Stanislaus and Fresno counties are expected to update their results Tuesday. But time is winding down, as all California counties must certify their elections by Thursday.
All of the cure vote expired unless a cure letter was received in the election office on Sunday by 5pm. The remaining vote is all conditional registration ballots plus 10 provisional ballots. This late, it's unlikely more than a handful of these types of ballots are valid.
Today is the last day for counties to send a statement of results to Secretary of State. Thursday (12/5) is the last day for county elections officials to certify election results.
I believe the larger issue is that there is no stautory reason why the counties need to take this long to certify. State law could/should be changed to force all counting to be done a week after the election, maybe sans cures for an extra week. Any ballot post-marked on election day needs no more than a week to arrive. And counties can budget for extra staff time to process same-day registrations (which is the most time-intensive process in all of this, although it's not a huge # of ballots in absolute numbers).
Because the counties are given such a long leash on this, they take it.
I understand the frustration with the long counts, but the idea that ballots shouldn't take more than a week to arrive is incorrect. The USPS under DeJoy has been a disaster in terms of reliability and consistency--we get mail maybe 2x a week and there's no predictability in terms of how long it takes. Someone here said in the last week that there are also added measures CA takes to ensure a complete and fair count, beyond curing. Better our energies are spent on figuring out why Harris got 2.4m fewer votes in NY and CA than Biden.
Forty-nine states are able to count their votes in a month's time and get the count right. It's long past time to expect the one state that can't--or won't--to reform their system.
Cohn out with a piece this morning stating that while turnout was the likely reason Harris lost the national PV, it wasn't the issue in the 7 swing states, where both candidates eclipsed 2020 numbers.
The main issue is, and this has been the number #1 thing I've been hammering on since the morning after, is we got creamed by people who get their news through "non-traditional" sources i.e. social media, which was likely a reversal from 2020. Conservative disinformation now dominates podcast/video-scroll land, and until we find a way to counter it, we're in big trouble.
I don't think that is as difficult as we make it out to be or our biggest problem. Obama dominated "non-traditional" sources and new forms of media during his terms. Biden as an elderly institutionalist was a uniquely poor fit for it and Harris only had 100 days to do everything. We get someone moderately tech-savvy and charismatic person building an 18-month campaign I think we can reach people in non-traditional spaces. That may not include everyone lost to the conspiracy feedback loop but enough to win sure.
I kinda agree, with the qualification that we’re well behind the 8 ball on what the right has built in the last 5-6 years and how they’ve cultivated the “apolitical” Rogan types to be their gateway drug.
That said, I’m not sure the DNC is even the vehicle to combat this
I agree to some degree on for lack of a better term the "apolitical media infostructure" though I think it matters less than a candidate who can appeal to the audiences in these spaces but I also agree the DNC is not the vehicle for this either.
Imho, it needs to become such a vehicle! This is why we need somebody like Ben Wikler as Chair of the DNC. The last thing we need is Rahm Emmanuel or similar.
I mean I don't think the DNC can create apolitical podcasts for PresiDem nominee and others to go on. I think you might have mentioned it first here but I really like the idea of the shadow cabinet which can go out and do interviews and if their expertise is relevant hit some of the apolitical podcasts and other media seamlessly. I can see Shadow secs. relevant to tech on tech podcasts, commerce on finance ones etc.
Most other countries run their full Presidential campaigns in far less than 107 days. I don't buy that an additional 500 days of preparation would likely have made any difference.
Sure but those are entire electorates in other countries that are used to short campaigns. For this subset of voters we call them apolitical podcast voters, I'm not 100% sure but I think Trump going to these spaces as much as he did over the last 9 years vs. Harris only able to devote a fraction of her 100 days did make a difference and Biden was a uniquely poor fit for them. I think having a shadow cabinet and others available to these spaces would be a good start though only part of the answer to one problem.
I agree partially, but I think this understates the shift how those platforms are run. The major social media platforms in particular have seen their leadership take abrupt hard-right turns.
Zuckerberg didn't seem to care much about politics before, but Facebook and all of the other Meta platforms have a new preference for pushing right wing perspectives compared to the Obama years. Twitter was bought out by Musk, and it's undeniable what he's been doing there. Reddit's ownership has changed and is now conservative. I don't know if Youtube does it as an intentional goal or if it's a sideproduct of the attention grifters being predominantly conservative, but I've known many people that get inundated with conservative content in their feeds despite never seeking it out. Not sure what Tiktok is up to as I don't know anyone that uses it and haven't looked into it.
This mirrors the change in many traditional media outlets, where the ownership is more and more willing to put their finger on the scales for their favored conservative ideology.
