Time to get tough, Democrats
Elliot Morris is wrapping up a series of posts on his latest Strength In Numbers/Verasight poll:
Americans are unhappy with the way things are going in the country, and don’t feel particularly well represented by either major political party. In our new February Strength In Numbers/Verasight poll, 53% of U.S. adults say the Democratic Party is out of touch with the concerns of most Americans. An identical percentage — 53% — say the same about Republicans.
The problem, Morris says, is that out-of-touchness is not the kind conventional wisdom suggests:
Whether a party is “in touch” or “out of touch,” we found, is a product of more than just ideological perceptions. In our survey, U.S. adults call Democrats weak (48%), ineffective (47%), and out of touch — but also empathetic (54%) and principled (49%). They call Republicans extreme (60%), elitist (57%), and cruel (51%). Both parties have brand problems. But the kind of problem is fundamentally different from what most people are assuming — and that difference matters enormously for 2026.
They tested for this by asking respondents for an assessment of 10 adjectives. You can survey the results in the chart above.
Since 45 percent of Americans now identify as independents, I’m obsessed with turning out more friendlies. Morris addresses that:
Democrats’ brand among independents differs from their brand among all adults in one hugely important way: the “extreme” label fades significantly. Just 35% of independents call Democrats extreme, versus 42% of all adults. That 7-point drop suggests the people telling pollsters Democrats are “too extreme” are disproportionately Republicans. Among actual swing voters, “extreme” isn’t really a Democratic problem. The GOP, on the other hand, has a big problem with perceived extremism.
What is a Democratic problem is that 45% of independents say Democrats are weak, and 44% say ineffective — nearly identical to the national numbers. Contra the extremism drop-off, these traits aren’t sourced to partisan talking points. Just 23% of independents call Democrats tough, the second-lowest rating either party gets on any trait — surpassed only by the GOP’s 22% on empathy among independents.
Independents “see two flawed parties — one that’s full of cruel, elitist extremists, and one that’s weak and ineffective.” Conventional wisdom post-2024 suggests that Democrats moderate for 2026 and 2028, but survey data suggests that that “gets the problem exactly backwards.”
Morris gets into a wonky statistical analysis of whether Democrats moderating or looking stronger gets them more electoral bang for the buck. But the two are not unrelated. It turns out that improving the party’s perception of strength is a better bet for winning a vote versus its extremeness score. Improving the party’s perception as strong is also a better bet than a perception that it is moderating. But good luck with that.
But good luck with that. It will take sustained effort. Morris has a few modest proposals:
What are some things they could do? First, they should treat any newsworthy confrontation with the Trump administration as a campaign opportunity, rather than a risk. Democrats may need to rethink their strategy in and out of Congress to orient around toughness. Maybe that means holding up nominees, forcing procedural votes, shutting down the government, or even showing up at protests. Democratic leaders should adopt the mindset of doing whatever it takes to shift perceptions. The strategy of issuing carefully worded statements or rolling over on funding challenges is a big reason the party finds itself where it does today.
The root of this Democratic Party problem is cultural. As a friend suggests, Democrats are cowed as much by their own supporters as by the right. Step out of line, say the wrong thing using the wrong terminology, and you’re Saint Sebastian pierced by your own allies’ arrows. “But what will Republicans say” is another cringe from some party elders who flinch like abused spouses. Not a good look. I just saw the Dropkick Murphys on Sunday. Their loud, in-your-face advocacy for working people was bracing. Maybe try that.
I’m a field guy. I see a party of policy liberals and campaign conservatives. Party leaders are still operating in the 20th century. I hear it in person from state-level candidates. Their idea of taking their game to the next level is doing the same thing they’ve always done, the way they’ve always done it, just more of it. There is no outside-the-box thinking and no risk-taking even when same old, same old isn’t working. They don’t experiment or innovate. They’ll update their software but not rethink their strategy. They’re in a groove so deep that they can’t see over the top of it. Few recognize it.
Democrats cannot win with registered Democrats alone. Except the lists they assemble for turning out independents are consistently too narrow. Plus, their committed volunteers, God bless ’em, want to knock every door like Jehovah’s Witnesses for Democrats. That’s not exactly the right approach with independents that give both major parties the side-eye even if they lean left. Democrats don’t just need broader targeting. They need a strategy that’s not one-size-fits-all. If they expect to encourage friendly independents to vote, the doorstep pitch isn’t about asking independents to vote for Democrats. That’s perhaps too much of an ask. In areas where independents lean blue but vote too little, the challenge is getting them to vote at all. The ask should be to vote as an exercise of their own power over their futures. But that would require a nimbleness and flexibility most campaigns and local committees cannot muster.
Also, half the independents are under 45.
Do Democrats want to win badly enough to try something new?