Why we still can’t have nice things

Ezra Klein in October 2021 interviewed data geek David Shor on the source of Democrats’ failure to deliver more on what Democrats claim they want. To win, Schor believed (in Klein’s words), “Democrats should do a lot of polling to figure out which of their views are popular and which are not popular, and then they should talk about the popular stuff and shut up about the unpopular stuff.” It was surprisingly controversial for reasons Klein describes in his essay.
David Dayen, responding at The American Prospect, suggested:
This bumps up against Democratic activist goals around diversity and inclusion and edge-pushing ideas around policing and immigration, and that’s the source of nearly all the tension around popularism. But I would argue that popularism is not only self-evident but approximately what Democrats have been doing in virtually every race of national import for the past 30 years. And that’s precisely the problem. You cannot talk about the same popular items, fail to deliver on them, and expect the voting public to keep listening to you. There are diminishing returns to parties that never seem to get results. At this moment, the only thing that will give Democrats a fighting chance is what my friend Matt Stoller just coined as “deliverism.”
Being a big-tent party means a lot of people want their say in how things get done. They demand that their voices be heard and their interests be represented. The problem is that sometimes those interests are not complementary but in competition. “Please all, please none” comes to mind.
After Kamala Harris lost in November, Sam Stein tapped out a piece for The Bulwark suggesting why Joe Biden’s deliverism didn’t deliver. “Biden’s domestic achievements didn’t resonate with voters,” Stein wrote. “And it’s left the party questioning whether deliverism is smart politics at all.”
But there is a tension there, somewhat, between Democrats’ legislative ability to deliver and their political ability to market those achievements. It’s not that they don’t have decent messages. (They’ve gotten better.) It’s that the left doesn’t have the right’s multifaceted, billionaire-funded media vectors for delivering it to people’s ears. What I’ve called the left’s “tree falls in the forest” problem.
But Klein and co-author Derek Thompson think it’s more than that. In “Abundance,” the pair argue that in liberals trying to satisfy every sub-interest group in their big tent, they’ve burdened the government with Jacob Marley-like chains. With the best of inclusive and environmental intentions, trying to please all has kept government from being nimble enough to build things on time and on budget that make people’s lives better. And not just at the national level, but the municipal as well. This is not helping. It’s undermined people’s faith in government action and it’s dragging down the Democrats’ brand with working people.
We have met the enemy and he is us.
I’m in the middle of the book now, so I don’t have fully formed thoughts. But I figured I’d drop in this conversation between Jon Stewart and Klein (that I’ve only just started) for some weekend listening.
* * * * *
Have you fought the coup today?
National Day of Action, Saturday, April 5
Choose Democracy
Indivisible: A Guide to Democracy on the Brink
You Have Power
Chop Wood, Carry Water
Thirty lonely but beautiful actions