The problem is much harder today than it was 15 years ago. We can absolutely improve on this front and it should be done. It's just the deck is stacked against us and our results ceiling is lower than it once was, yet requires greater investment to get there.
And I believe Univision, perhaps the most important Spanish-language news channel, now has new conservative ownership.
Imho, we need to encourage democracy-minded billionaires and millionaires to purchase news media and to invest in amplifying fact-based, truth-seek news.
Related to this, on a small scale - Stephen King is reliable lefty. He also owns several radio stations in Maine that he played music on. He's now shutting them down/selling them off. The man has very deep pockets, he could easily keep running them as local left leaning talk radio that could help slightly in the state. I wish I knew him and could encourage him to think wider.
If sold, we need to make sure they’re not snapped up by the radio equivalents of Sinclair Broadcast. Radio stations are not expensive! Surely we can encourage another millionaire to invest in them.
Dems dominated social media spaces in the Obama yeara because political social media in the early-mid teens was largely the sphere of college educated geeks and think tankers. The barrier being funny cat videos and Russian propaganda hadn't broken yet (it really didn't until the last few years); now it has.
Once the tariffs and mass deportations go through reality is gonna smack them right in the face that I don't think any amount of disinformation will be able to overcome. I could be wrong though.
Which podcasts, though? I can only speak for myself but the podcasts I listen to are drag queens and true crime and that’d be preaching to the choir while the hosts also specifically try to come off as not pro-Democrat. “All politicians suck.” Our people seem terrible at hyping our own people at the political level bc they want to be above that.
In the primaries, certainly podcasts that preach to the choir for liberal and Democratic Party causes.
However, in the general election the ideal podcasts should be where Democrats are not preaching to the choir and instead get more listeners who don’t necessarily pay attention in the primaries, are not politically savvy or who don’t represent the base. This gives the presidential candidates the options to expand their reach.
Joe Rogan’s podcast may be where Democrats don’t want to go but Rogan himself is pro-universal healthcare and socially liberal on numerous issues even while he’s libertarian on others. There may be podcast watchers who may hold similar views as Rogan but could watch a Democratic Presidential Candidate appeal to them if he/she plays the cards right.
It is a mistake to blame it mostly on ''non-traditional'' sources of media. Dems made deliberate choices to appeal to high-information voters mostly likely to still follow traditional media. And not appeal to less engaged voters that get their news mainly from social media.
Immigration is a good example, where dems priotitized the more pro-immigration high-information voters then anti-immigration lower-information voters. It was not conservative disinformation that made people realize that dems were out of step with their own views on this topic.
Harris and her campaign talked a lot about protecting democracy, something which is much more important to voters following traditional media.
Trump gave a lot more interviews to podcasts and other non-traditional media then Harris. Harris didn't take the chance to go on Joe Rogan.
Gallego in AZ is a great example of how you can appeal to low-information voters, even as a progressive. Like how many dems besides him hosted watch parties for major boxing events or showed up at car shows?
That’s not quite true, although you do make some good points.
In recognition of America’s changed media landscape, a large number of podcasters, influencers and journalists from alternativ media received credentials to attend and cover the Democratic National Convention.
Kamala Harris made many appearances on podcasts, was interviewed by influencers and appeared on Howard Stern. In fact, the NYC and DC-based media were continually bitching that Harris was prioritizing these media venues while ignoring their traditional beltway media!
The Harris-Walz Campaign also had an effective Rapid Response Team posting on Xitter. It also had a team of media-savvy youngsters that created TikTok content that went viral.
Did she actually make many appearances on podcasts? The impression I got (from Dailykos) was that she only went on a handful, mostly in that one week blitz that she did.
Trump went to at least double the amount of podcasts as Harris. Trump went on Joe Rogan which has more reach amongst swing voters then a lot of traditional media combined.
Yes, some journalist complained about not getting enough attention over new media. Which speaks more about their inflated sense of importance then reality.
Looking at viewership traditional beltway media is very much dwarfed by social media amongst swing voters.
A rapid response team on twitter doesn't help if your positions are unappealing to voters getting the news on social media.
You can invest as much as you want in social media. If your positions are not appealing to the people on there you will struggle.
A post going viral because it speaks to the values of swing voters is worth more then 100 sponsored posts.
It is inherently easier to change your positions and run more appealing candidates then changing the media landsscape.
It’s going to be really fascinating to see legacy media in four years considering the demographic death spiral broadcast and even cable news viewership is in
We had the DSA try to takeover our City Council and mayor's office in 2021. (In Somerville, MA) It did not go particularly well for them, though they did end up netting 1 more Socialist councilor. (4 out of 11 to 5 out of 11) This was in part because they brought in a bunch of outside volunteers who didn't understand the city and ended up alienating people, but also because they had a rather incoherent agenda. In particular, it wasn't really clear what distinguished them as socialists from the progressive-leaning Democrats we usually elect, other than saying that they would cut the police budget by at least 10%. There was also some talk of rent control (illegal under State law) and expanding social housing (illegal under Federal law), but nothing actionable.
