Into the Wilds of Democratic Navel-Gazing and Big Think

About a week ago, both Matt Yglesias and Jonathan Last at The Bulwark had pieces up arguing different electoral strategies for the Democratic Party. Yglesias argued that while the current Democratic Party is at least competitive in national majority votes (good enough for bragging rights and probably the House) they are at a decisive disadvantage when it comes to winning the Senate in 2026 and in a challenging position when it comes to the Electoral College. What’s necessary, he argues, is a major repositioning on issues like guns and fossil fuels (among other issues) to make Democrats competitive in Senate contests in states like Iowa or Texas, states that often seem like they might elect a Democrat but then don’t. For the purposes of this conversation, we might slot in immigration and trans rights for Yglesias’ fossil fuels and guns. In a way, the arguments were captured by a series of speeches freshman Senator Elisa Slotkin (D-MI) started giving around the same time, in which she argued that Democrats needed to shed their reputation for being “weak and woke” in order to battle and defeat Trump.