On Wednesday, I pointed to a posting at The Ink calling for Democrats to tell a better story. Facts without context aren’t as “sticky” as a good story. Facts matter. College graduates, children of the Enlightenment, built their educations and their livelihoods around them. But like your SAT or GRE scores, nobody gives a damn about them later in life. What does your job experience say about you? What story does it tell?
The play’s the thing that will catch the conscience of disaffected voters, writes Michael Podhorzer at Weekend Reading. A key point in Part I of his analysis:
Disaffected voters cast ballots when they believe that if the other party wins, they will lose the freedoms they now take for granted – whether it’s the freedom to own an AR-15 or to have access to reproductive health services.
Podhorzer addresses presidential polling showing “young voters and voters of color” moving away from Biden:
Before we can address the question of whether Biden needs a “low turnout election,” or assess the danger posed by “disengaged voters [driving] the overall polling results,” we need a better way of thinking about votersin the age of MAGA.
Like what I call “mad poll disease,” turnout terror is caused by not recognizing that the factor most certain to determine the election outcome is one we can’t know ahead of time. That factor is: What will the election seem to be “about” to most voters by October? Will it be a referendum on the Biden administration – or will it be a referendum on whether America should be ruled by MAGA? (For stylistic ease, I’ll refer to the alternatives as either the “MAGA election” or the “Biden election” even though, of course, the reality will be something along a continuum, closer to one or the other.)
If we imagine a single undecided voter picking between Biden and Trump in a voting booth, it might seem painfully obvious why this frame would matter. But it is less obvious that what the election is “about” also affects who turns out to vote.
Since 2016, whenever an election has been “about” MAGA, turnout rates have been much higher than normal, and Democrats have won much more often in those contests. If the Trump and MAGA agenda is salient in October, I am confident turnout will again be at historic highs and that Biden will do as well or better than he did in 2020. But if the economy, immigration, or a similar issue is center stage, turnout levels will be lower, as will Biden’s prospects for an Electoral College victory.
This gets back to facts, facts in which Democrats put undue confidence. Podhorzer argues that the broader story Democrats tell will have more of an impact on supporter turnout than trying to persuade voters who believe the economy sucks to believe it doesn’t by hammering away at their disbelief with fact sheets. As in, “Since 2016, whenever an election has been “about” MAGA, turnout rates have been much higher than normal, and Democrats have won much more often in those contests.”
As you can see from the chart below, there was very little change in the number of “most likely” voters going into the 2016 and 2020 elections. But going into this election, there are nearly a third more of the “most likely” voters than there were before the last two elections! That 18 million voter gain reflects the conversion of previously “very likely” voters into “most likely” voters across all demographics.
Podhorzer provides more analysis of how these shifts shake out in Biden’s favor. I won’t reproduce those here. But his conclusions about “double haters” may be useful:
In our current political era, knowing and believing what Trump and MAGA plans to do makes people more likely to vote.
The dramatic change in partisan preferences for somewhat likely voters and those who haven’t voted is the crux of the uncertainty about the outcome of the 2024 election. But it would be a mistake to think that the portion of these less likely voters was dependent only on how large the turnout ladle that scoops them up in November will be. Rather, turnout rates will depend on what motivates those less likely voters to vote, given they have been all but sitting out the last three elections. In our current political era, knowing and believing what Trump andMAGA plans to do makes people more likely to vote: for better or worse.
[…]
Recent history suggests that contingent voters can and will become more engaged in the coming months. But it’s far from assured that they will become engaged enough to understand why they personally need to come out and vote. This is not a reason to panic and make predictions of doom; it’s a reason to get to work at keeping those predictions from becoming self-fulfilling prophecies. This isn’t just a job for political campaigns; it’s the job of all of civil society, including the media, who care about American democracy.
Tell better stories. Start with shared values, name the villains, share a vision (say what you’re for).
I’ll have to study this more for what it means for the unaffiliated voters I’m pursuing as critical to wins this fall. But I’ll take the upbeat advice.
Update: What have I been saying?
.@AnandWrites: "American democracy is at risk because of the Democratic Party's risk aversion: not wanting to get messy, to do things that alienate a third of people… but if you're running against fascism in 2024, maybe a little less caution, a little more boldness, try stuff." pic.twitter.com/m8ezgfyZBj