This focus on policing as the distinguishing campaign plank, plus vagueness about the details, led opponents to say that they actually wanted to abolish the Somerville Police Department and were hiding this fact. My sense was that their vagueness was a result of compromising between the more radical defund the police types in their base (which included police abolitionists) and what the candidates themselves felt was possible and politically feasible.
Needless to say, I was sufficiently unimpressed that vague promises of police reform was what constituted socialism in the 21st century, that I made this meme:
For those who don't feel like clicking on the link: it's a "swole doge meme". The muscular anthro-dog has that text "Socialists 1848: Workers of the word unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains!" and the derpy shibu has the text "Socialists 2021: I want to cut the police budget by 10%"
Public Housing agencies aren't allowed any net increase in the number of units. (Since 1999) Hence why all these weird incentives to get private developers to build low income housing are the norm now.
Thanks. So if I understand correctly, Federal law prohibits federal funding of the expansion of public housing unit count, since 1998. That doesn’t actually make it illegal to create additional social housing, it just means that the main funding mechanism is off the table. Funding an expansion of social (governmental or otherwise) housing via other means is perfectly legal, it’s just seen as cost-prohibitive.
Another thing is that a lot of public housing authorities are well under their Faircloth limits, so money is often the principal barrier more than the law.
From a political standpoint, I don't believe a DSA takeover of Minneapolis city council would mean great things for Dems ability to hold the state. Harris won by just 5.
Minneapolis & America need more social democrats – not democratic socialists.
If the DSA had their political instincts intact (and there is little evidence that they do), they would change their toxic name to the far-more-palatable "American Social Democrats".
In a very troubling development, South Korean President Yoon declared martial law without apparent justification. South Korea's Constitution permits a declaration of martial law "to cope with a military necessity or to maintain the public safety," but Yoon only made vague references to "anti-state forces" and support for North Korea among the opposition party, which controls the National Assembly, when he made the announcement. Yoon is deeply unpopular and neck-deep in corruption allegations, so he could be preempting a possible uprising, like what happened in 2016 when Park Geun-hye was forced to resign. The head of his own party has apparently come out against the declaration.
Hard to parse the exact implications at this point, but nothing good will come of this. It's also hard not to ask "what if" with Trump returning to power next month ...
I'd bet money Trump tries/does the same thing. He's going to spur multiple constitutional crises . . .all in a time of a booming economy and emhanced geopolitical strength. Just insane self-sabotage by the American voter.
We had folks like Milley and Esper to guard against unconstitutional behavior during Trump's first term. But he's clearly learned his lesson and will purge the Pentagon of professionals ... it's beyond doubt that he'll appoint a sycophant to lead the JCS, which would mark the end of arguably the most important remaining guardrail.
Romania, too, if Georgescu’s new majority polling holds up. And maybe Canada and Australia next year. And France’s government looks imminently to collapse like Germansy’s.
I thought the recent parliamentary elections went well for the democratically-minded moderate parties? Does this not indicate a likelihood that Romania’s voters will refrain from making the mistake of handing power to the far-right, pro-Russian Călin Georgescu?
Maybe. The runoff is such a 1v1 affair, though, and there were polls circulating on Reddit that suggested a cordon sanitaire has not consolidated successfully
Yup. The National Assembly just voted to end martial law after finally attaining quorum (police tried to block opposition lawmakers from entering the building). No question this is the end of Yoon; seems like a foregone conclusion that he'll face impeachment and criminal charges.
"South Korean military officials say the martial law will remain in place until President Yoon Suk Yeol lifts it himself despite parliament’s majority vote against it, according to local media outlet YTN."
EDIT: Here is a gift link to The Washington Post’s live coverage. They have five journalists covering this rapidly-evolving situation.
I'm not an expert on Korean constitutional law ... but this seems blatantly illegal. All media coverage suggests that the President is constitutionally required to end martial law if the National Assembly votes accordingly. But Yoon knows the jig is up if his gambit fails, so he'll probably push the country to the brink to save himself. Also very disturbing that the military seems completely willing to support this power grab.
BBC is reporting that Yoon says he will lift the martial law after parliament's vote. Guess he concluded he wasn't going to win and it's best to minimize his punishment rather than to go all in.
I'm so tired of our timeline. It looks like his effort will ultimately fail, thankfully. But our institutions across the globe are showing too many cracks and being attacked too often. I wish this was a boring era.
There's a whole wikipedia article on it, if you want to read it. The link is dubious at best.
