I suspect that one of the problems with holding together a center-left Democratic Party coalition is the fact that the moderate to moderate-conservative members of the coalition seem to think they need to engage in a kind of performative hostility towards the leftward part of the coalition. This is a very similar hostility to the one you discuss above, in which Democrats in general are hostile to Trump voters in ways that make it hard to attract the ones that are relatively close to the Democratic Party's coalition. I think one of the secrets of Joe Biden's success in 2020 is that he manages to say that he's not going to pursue particular policies desired by the left (M4A, GND) in a way that respects the supporters of those policies and signals broad agreement with the goals of the policies.
I wanted to know your thoughts on how you engage with friends and family on politics when your media diets have limited overlap. As a mental exercise I often ask myself: what is the most convincing example of Trump’s behavior I could give as proof of his disregard for corrupt behavior? When I come to an answer as black and white as Trump trying to sell GOYA beans from the resolute desk—I can see, from their perspective, why Hunter Biden’s emails are the “real” proof of corruption. Somehow the more obviously corrupt something is the less relevant it seems and the most consequentially corrupt acts enjoy more time in the news cycle muddying the waters into partisanship. Overall, my solution has been to try use more neutral/right leaning sources they can find acceptable like the Wikipedia, the WSJ, and Fox News to form my arguments. It’s a tiring exercise and I find it disheartening that journalism and opinion work I enjoy like Vox, NYT, and 538 can be so quickly ignored out of hand. Deep down I feel some kind of hypocrisy for not sitting through a 15 minute Infowars video sent to me on voter fraud and trying to discuss it on the merits. I’m not expecting to change any minds here, just trying to figure out the starting point we can all discuss current events from.
P.S. I find your work to be some of the most reasonable and intelligent out there. When I heard you were leaving Vox my hope was for HUD secretary in the Biden administration ;) Alas, I’m proud to be able to support your work more directly now. Keep it up!
I had to come here and look at the full article so many on twitter were quoting. As usual, they took something totally out of context and I'm baffled how anyone could read the full article and not understand the point you were making. I hate twitter so much, but cannot look away. You got my $8.
One of the hardest boards to bore will be rekindling Americans' trust in politicians and in fact-based journalism. The poll numbers about trust don't tell the whole story, of course, but at current levels, it's going to be very hard to get 2024 right.
I mostly do trust what I read at genuine news sites, but in the past when I've read a story about which I had inside knowledge, I often saw that the reporter had something significant wrong, and sometimes they had clearly wrapped the facts in their preferred narrative.
I can't believe I'm actually paying for a substack subscription. I'm assuming at some point you'll lead all of us on a YIMBY charge in some rando town's rezoning committee meeting
Proud to be a founding subscriber, Matt. Been a big fan since Center for Progress days. I admire the principled stance you took on leaving Vox. Freedom of the press means nothing if all viewpoints can't be ably and vocally present. Most of all this is going to be a helluva lot of fun!
Good luck with the new venture. I think your three reminders about the electorate are quite useful. What. if anything, can we learn from Sherrod Brown? Is he a unicorn, or can his politics translate to other red states?
My big question is if we can move away from this activist/academic level of signaling solidarity AND keep the Democratic coalition together. Given that activists provide a lot of grassroots level energy/organizing but that their most identitarian takes are alienating, how can we keep the Democratic coalition together?
We need to convince the activists it’s in their interests to move away from this kind of language. But they also really love this kind of language. Can we do this without losing them? Do we need new activists and where do they come from?
Matt, I have been an unabashed Yglesias groupie since Center for American Progress days. Frankly, although you had published some great signature pieces at Vox, I missed the spontaneity and sense of fun of your blog work. I am happy as a clam about Slow Boring and proud to be a founding paid subscriber. All viewpoints ably and vocally present is the only serious metric for freedom of the press. Go for it!
All the best with your new venture, looking forward to reading less “sexy” content!
Your title reminds me of the last lines of George Eliot’s Middlemarch: ... for the growing good of the world is partly dependent on unhistoric acts; and that things are not so ill with you and me as they might have been is half owing to the number who lived faithfully a hidden life, and rest in unvisited tombs.
I appreciate your contrarian takes and will gladly pay $80 a year to continue reading them. Best of luck.
Evan Bayh guest spot on The Weeds?
