@SwannMarcus89 In Season 3, they bench Saracen for McCoy after averaging 38 PPG in his 4 starts. With JD”Best QB in Texas” McCoy, they average 14.5 PPG the rest of the way when he plays (I’m not counting the 28 Saracen put up after JD was shutout in the state title game
@UberHansen I thought that going in (I think he’s the better player fwiw) but the few reports so far I’ve seen seem to indicate Anderson has had the better camp (early albeit) and I think he gets it if its a tie.
@GregTompsett@mtm2649@RobynMundyWYO I think in the playoff game, it was defensible starting Klein but once it was clear in that game Klein was a disaster, should’ve tried Dorian and just leaned into the higher variance (It probably goes just as badly but give me the higher upside when both options are awful)
@no_iph0ne Andy Beshear or Chris Van Hollen. Can’t be a senator from a swing state (Rules out Ossoff, Warnock, Kelly). Beshear is geographic balance, good ideological part of the party. Van Hollen is from a safe seat, establishment, moderately coded but populist.
Incredible to watch a bunch of dudes from Eden and North Java lose their minds on FB about the city of Buffalo not doing fireworks like they’d EVER come to the city to watch them in the first place
Comparing Abigail Spanberger and Zohan Mamdani approximately half a year into their first term really demonstrates the stakes of the current battle for the future of the Democratic Party.
After their respective elections, a lot of Third Way types argued that Zohran's win in NYC offered the Dem Party few if any lessons, and the real attention should be on folks like Spanberger. Fast forward, and Zohran is reinvigorating municipal institutions and doing a whole spectrum of things to make people believe that democratic government can, in fact, make a positive impact in their lives. Compare that to Spanberger, who is vetoing laws to support collective bargaining and protect immigrants and lower prescription drug prices.
This really gets to the core divide between Dem factions right now: Between those who think Trump/MAGA appeared out of nowhere and so all we have to do is win one election against them, and those who understand that these forces arose out of a disillusionment with our democratic institutions -- a belief that the system isn't working and so we need a strongman to blow it up -- meaning that the only long-term solution (that can avoid a repeat of this Biden-wins-in-2020-but-Trump-is-back-in-2024 loop) is proving that democratic government can, in fact, work for regular people.
In NYC, Zohran is doing that hard work of proving democratic (and Democratic) government can make a positive impact in people's lives. In Virginia, Spanberger -- after running and winning on an affordability message -- is doing favors for Big Pharma to stop legislation that could control prescription drug prices, i.e. resorting to the samed failed playbook that makes voters think, "Oh, GOP or Democrat, these politicians are all the same."
At the state level, this is the kind of trajectory that will lock in a Republican gubernatorial victory in Virginia in three years. But bigger picture -- and as we think about the next presidential primary -- this demonstrates that the question must be not just who can win in 2028, but also what will they do after winning to ensure we're not right back in this fascism loop a few years later.
We've talked a lot about how economic populism is our best frame for winning upcoming elections. But we should keep in mind that just as importantly, it's a necessary governance strategy to lock those wins in for the long term.
Democracy will die in this country because Republicans have no scruples about doing anything and everything necessary to secure more power and Dems just don’t have the guts to match the same energy.
How exactly is it “moderate” to let Republicans control the house because you let them unilaterally redistrict to gain a big advantage?
That’s not moderate or pragmatic, it’s just terrible politics.