There are a few genuine Chinese expressions in English, such as "lose face" and "long time no see". But almost all "ancient chinese proverbs" are not genuine.
Thank you! For a few decades I have been immersing myself in the "I Ching: Book of Changes" (Wilhelm/Baynes translation). Perhaps tellingly, the wisdom and sayings therein have a very different flavor.
Janet Mills has been a truly excellent governor! Lots of Mainers felt considerable schadenfreude when she, in her reelection bid, trounced Paul "Flintstone" LePage by a whopping 13 percent.
If Mills were 20–25 years younger, I would applaud her candidacy for Senate, and I think she might be a strong candidate against Collins. But, alas, Mills is neither young nor middle-aged.
So I agree with Henrik: all things considered, someone like Troy Jackson is a better candidate. Between now and the 2026 election, any serious aspiring candidate should greatly increase their visibility and augment their political bona fides.
I was looking at other statewide officials in Maine for ideas. Frey is out for obvious reasons. Would Bellows be more successful a second time around, after being SOS?
Bellows’ main issue is that as SOS she’s chosen by the legislature, so her experience running a statewide campaign still isn’t there even despite much better name recognition
EDIT: Moreover, Troy Jackson and other wannabe Democratic candidate for Senate need to immediately start attacking Susan Collins and emphasize her shortcomings and infamous cowardly "concern".
That’s particularly true of any failure by Collins to oppose Trump’s most-destructive policies and his most dangerous appointments (Gabbard, Hegseth, Patel, RFK Jr).
I know she’s a bit older than desired but would it be worth it to have her run for a single term then pass the torch? Susan Collins is tough to beat so I just want the strongest candidate who can beat regardless of age.
Stanislaus County's final update is in, adding 158 votes that break 57%/43% for Democrat Adam Gray, netting him 22 votes to increase his lead over incumbent Republican John Duarte to 165 votes.
Mike Duggan? Can't see any of the row officers ditching the party, and he's been publicly weighing a bid for governor. Would be a massive setback if true.
You'd think after we lost a critical election that people in the party would be less stuck on doomed vainglory runs for office that make it harder for our candidates to win.
Hopefully whoever it is ends up fading into irrelevance and/or the midterms end up so good for us that it doesn't matter.
"Adam Gray declared victory over incumbent Rep. John Duarte in California’s 13th Congressional District early Tuesday afternoon.
Gray’s declaration comes while votes are still being tallied. Official certification is scheduled for Dec. 13.
“I’m honored to become the Congressman-elect for California’s 13th Congressional District,” Gray said in a statement. “The final results confirm this district is ready for independent and accountable leadership that always puts the Valley’s people ahead of partisan politics.”
CA 13: May get the final updates today.
Stanislaus and Fresno counties are expected to update their results Tuesday. But time is winding down, as all California counties must certify their elections by Thursday.
https://themercedfocus.org/going-the-distance-gray-and-duarte-whisker-apart-as-ca-13-race-end-nears/
All of the cure vote expired unless a cure letter was received in the election office on Sunday by 5pm. The remaining vote is all conditional registration ballots plus 10 provisional ballots. This late, it's unlikely more than a handful of these types of ballots are valid.
How is it possible that they still don't have all of the votes counted on certification day? This is completely unacceptable.
Today is the last day for counties to send a statement of results to Secretary of State. Thursday (12/5) is the last day for county elections officials to certify election results.
I believe the larger issue is that there is no stautory reason why the counties need to take this long to certify. State law could/should be changed to force all counting to be done a week after the election, maybe sans cures for an extra week. Any ballot post-marked on election day needs no more than a week to arrive. And counties can budget for extra staff time to process same-day registrations (which is the most time-intensive process in all of this, although it's not a huge # of ballots in absolute numbers).
Because the counties are given such a long leash on this, they take it.
I understand the frustration with the long counts, but the idea that ballots shouldn't take more than a week to arrive is incorrect. The USPS under DeJoy has been a disaster in terms of reliability and consistency--we get mail maybe 2x a week and there's no predictability in terms of how long it takes. Someone here said in the last week that there are also added measures CA takes to ensure a complete and fair count, beyond curing. Better our energies are spent on figuring out why Harris got 2.4m fewer votes in NY and CA than Biden.
Better than not being accurate imo
Forty-nine states are able to count their votes in a month's time and get the count right. It's long past time to expect the one state that can't--or won't--to reform their system.
nonsense
Cohn out with a piece this morning stating that while turnout was the likely reason Harris lost the national PV, it wasn't the issue in the 7 swing states, where both candidates eclipsed 2020 numbers.
