I also like that you get me to think. I think what Dems need to do is know the audience. Most people running for office have some idea of what their constituents want and need. The first step of any process is assessing the situation. Do you think the Dems are going to just throw the Democratic Socialist platform at everyone? I also think that bringing up, as it fits each district, how much millionaires are fleecing the rest of us, and finding strategies to change that. I think that would appeal to most working and middle class people. Do I have a point?
I am in the near suburbs of Philly and completely done voting for someone like Cuomo with sexual abuse allegations, just because Clinton and Clayburn endorsed him. What were they thinking? Some of us care about morality in its true sense.
Thank you so much for sharing this...seriously, Rachel...I appreciate you weighing in thoughtfully and bringing such nuance to the conversation. You absolutely have a point, and I love that you’re thinking strategically about meeting people where they are.
That’s the core of what I’m constantly trying to hammer: know your audience...know your district...know your voters. The best candidates don’t just run on what they believe...they run on what their constituents need to hear and experience to trust that their lives will get better.
And you’re right...the Democratic Socialist platform isn’t going to get blanketed across America tomorrow. But what I’m pushing back against is the growing pattern of treating highly localized wins as if they should be national blueprints.
That’s where things break down. Local messaging...like hitting hard on the economic fleecing you brought up...can be incredibly effective when it’s framed in a way that makes each community feel it’s about them...not about the national party’s narrative.
Also...yes, I completely hear you on the Cuomo frustration. I’ve long said that party endorsements don’t automatically override what voters care about on the ground... especially when trust and character are in play. Blindly propping up candidates with that kind of baggage is a tactical and moral failure.
I love that you’re here and engaging like this. I want you thinking...disagreeing...pushing back...that’s what makes this community strong. Please keep it coming!
You're welcome. As it turns out, a significant portion of the human race...doesn't like to think that hard...or even be nudged to. I love it when people like yourself...are stimulated by it!
Jack, I'm a long-time reader and new paid subscriber.
I have to disagree with your central premise, which is that "Believing New York City Speaks for America." While that's true at the literal level of political platform, what's most instructive is Mamdani's point that Dems should be "listening," not "lecturing." People don't want to be told what's most important to them. They want politicians to *ask* them what's most important to them and build campaigns around their real concerns. That is a replicable strategy. I've listened to several of Mamdani's interviews, not just the analysis of those interviews. I think Dems win by listening to what people are thinking and feeling rather than telling them what they're thinking and feeling.
You recommend that we "Follow the Money, Not Just the Movement," and this is what I think many are doing when they look at Dem candidates. Big money is corrupting our politics, Dem and Repub alike; I don't think you disagree with that.
I genuinely appreciate your thoughtful pushback and I’m glad you’re engaging deeply...seriously, I value that. I don’t disagree that listening beats lecturing every time. That’s foundational.
Where I push back is the idea that NYC’s political winds automatically scale nationwide. It’s not that people shouldn’t be heard...it’s that what resonates in one place can fall flat in another. Listening must also be paired with political realities on the ground. What wins Queens might lose Ohio.
As for "follow the money"—yes, totally. Big money distorts both parties...no question. But sometimes...the most energized "movements" are also backed by big money from different corners...and we have to stay sharp enough to track both. It's not always a clean grassroots story just because it feels like one. There have been plenty of examples that were not.
Again, I really appreciate you taking the time to challenge this...iron sharpens iron...and these are the kinds of conversations that make this space worth it.
I agree with you that the political winds don't scale nationwide...for a copycat message. It's only the strategy of listening and coming to voters with an authentic message that does.
I'm not saying it won't play well in Peoria but even folks in Peoria realize that the Big Money isn't doing them any favors to make living and dying in this country affordable. Tired of paying for Social Security, Medicaid/Medicare and unemployment only to see that these programs get cut - while Elon Musk blows up another rocket using our tax dollars. It's not right and Dems need to focus that.
Thank you for this...you nailed something powerful here with “Afford to Live & Afford to Dream.” That’s language that does cut across geography...because it speaks to basic human dignity and economic fairness—things people in Philly...Peoria...and everywhere else absolutely feel in their bones.
You’re also spot on about the frustration with seeing programs we all pay into...Social Security...Medicare...unemployment...constantly on the chopping block, while billionaires burn public money with zero accountability.
That’s a winning issue when it’s framed properly, and it hits whether someone’s urban... suburban...or rural. The key is making sure Democrats don’t overcomplicate it. It’s not about wonky tax code battles...it’s about saying plainly: you paid in...you should benefit first.
When you speak like that...it connects everywhere.
Thank you again for sharing this...this kind of perspective sharpens the work and keeps the conversation grounded. Please keep dropping these insights!
P.S. I've been engaging on this issue a big part of the day on social media. If only the average person on social media thought 1/2 as much about what they were getting ready to write as subscribers to JHN do. It's always fun...here...among the thinking. ;)
Jack, I understand what you're saying about Mandani's win: That the existing rank and file Democratic machine wants to tread lightly. Right now, it's more important that we win. However, at some point, we need to think like New Yorkers and get people to really think about each other than trying to be safe to the detriment of us all.
Ironically, NYC has some responsibility for the ascension of Trump. I kept hearing stuff like "Trump is good for business". NYC is a great place to visit, but I sure as hell wouldn't want to live there.
