I'm in Midwood today where Andrew Yang is getting endorsed by two leading Orthodox Jewish politicians, Simcha Eichenstein and Kalman Yeger
"We need a fresh face," Eichenstein says of Andrew Yang. "Someone who is focused, capable, and driven."
"I believe Andrew Yang has the smarts and the skills to tackle the crises of today," says Simcha Eichenstein. "Andrew understands the Orthodox Jewish community is part of the beautiful mosaic that is New York City."
Yeger says Yang told him he'd treat the Orthodox Jewish community "fairly." He says government and the media were silent as anti-Semitic attacks surged last year
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
What @AndrewYang did when he first ran for president was seek out a bunch of popular podcasts on different ends of the political spectrum. Why? Because he was a nobody, and major newspapers wouldn't bother with him. Not a bad strategy.
Liberal writers and voters don't really get Yang, but there's a reason he's leading the 2021 field and became popular running for president. Many voters don't hit neat ideological boxes - they hunt for a compelling message and a person to deliver it.
A few presidential candidates understood going for all media is a good strategy. They're the ones who didn't shun Fox, for example. Yang, Bernie Sanders, and Pete Buttigieg come to mind
How to actually understand labor endorsements in New York races -
If you've got a small race - city council, state senate etc. - labor matters a lot. Few people have heard of the candidates. Labor raises name rec and mobilizes their members for you. Their money goes far.
If you've got a BIG race - NYC mayor comes to mind - organized labor has diminished returns, UNLESS they all unite behind you. This is how Scott Stringer beat Eliot Spitzer.
If you've got a BIG race - NYC mayor comes to mind - an individual labor union won't move the needle much because most members will pay attention enough to develop their own opinions and views. DC37, UFT, 1199 can't just snap their fingers and tell 20k people how to vote.
Now that time has passed, the dark truth is that a large part of Ruth Bader Ginsburg's legacy will be allowing Donald Trump to nominate a strenuously pro-life Supreme Court justice. It's an unfair system we have but Ginsburg knew this. She chose not to retire.
It is not an exaggeration to say Ginsburg paved the way to allow a right-wing Republican president to pick her replacement. In 2014, it was clear Democrats were losing the Senate. And in 2016, after two terms of Obama, it was very possible a Republican would replace him.
It is difficult for me to be overly celebratory of anyone's legacy when their direct decision to not retire is tied to their replacement, who will hold views diametrically opposed to that very legacy. The Supreme Court is the institution we are stuck with. Ginsburg knew it.
The untold story is how few famous or prominent politicians want to be mayor. A huge departure from 2013, when at least five very viable Democrats tried to replace Michael Bloomberg.
Consider the field today. It's literally two elected officials of note - Borough President Eric Adams and Comptroller Scott Stringer - and a bunch of people who have never held elected office before. It may be the thinnest Democratic primary in modern history.
Going to do a Substack on this but it strikes me there are two factors at play: the terrible state NYC is in, due to COVID-19 and the subsequent economic crisis, and the nationalization of our politics, which has made relative do-nothing perches like Congress much more attractive
What will probably do Trump in is an obvious Electoral College loss. Trump survives because Republicans have his back but most Republican politicians would be fine ditching Trump and regrouping for a 2022 midterm backlash and a more reliable GOP standard bearer in 2024.
What will save Trump is a very narrow election outcome, like 2016 but in reverse, with Biden barely ahead. Then you will have chaos, court challenges, all the hell everyone is forecasting. If the national polls are a reflection of Election Day, however, that stuff may not happen.
Republican politicians tolerate Trump because he's popular with the base and appoints the judges they want. But any replacement level Republican can appoint judges. A fair amount of GOP players - Cruz, Hawley, Cotton, and others - would be okay with Trump clearing the stage
McConnell and Trump are rationally pursuing their interests in the zero-sum world of American politics. If you aren't winning, you are losing. They seek to cement the conservative majority for the next 30 years. Democrats can either recognize the war for what it is or lose.
There's actually nothing horrifying or wrong about McConnell ramming through judges. He's a right-wing ideologue doing what his party wants of him. It's up to Democrats to elect people who care this much about relentlessly helping the poor and everyone else.
The reality for Democrats is the only rational move to make, if they have a majority, is pack the court. Expand it relentlessly, rush through judges, stamp out Republicans as Republicans have chosen to stamp out Democrats