The main issue is, and this has been the number #1 thing I've been hammering on since the morning after, is we got creamed by people who get their news through "non-traditional" sources i.e. social media, which was likely a reversal from 2020. Conservative disinformation now dominates podcast/video-scroll land, and until we find a way to counter it, we're in big trouble.
So I guess a question for any of these DNC candidates would be if they have a plan, or even an idea, of how to tackle that problem.
I don't think that is as difficult as we make it out to be or our biggest problem. Obama dominated "non-traditional" sources and new forms of media during his terms. Biden as an elderly institutionalist was a uniquely poor fit for it and Harris only had 100 days to do everything. We get someone moderately tech-savvy and charismatic person building an 18-month campaign I think we can reach people in non-traditional spaces. That may not include everyone lost to the conspiracy feedback loop but enough to win sure.
I kinda agree, with the qualification that we’re well behind the 8 ball on what the right has built in the last 5-6 years and how they’ve cultivated the “apolitical” Rogan types to be their gateway drug.
That said, I’m not sure the DNC is even the vehicle to combat this
I agree to some degree on for lack of a better term the "apolitical media infostructure" though I think it matters less than a candidate who can appeal to the audiences in these spaces but I also agree the DNC is not the vehicle for this either.
Imho, it needs to become such a vehicle! This is why we need somebody like Ben Wikler as Chair of the DNC. The last thing we need is Rahm Emmanuel or similar.
I mean I don't think the DNC can create apolitical podcasts for PresiDem nominee and others to go on. I think you might have mentioned it first here but I really like the idea of the shadow cabinet which can go out and do interviews and if their expertise is relevant hit some of the apolitical podcasts and other media seamlessly. I can see Shadow secs. relevant to tech on tech podcasts, commerce on finance ones etc.
We could call it the Truth Cabinet™.
I don't think the DNC is necessarily the vehicle for running the whole operation. But it could be the vehicle for building the operation that does it.
Most other countries run their full Presidential campaigns in far less than 107 days. I don't buy that an additional 500 days of preparation would likely have made any difference.
Sure but those are entire electorates in other countries that are used to short campaigns. For this subset of voters we call them apolitical podcast voters, I'm not 100% sure but I think Trump going to these spaces as much as he did over the last 9 years vs. Harris only able to devote a fraction of her 100 days did make a difference and Biden was a uniquely poor fit for them. I think having a shadow cabinet and others available to these spaces would be a good start though only part of the answer to one problem.
I actually thought Kamala was winning the Tik Tok game for a bit?
For a bit yes, but the bullshit firehose in late September and then October blunted a lot of that momentum.
That’s always been the hard thing about running against Trump
I agree partially, but I think this understates the shift how those platforms are run. The major social media platforms in particular have seen their leadership take abrupt hard-right turns.
Zuckerberg didn't seem to care much about politics before, but Facebook and all of the other Meta platforms have a new preference for pushing right wing perspectives compared to the Obama years. Twitter was bought out by Musk, and it's undeniable what he's been doing there. Reddit's ownership has changed and is now conservative. I don't know if Youtube does it as an intentional goal or if it's a sideproduct of the attention grifters being predominantly conservative, but I've known many people that get inundated with conservative content in their feeds despite never seeking it out. Not sure what Tiktok is up to as I don't know anyone that uses it and haven't looked into it.
This mirrors the change in many traditional media outlets, where the ownership is more and more willing to put their finger on the scales for their favored conservative ideology.
The problem is much harder today than it was 15 years ago. We can absolutely improve on this front and it should be done. It's just the deck is stacked against us and our results ceiling is lower than it once was, yet requires greater investment to get there.
And I believe Univision, perhaps the most important Spanish-language news channel, now has new conservative ownership.
Imho, we need to encourage democracy-minded billionaires and millionaires to purchase news media and to invest in amplifying fact-based, truth-seek news.
Related to this, on a small scale - Stephen King is reliable lefty. He also owns several radio stations in Maine that he played music on. He's now shutting them down/selling them off. The man has very deep pockets, he could easily keep running them as local left leaning talk radio that could help slightly in the state. I wish I knew him and could encourage him to think wider.
If sold, we need to make sure they’re not snapped up by the radio equivalents of Sinclair Broadcast. Radio stations are not expensive! Surely we can encourage another millionaire to invest in them.
Meta’s ecosystem pushes way less political content than it used to, in fairness. The difference between 2016/20 and today is stark.
The problem really is heavily how YT’s algo is designed. It’s always been, and remains, the biggest problem in this sphere
Dems dominated social media spaces in the Obama yeara because political social media in the early-mid teens was largely the sphere of college educated geeks and think tankers. The barrier being funny cat videos and Russian propaganda hadn't broken yet (it really didn't until the last few years); now it has.
