Nick Singer retweeted
This is the most brutal and accurate psychological analysis of Trump & Trumpism I’ve ever seen from @VanLathan
Nick Singer retweeted
Hayes on Medicare for All: "The odds of Donald Trump signing that into law, pretty small--"
Sen. Sanders: "Hold it, hold it, hold it... Our job is to produce it. He wants to veto it, Republicans want to sustain that veto, that is their responsibility, the American people will see it."
Nick Singer retweeted
The American people spoke loudly and clearly on Tuesday. The new Democratic majority cannot continue the same old, same old establishment policies.
Working families want change, REAL change, and that’s what Democrats must deliver.
Nick Singer retweeted
Most Democratic voters want to replace Schumer, polling since 2025 consistently shows. This is not some fringe or "progressive" position. I'm not even sure it's primarily ideological. Schumer is 75, stumbles while speaking, was hospitalized last year - he's not up to the job
Nick Singer retweeted
Jon Stewart on Chuck Schumer: “Someone has to meet this moment. You have an opportunity to actually govern. One of the first things you need to do is remove that system of seniority from Democratic politics. It’s a bullshit system and it needs to go. Chuck Schumer fought tooth and nail against half of these fucking people. He does not understand the urgency of the moment and what the future demands”
Nick Singer retweeted
Let me get this straight: DSA House candidates had a higher win percentage than non-DSA House candidates, but the guys who think victory margins are more important are the "all that matters is winning" guys?
Nick Singer retweeted
Yes indeed, explained in a nutshell - hiking up interest rates can't cure supply-side inflation and can make it worse. So why raise interest rates? To protect the value of the hoarders' and lenders' money and debt repayments while workers, businesses and borrowers suffer.
The Bank of England has raised interest rates to 4%, supposedly to tackle inflation.
There is just one problem with this decision. The Bank knows that much of the inflation we are suffering is being driven by rising oil and energy prices, largely resulting from conflict in the Middle East.
It also knows that raising interest rates cannot reduce those prices.
So why is it doing this?
The answer is that the Bank believes it must suppress demand elsewhere in the economy to compensate for rising energy costs.
In other words, it is deliberately making mortgages more expensive, increasing business borrowing costs, discouraging investment and reducing household spending power.
And all this when people are already struggling with higher energy bills. That is problem number one.
There is, however, another problem. Higher interest rates increase costs for businesses, which can then feed through into higher prices. They can, in that case, add to inflation rather than reduce it.
The Bank is imposing economic pain to address a problem its chosen policy cannot directly solve.
That is not sound economic management. It is the consequence of an economic dogma that refuses to recognise the difference between inflation caused by excessive demand and inflation caused by supply shocks.
When will we learn?
Nick Singer retweeted
#News - Michigan Sen -Elect Abdul El-Sayed on CNN says he’ll support Md Sen Chris Van Hollen for Senate Majority Leader if Van Hollen decides to challenge Sen Chuck Schumer. El-Sayed says Van Hollen “would be amazing” in that role.
Matt is trying to run the ultimate anti-popularism circuit which is to insist over and over that elitism is the only path forward and only the people at the top should be allowed to rule us all. It's both deeply unpopular and clearly has many, many downsides for the non-elite.
In the last 20 hours you have posted three times pitting this as a binary ideological battle between the moderate/establishment “faction” and the progressive/leftist “faction.”
So either you were being disingenuous then, or you are being disingenuous now. There is no third thing.
You said that since progressive candidates perform led slightly worse than moderate ones — which on balance is accurate but there are many exceptions (including Randy Villegas) and race/candidate/cycle-specific factors at play in individual races that you intentionally and irresponsibly choose to ignore — the party shouldn’t listen to their advice on how to win. Even though the objectively successful “fusion” message employed by the Ossoffs and Talaricos of the world adopted a lot of the economic populist messaging honed by the progressive-left over the last decade or so.
And you basically said that anyone that disagrees with you is just stupid (a lot of what ails the left “stems from poor epistemic practices”).
I want a party that takes good ideas for all corners of the party (including moderates!).
All of this is incredibly nuanced, but you are — and have been, even in the weeks leading up to the election — trying to lay the groundwork for a blunt and deeply unsophisticated “us vs. them” dynamic that serves nobody but people like you who want clicks on your Substack (and any corporate clients you have that would benefit from said debate/outright moderation on policy).
You took like a campaign tactic in popularism — which at a base level makes sense — and have contorted it into an entire ideology. It’s just poll- and focus-group tested centrism with no room for outside the box thinking, which — as anyone who has worked in politics or campaigns can attest — is not always the optimal strategy! And I say this as a longtime pollster and focus group moderator!
Nick Singer retweeted
"It’s not a time for incrementalism," said Sen. Chris Van Hollen. "It’s a time to move forward a very bold kitchen table agenda." commondreams.org/news/chris-…
Nick Singer retweeted
El-Sayed: "If they come for your rights, they're coming for all of our rights. Because rights are rights ... if we're committed that government should be able about providing you the basic needs of a dignified life and protecting your rights, let's all come together around that."
Nick Singer retweeted
DSA candidates and Blue Dogs both beat the Democratic Party average last night. Edge is small esp. once you add controls for demographics and other candidate characteristics (e.g., anybody would have crushed Paxton; Collins would have done well against any Maine Dem).
Says the folks trying to shave points off Abdul. Every accusation of factionalism is an admission with this guy.
The left wants Dems to do something and stop sucking. But hey, let's run it back and get Don Jr/Vance/Tucker in a few years. That'll show the left!
Ezra Klein is among this pervasive brand of journalists who are simply bad at math and don't realize it. They are torturing polling, turnout numbers and performance (while not factoring for spending, the single highest correlating factor) and sayings see, leftists under perform!
Ezra Klein on the electoral performance of El-Sayed, Peggy Flanagan and Angie Nixon:
Angie Nixon—I don't think there's any reason to look at the results and say it was a brilliant strategic move to run the DSA candidate in Florida.
Sometimes people take statements about electoral performance as moral statements about the worth of a candidate or the ideas. That's crazy in my view.
He is simply wrong on Abdul. He performed as well as all the other Dems despite being Muslim and having an insane amount of money spend against him. He was, in fact, an incredible candidate. So was Angie! Here's your proof: xitter.cf/MattBruenig/status/211…
Nick Singer retweeted
if Democrats want this moment to translate into long-term power the first thing they need to do is get rid of Schumer and Jeffries
It's a fundamental misunderstanding of how power and a change election work. Also, can you imagine the Republicans winning a huge victory and going on TV and saying they'd work with Dems? Don't shed your spine day one.
