Democrats?

The coalition the Democratic Party built in the Obama years has crumbled. But Democrats can choose how to respond.

www.nytimes.com

 

[superrific]

I think it's fine. I don't think its, like, transformative or anything, but I don't have any problem with it.

Ultimately, though, I think whether sentiment like that plays or not will depend on how badly things go in Trump's term. Frankly, while we all (including me) want to talk about it, it's basically impossible to say what the strategy in the 2026 midterms or the 2028 election should be because we have no idea what the landscape will look like. As Ezra Klein recently pointed out, Democrats got wiped out in 2004 and the conclusion of most pundits at the time was that Dems needed to pivot to a Heartland moderate. Instead, they ended up running "an antiwar Black man with the middle name Hussein whose politics were forged in Chicago" and blowing out Republicans in their greatest triumph in the last 25 years, So, we just don't really know what everyone will be looking for, or what message will resonate.

Opinion | Where Does This Leave Democrats?

The coalition the Democratic Party built in the Obama years has crumbled. But Democrats can choose how to respond.

www.nytimes.com

It isn't transformative. One would hope it's not that easy to make transformative slogans. It would be really freaking embarrassing.

You are, of course, correct that there are a lot of unknowns. I am assuming that Trump is going to push the economy into recession and create inflation.