Once the tariffs and mass deportations go through reality is gonna smack them right in the face that I don't think any amount of disinformation will be able to overcome. I could be wrong though.
Democratic Presidential Candidates should do lot of podcasts. Trump capitalized on this.
I don’t think it was enough for Kamala Harris to be on Howard Stern’s show.
Which podcasts, though? I can only speak for myself but the podcasts I listen to are drag queens and true crime and that’d be preaching to the choir while the hosts also specifically try to come off as not pro-Democrat. “All politicians suck.” Our people seem terrible at hyping our own people at the political level bc they want to be above that.
In the primaries, certainly podcasts that preach to the choir for liberal and Democratic Party causes.
However, in the general election the ideal podcasts should be where Democrats are not preaching to the choir and instead get more listeners who don’t necessarily pay attention in the primaries, are not politically savvy or who don’t represent the base. This gives the presidential candidates the options to expand their reach.
Joe Rogan’s podcast may be where Democrats don’t want to go but Rogan himself is pro-universal healthcare and socially liberal on numerous issues even while he’s libertarian on others. There may be podcast watchers who may hold similar views as Rogan but could watch a Democratic Presidential Candidate appeal to them if he/she plays the cards right.
It is a mistake to blame it mostly on ''non-traditional'' sources of media. Dems made deliberate choices to appeal to high-information voters mostly likely to still follow traditional media. And not appeal to less engaged voters that get their news mainly from social media.
Immigration is a good example, where dems priotitized the more pro-immigration high-information voters then anti-immigration lower-information voters. It was not conservative disinformation that made people realize that dems were out of step with their own views on this topic.
Harris and her campaign talked a lot about protecting democracy, something which is much more important to voters following traditional media.
Trump gave a lot more interviews to podcasts and other non-traditional media then Harris. Harris didn't take the chance to go on Joe Rogan.
Gallego in AZ is a great example of how you can appeal to low-information voters, even as a progressive. Like how many dems besides him hosted watch parties for major boxing events or showed up at car shows?
That’s not quite true, although you do make some good points.
In recognition of America’s changed media landscape, a large number of podcasters, influencers and journalists from alternativ media received credentials to attend and cover the Democratic National Convention.
Kamala Harris made many appearances on podcasts, was interviewed by influencers and appeared on Howard Stern. In fact, the NYC and DC-based media were continually bitching that Harris was prioritizing these media venues while ignoring their traditional beltway media!
The Harris-Walz Campaign also had an effective Rapid Response Team posting on Xitter. It also had a team of media-savvy youngsters that created TikTok content that went viral.
Did she actually make many appearances on podcasts? The impression I got (from Dailykos) was that she only went on a handful, mostly in that one week blitz that she did.
Trump went to at least double the amount of podcasts as Harris. Trump went on Joe Rogan which has more reach amongst swing voters then a lot of traditional media combined.
Yes, some journalist complained about not getting enough attention over new media. Which speaks more about their inflated sense of importance then reality.
Looking at viewership traditional beltway media is very much dwarfed by social media amongst swing voters.
A rapid response team on twitter doesn't help if your positions are unappealing to voters getting the news on social media.
You can invest as much as you want in social media. If your positions are not appealing to the people on there you will struggle.
A post going viral because it speaks to the values of swing voters is worth more then 100 sponsored posts.
It is inherently easier to change your positions and run more appealing candidates then changing the media landsscape.
It’s going to be really fascinating to see legacy media in four years considering the demographic death spiral broadcast and even cable news viewership is in
We had the DSA try to takeover our City Council and mayor's office in 2021. (In Somerville, MA) It did not go particularly well for them, though they did end up netting 1 more Socialist councilor. (4 out of 11 to 5 out of 11) This was in part because they brought in a bunch of outside volunteers who didn't understand the city and ended up alienating people, but also because they had a rather incoherent agenda. In particular, it wasn't really clear what distinguished them as socialists from the progressive-leaning Democrats we usually elect, other than saying that they would cut the police budget by at least 10%. There was also some talk of rent control (illegal under State law) and expanding social housing (illegal under Federal law), but nothing actionable.
This focus on policing as the distinguishing campaign plank, plus vagueness about the details, led opponents to say that they actually wanted to abolish the Somerville Police Department and were hiding this fact. My sense was that their vagueness was a result of compromising between the more radical defund the police types in their base (which included police abolitionists) and what the candidates themselves felt was possible and politically feasible.
Needless to say, I was sufficiently unimpressed that vague promises of police reform was what constituted socialism in the 21st century, that I made this meme:
https://photos.app.goo.gl/wMwi9kcgjJuz498j6
For those who don't feel like clicking on the link: it's a "swole doge meme". The muscular anthro-dog has that text "Socialists 1848: Workers of the word unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains!" and the derpy shibu has the text "Socialists 2021: I want to cut the police budget by 10%"
What do you mean by saying that expanding social housing would be illegal under federal law?