I also like that you get me to think. I think what Dems need to do is know the audience. Most people running for office have some idea of what their constituents want and need. The first step of any process is assessing the situation. Do you think the Dems are going to just throw the Democratic Socialist platform at everyone? I also think that bringing up, as it fits each district, how much millionaires are fleecing the rest of us, and finding strategies to change that. I think that would appeal to most working and middle class people. Do I have a point?
I am in the near suburbs of Philly and completely done voting for someone like Cuomo with sexual abuse allegations, just because Clinton and Clayburn endorsed him. What were they thinking? Some of us care about morality in its true sense.
End of rant. 👹
Thank you so much for sharing this...seriously, Rachel...I appreciate you weighing in thoughtfully and bringing such nuance to the conversation. You absolutely have a point, and I love that you’re thinking strategically about meeting people where they are.
That’s the core of what I’m constantly trying to hammer: know your audience...know your district...know your voters. The best candidates don’t just run on what they believe...they run on what their constituents need to hear and experience to trust that their lives will get better.
And you’re right...the Democratic Socialist platform isn’t going to get blanketed across America tomorrow. But what I’m pushing back against is the growing pattern of treating highly localized wins as if they should be national blueprints.
That’s where things break down. Local messaging...like hitting hard on the economic fleecing you brought up...can be incredibly effective when it’s framed in a way that makes each community feel it’s about them...not about the national party’s narrative.
Also...yes, I completely hear you on the Cuomo frustration. I’ve long said that party endorsements don’t automatically override what voters care about on the ground... especially when trust and character are in play. Blindly propping up candidates with that kind of baggage is a tactical and moral failure.
I love that you’re here and engaging like this. I want you thinking...disagreeing...pushing back...that’s what makes this community strong. Please keep it coming!
I just KNEW you would make me think, and I LIKE having to think.
Thank you!
Warmly,
Rae
You're welcome. As it turns out, a significant portion of the human race...doesn't like to think that hard...or even be nudged to. I love it when people like yourself...are stimulated by it!
Jack, I'm a long-time reader and new paid subscriber.
I have to disagree with your central premise, which is that "Believing New York City Speaks for America." While that's true at the literal level of political platform, what's most instructive is Mamdani's point that Dems should be "listening," not "lecturing." People don't want to be told what's most important to them. They want politicians to *ask* them what's most important to them and build campaigns around their real concerns. That is a replicable strategy. I've listened to several of Mamdani's interviews, not just the analysis of those interviews. I think Dems win by listening to what people are thinking and feeling rather than telling them what they're thinking and feeling.
You recommend that we "Follow the Money, Not Just the Movement," and this is what I think many are doing when they look at Dem candidates. Big money is corrupting our politics, Dem and Repub alike; I don't think you disagree with that.
Welcome to the crew, Julie!
I genuinely appreciate your thoughtful pushback and I’m glad you’re engaging deeply...seriously, I value that. I don’t disagree that listening beats lecturing every time. That’s foundational.
Where I push back is the idea that NYC’s political winds automatically scale nationwide. It’s not that people shouldn’t be heard...it’s that what resonates in one place can fall flat in another. Listening must also be paired with political realities on the ground. What wins Queens might lose Ohio.
As for "follow the money"—yes, totally. Big money distorts both parties...no question. But sometimes...the most energized "movements" are also backed by big money from different corners...and we have to stay sharp enough to track both. It's not always a clean grassroots story just because it feels like one. There have been plenty of examples that were not.
Again, I really appreciate you taking the time to challenge this...iron sharpens iron...and these are the kinds of conversations that make this space worth it.
Thanks for responding, Jack!
I agree with you that the political winds don't scale nationwide...for a copycat message. It's only the strategy of listening and coming to voters with an authentic message that does.
Afford to Live & Afford to Dream.
I'm not saying it won't play well in Peoria but even folks in Peoria realize that the Big Money isn't doing them any favors to make living and dying in this country affordable. Tired of paying for Social Security, Medicaid/Medicare and unemployment only to see that these programs get cut - while Elon Musk blows up another rocket using our tax dollars. It's not right and Dems need to focus that.
Thank you for this...you nailed something powerful here with “Afford to Live & Afford to Dream.” That’s language that does cut across geography...because it speaks to basic human dignity and economic fairness—things people in Philly...Peoria...and everywhere else absolutely feel in their bones.
You’re also spot on about the frustration with seeing programs we all pay into...Social Security...Medicare...unemployment...constantly on the chopping block, while billionaires burn public money with zero accountability.
That’s a winning issue when it’s framed properly, and it hits whether someone’s urban... suburban...or rural. The key is making sure Democrats don’t overcomplicate it. It’s not about wonky tax code battles...it’s about saying plainly: you paid in...you should benefit first.
When you speak like that...it connects everywhere.
Thank you again for sharing this...this kind of perspective sharpens the work and keeps the conversation grounded. Please keep dropping these insights!
P.S. I've been engaging on this issue a big part of the day on social media. If only the average person on social media thought 1/2 as much about what they were getting ready to write as subscribers to JHN do. It's always fun...here...among the thinking. ;)
Jack, I understand what you're saying about Mandani's win: That the existing rank and file Democratic machine wants to tread lightly. Right now, it's more important that we win. However, at some point, we need to think like New Yorkers and get people to really think about each other than trying to be safe to the detriment of us all.
Ironically, NYC has some responsibility for the ascension of Trump. I kept hearing stuff like "Trump is good for business". NYC is a great place to visit, but I sure as hell wouldn't want to live there.
Remember “It’s the economy, stupid”? Basic messages are vital. We need to find one or two again.