I just wrote Axios’ reporter. Incredibly, Alex Isenstadt published "3 takeaways from Wisconsin and Florida special elections" – and not a word quantifying the Democratic over-performances in FL-06 and FL-01! How is this possible??
I just wrote Axios’ reporter. Incredibly, Alex Isenstadt published "3 takeaways from Wisconsin and Florida special elections" – and not a word quantifying the Democratic over-performances in FL-06 and FL-01! How is this possible??
If so, then we dodged a bullet narrative-wise with Wisconsin. Had Schmiel won, then there would probably be a lot of fawning over Trump and Musk's invincibility and how the GOP found the secret to winning purple states and districts at least as long as Elon keeps his checkbook open.
I never thought an actual Dem win in either Florida district was a realistic possibility, but the GOP's performance was sufficiently off from just five months ago to suggest that NY-21 might well have been close and maybe a Dem gain if Stefanik had left as planned.
Yes, this. Stefanik's seat easily could have had both a Republican and a Conservative candidate on the ballot. Throw a healthy Democratic over-performance into the mix and it's very plausible that her seat could have fallen.
Meanwhile Lauren Egan who's now employed at The Bulwark outright said last night that Democrats based off everything last night are in the ballgame to win any House district that Trump won by up to 10 points.
It's clear there's orders from upstairs at the Mainstream outlets to tell their reporters to sugar coat any negative reporting regarding Republicans so The Regime doesn't sick whatever is left of the Federal bureaucracy on them.
What I like about Axios is that it gives me a very quick overview of major stories – or soundbite news, as you call it. Lots of news sites intentionally give you insufficient info on their front page, forcing you to click on their various headline(s) if you want to see what each story is really about – sort of an internal "click-bait", if you will. (I suspect that inflates the page-view statistics they can show advertisers.)
One of my favorite news sites used to be Vox (not to be confused with Fox!), until Ezra Klein left for the New York Times.
I just wrote Axios’ reporter. Incredibly, Alex Isenstadt published "3 takeaways from Wisconsin and Florida special elections" – and not a word quantifying the Democratic over-performances in FL-06 and FL-01! How is this possible??
https://www.axios.com/2025/04/02/wisconsin-florida-special-elections-trump
It’s increasingly clear that mainstream journalists need the help of good data journalists such as David Nir and Jeff Singer of The Downballot.
The talk of an upset in FL-6, which was never more than a slim possibility, made the actual results underwhelming to "narrative" driven journalists.
If so, then we dodged a bullet narrative-wise with Wisconsin. Had Schmiel won, then there would probably be a lot of fawning over Trump and Musk's invincibility and how the GOP found the secret to winning purple states and districts at least as long as Elon keeps his checkbook open.
I never thought an actual Dem win in either Florida district was a realistic possibility, but the GOP's performance was sufficiently off from just five months ago to suggest that NY-21 might well have been close and maybe a Dem gain if Stefanik had left as planned.
they were never concerned about FL...they were very concerned about Stefanik...and the msm won't dwell on "much closer margin" stuff.
Yes, this. Stefanik's seat easily could have had both a Republican and a Conservative candidate on the ballot. Throw a healthy Democratic over-performance into the mix and it's very plausible that her seat could have fallen.
I'm convinced they were never really worried and were trying to inflate D chances to narrative-offset the inevitable overperformance.
Meanwhile Lauren Egan who's now employed at The Bulwark outright said last night that Democrats based off everything last night are in the ballgame to win any House district that Trump won by up to 10 points.
It's clear there's orders from upstairs at the Mainstream outlets to tell their reporters to sugar coat any negative reporting regarding Republicans so The Regime doesn't sick whatever is left of the Federal bureaucracy on them.
https://youtu.be/GVlgp33KsaA?si=KJfoy_2-u8Xzj8Ut&t=176
Politico especially, NYT and MSNBC were quite critical of the Republican performances across the board for a change though.
I never much cared for Axios. To me, it's watered-down soundbite news.
When I was still on Twitter I enjoyed trolling Josh Kraushaar with this: https://www.axios.com/2022/10/23/republican-wave-midterms-congress
What I like about Axios is that it gives me a very quick overview of major stories – or soundbite news, as you call it. Lots of news sites intentionally give you insufficient info on their front page, forcing you to click on their various headline(s) if you want to see what each story is really about – sort of an internal "click-bait", if you will. (I suspect that inflates the page-view statistics they can show advertisers.)
One of my favorite news sites used to be Vox (not to be confused with Fox!), until Ezra Klein left for the New York Times.