Faircloth Amendment
https://nationalhomeless.org/repeal-faircloth-amendment/
Public Housing agencies aren't allowed any net increase in the number of units. (Since 1999) Hence why all these weird incentives to get private developers to build low income housing are the norm now.
Thanks. So if I understand correctly, Federal law prohibits federal funding of the expansion of public housing unit count, since 1998. That doesn’t actually make it illegal to create additional social housing, it just means that the main funding mechanism is off the table. Funding an expansion of social (governmental or otherwise) housing via other means is perfectly legal, it’s just seen as cost-prohibitive.
Yes, the HUD website seems to support that view
Another thing is that a lot of public housing authorities are well under their Faircloth limits, so money is often the principal barrier more than the law.
From a political standpoint, I don't believe a DSA takeover of Minneapolis city council would mean great things for Dems ability to hold the state. Harris won by just 5.
Minneapolis & America need more social democrats – not democratic socialists.
If the DSA had their political instincts intact (and there is little evidence that they do), they would change their toxic name to the far-more-palatable "American Social Democrats".
Yes it's bad not just for state optics but national optics. I hope they get crushed.
In a very troubling development, South Korean President Yoon declared martial law without apparent justification. South Korea's Constitution permits a declaration of martial law "to cope with a military necessity or to maintain the public safety," but Yoon only made vague references to "anti-state forces" and support for North Korea among the opposition party, which controls the National Assembly, when he made the announcement. Yoon is deeply unpopular and neck-deep in corruption allegations, so he could be preempting a possible uprising, like what happened in 2016 when Park Geun-hye was forced to resign. The head of his own party has apparently come out against the declaration.
Hard to parse the exact implications at this point, but nothing good will come of this. It's also hard not to ask "what if" with Trump returning to power next month ...
I'd bet money Trump tries/does the same thing. He's going to spur multiple constitutional crises . . .all in a time of a booming economy and emhanced geopolitical strength. Just insane self-sabotage by the American voter.
We had folks like Milley and Esper to guard against unconstitutional behavior during Trump's first term. But he's clearly learned his lesson and will purge the Pentagon of professionals ... it's beyond doubt that he'll appoint a sycophant to lead the JCS, which would mark the end of arguably the most important remaining guardrail.
Romania, too, if Georgescu’s new majority polling holds up. And maybe Canada and Australia next year. And France’s government looks imminently to collapse like Germansy’s.
Social media and society are incompatible
I thought the recent parliamentary elections went well for the democratically-minded moderate parties? Does this not indicate a likelihood that Romania’s voters will refrain from making the mistake of handing power to the far-right, pro-Russian Călin Georgescu?
Maybe. The runoff is such a 1v1 affair, though, and there were polls circulating on Reddit that suggested a cordon sanitaire has not consolidated successfully
But it will be worth it because eggs will be cheaper!
Sounds like the coup is rapidly failing in Seoul. I’d have to imagine Yoon’s impeachment would come very fast
Yup. The National Assembly just voted to end martial law after finally attaining quorum (police tried to block opposition lawmakers from entering the building). No question this is the end of Yoon; seems like a foregone conclusion that he'll face impeachment and criminal charges.
People unsurprisingly won’t run interference for your autogolpe when your approval rate is 15%
"South Korean military officials say the martial law will remain in place until President Yoon Suk Yeol lifts it himself despite parliament’s majority vote against it, according to local media outlet YTN."
EDIT: Here is a gift link to The Washington Post’s live coverage. They have five journalists covering this rapidly-evolving situation.
https://wapo.st/4iwFvHV
I'm not an expert on Korean constitutional law ... but this seems blatantly illegal. All media coverage suggests that the President is constitutionally required to end martial law if the National Assembly votes accordingly. But Yoon knows the jig is up if his gambit fails, so he'll probably push the country to the brink to save himself. Also very disturbing that the military seems completely willing to support this power grab.
BBC is reporting that Yoon says he will lift the martial law after parliament's vote. Guess he concluded he wasn't going to win and it's best to minimize his punishment rather than to go all in.
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cn38321180et?post=asset%3Af9b5e751-fb9c-4090-965d-dc710ba71114#post
I'm so tired of our timeline. It looks like his effort will ultimately fail, thankfully. But our institutions across the globe are showing too many cracks and being attacked too often. I wish this was a boring era.
Oh, what I would give for boring! Your comment reminds me of two Chinese curses:
"May you live in interesting times."
"May you come to the attention of the authorities."
Not actually Chinese, of course.
