Now, the "pick Abrams" advice might seem common sense to some of you, but to others, the 1s operating under The Chuck Todd Theory of Elections, it doesn't. They are dreaming of Klobuchar. Which, as a fellow moderate, I can totally understand.
But this is the wrong approach.
But this is the wrong approach.
And just so I can so some more shameless self-promotion, as I was telling @JoeNBC during our chat today (yes-that actually happened!!!) people need to retool their thinking about elections to this: what will determine whether WI, MI, PA, AZ go blue in '20 will be the demos of the
electorate, bc the demos (% non-white, % college ed vs non ed, % female, % under age 40) will shape the partisan composition of the state (% of Rs relative to % of Ds) and if Ds want to win, they damn well better match or come close to matching that R %. They can be short bc the
turnout surge among Indies will make an Indie voter pool more friendly to Ds than Rs in 2020 than it was in 2016 & that can be combined w the D % to offset D underperformance. BUT only so much of it. You will be able to see this in my @newrepublic piece but can see it simply by
looking at the party breakdown of Iowa's electorate in 2012 versus 2016. In 2012 38% of IA voters were Ds & 32% were Rs bc Obama inspired strong turnout of non-whites & younger voters. But in 2016 it inverses, Rs made up 34% to Ds 31%. Party split is the🔑 
Also see @Davin_Phoenix's excellent book amazon.com/Anger-Gap-Shap…