I suspect that one of the problems with holding together a center-left Democratic Party coalition is the fact that the moderate to moderate-conservative members of the coalition seem to think they need to engage in a kind of performative hostility towards the leftward part of the coalition. This is a very similar hostility to the one you discuss above, in which Democrats in general are hostile to Trump voters in ways that make it hard to attract the ones that are relatively close to the Democratic Party's coalition. I think one of the secrets of Joe Biden's success in 2020 is that he manages to say that he's not going to pursue particular policies desired by the left (M4A, GND) in a way that respects the supporters of those policies and signals broad agreement with the goals of the policies.
I wanted to know your thoughts on how you engage with friends and family on politics when your media diets have limited overlap. As a mental exercise I often ask myself: what is the most convincing example of Trump’s behavior I could give as proof of his disregard for corrupt behavior? When I come to an answer as black and white as Trump trying to sell GOYA beans from the resolute desk—I can see, from their perspective, why Hunter Biden’s emails are the “real” proof of corruption. Somehow the more obviously corrupt something is the less relevant it seems and the most consequentially corrupt acts enjoy more time in the news cycle muddying the waters into partisanship. Overall, my solution has been to try use more neutral/right leaning sources they can find acceptable like the Wikipedia, the WSJ, and Fox News to form my arguments. It’s a tiring exercise and I find it disheartening that journalism and opinion work I enjoy like Vox, NYT, and 538 can be so quickly ignored out of hand. Deep down I feel some kind of hypocrisy for not sitting through a 15 minute Infowars video sent to me on voter fraud and trying to discuss it on the merits. I’m not expecting to change any minds here, just trying to figure out the starting point we can all discuss current events from.
P.S. I find your work to be some of the most reasonable and intelligent out there. When I heard you were leaving Vox my hope was for HUD secretary in the Biden administration ;) Alas, I’m proud to be able to support your work more directly now. Keep it up!
Been a follower and fan for a while now! Excited to follow you here now!
I had to come here and look at the full article so many on twitter were quoting. As usual, they took something totally out of context and I'm baffled how anyone could read the full article and not understand the point you were making. I hate twitter so much, but cannot look away. You got my $8.
Really excited to be a part of this.
One of the hardest boards to bore will be rekindling Americans' trust in politicians and in fact-based journalism. The poll numbers about trust don't tell the whole story, of course, but at current levels, it's going to be very hard to get 2024 right.
I mostly do trust what I read at genuine news sites, but in the past when I've read a story about which I had inside knowledge, I often saw that the reporter had something significant wrong, and sometimes they had clearly wrapped the facts in their preferred narrative.
You need a huge button at this site that says "buy my book!"
I can't believe I'm actually paying for a substack subscription. I'm assuming at some point you'll lead all of us on a YIMBY charge in some rando town's rezoning committee meeting
you are a leader, the Atlantic article and then reading this got you a new follower. i love your rebel blogger attitude.
Proud to be a founding subscriber, Matt. Been a big fan since Center for Progress days. I admire the principled stance you took on leaving Vox. Freedom of the press means nothing if all viewpoints can't be ably and vocally present. Most of all this is going to be a helluva lot of fun!
Good luck with the new venture. I think your three reminders about the electorate are quite useful. What. if anything, can we learn from Sherrod Brown? Is he a unicorn, or can his politics translate to other red states?
My big question is if we can move away from this activist/academic level of signaling solidarity AND keep the Democratic coalition together. Given that activists provide a lot of grassroots level energy/organizing but that their most identitarian takes are alienating, how can we keep the Democratic coalition together?
We need to convince the activists it’s in their interests to move away from this kind of language. But they also really love this kind of language. Can we do this without losing them? Do we need new activists and where do they come from?
Matt, I have been an unabashed Yglesias groupie since Center for American Progress days. Frankly, although you had published some great signature pieces at Vox, I missed the spontaneity and sense of fun of your blog work. I am happy as a clam about Slow Boring and proud to be a founding paid subscriber. All viewpoints ably and vocally present is the only serious metric for freedom of the press. Go for it!
All the best with your new venture, looking forward to reading less “sexy” content!
Your title reminds me of the last lines of George Eliot’s Middlemarch: ... for the growing good of the world is partly dependent on unhistoric acts; and that things are not so ill with you and me as they might have been is half owing to the number who lived faithfully a hidden life, and rest in unvisited tombs.
No higher praise...