Are these on that long list of fictional stuff ascribed to the Chinese? Wouldn’t surprise me.
There's a whole wikipedia article on it, if you want to read it. The link is dubious at best.
There are a few genuine Chinese expressions in English, such as "lose face" and "long time no see". But almost all "ancient chinese proverbs" are not genuine.
Thank you! For a few decades I have been immersing myself in the "I Ching: Book of Changes" (Wilhelm/Baynes translation). Perhaps tellingly, the wisdom and sayings therein have a very different flavor.
If we want “boring” we’re going to have to decidedly defeat, discredit, and demonetize the people trying to make things “interesting”
So do we think Janet Mills actually challenges Susan Collins? Would she be the best candidate to beat her?
She’d be 78 on Election Day 2026. Somebody younger like Troy Jackson would be way better
Janet Mills has been a truly excellent governor! Lots of Mainers felt considerable schadenfreude when she, in her reelection bid, trounced Paul "Flintstone" LePage by a whopping 13 percent.
If Mills were 20–25 years younger, I would applaud her candidacy for Senate, and I think she might be a strong candidate against Collins. But, alas, Mills is neither young nor middle-aged.
So I agree with Henrik: all things considered, someone like Troy Jackson is a better candidate. Between now and the 2026 election, any serious aspiring candidate should greatly increase their visibility and augment their political bona fides.
I was looking at other statewide officials in Maine for ideas. Frey is out for obvious reasons. Would Bellows be more successful a second time around, after being SOS?
Bellows’ main issue is that as SOS she’s chosen by the legislature, so her experience running a statewide campaign still isn’t there even despite much better name recognition
EDIT: Moreover, Troy Jackson and other wannabe Democratic candidate for Senate need to immediately start attacking Susan Collins and emphasize her shortcomings and infamous cowardly "concern".
That’s particularly true of any failure by Collins to oppose Trump’s most-destructive policies and his most dangerous appointments (Gabbard, Hegseth, Patel, RFK Jr).
I know she’s a bit older than desired but would it be worth it to have her run for a single term then pass the torch? Susan Collins is tough to beat so I just want the strongest candidate who can beat regardless of age.
Initial Recount completed in NC Supreme Court race. Mills gains votes https://x.com/BryanRAnderson/status/1863981958260248925
I am confused. Your link says "no net change".
"Riggs going into recount: 734-vote lead"
"Riggs following recount: 734-vote lead"
I know but the last numbers we had end of last week were roughly 675. Don't know when the number changed but its all to the good
Sorry Riggs gains votes
CA 13 Stanislaus in. Grey picks up 22 votes https://x.com/CATargetBot0001/status/1864045410999824510
Stanislaus County's final update is in, adding 158 votes that break 57%/43% for Democrat Adam Gray, netting him 22 votes to increase his lead over incumbent Republican John Duarte to 165 votes.
Only Fresno County remains now.
That's a wrap then. No way there's enough votes in the sliver of Fresno in this district to flip it.
Wouldn’t think so. Barring something totally fluky.
Can't divulge specifics but expect some big 2026 MI-Gov news tomorrow.
A Benson/Nessel ticket would win easily, hopefully that's the news (my dream 2026 ticket)!! 💙🇺🇲
unfortunately not, about a major candidate running as an independent instead of a democrat.
Mike Duggan? Can't see any of the row officers ditching the party, and he's been publicly weighing a bid for governor. Would be a massive setback if true.
You'd think after we lost a critical election that people in the party would be less stuck on doomed vainglory runs for office that make it harder for our candidates to win.
Hopefully whoever it is ends up fading into irrelevance and/or the midterms end up so good for us that it doesn't matter.
newly tabulated provisional/other ballots in New York City significantly narrow Trump's popular vote margin. Added at certification:
Harris 159,983
Trump 52,544
Nationally, Trump now leads by 2,297,478 votes (1.48%).
It’s over Fresno in in CA13 Grey picks up 22 votes leads by 187.
https://x.com/taniel/status/1864112524720775316?s=61&t=5copDbz1aPl7ASsRCUclLg
"Adam Gray declared victory over incumbent Rep. John Duarte in California’s 13th Congressional District early Tuesday afternoon.
Gray’s declaration comes while votes are still being tallied. Official certification is scheduled for Dec. 13.
“I’m honored to become the Congressman-elect for California’s 13th Congressional District,” Gray said in a statement. “The final results confirm this district is ready for independent and accountable leadership that always puts the Valley’s people ahead of partisan politics.”
https://gvwire.com/2024/12/03/adam-gray-declares-victory-over-incumbent-rep-john-duarte-after-latest-vote-tally/
AP calls it. And Duarte concedes.
https://x.com/Redistrict/status/1864164374350344349