Marc Singer
@theothermarcsinger.bsky.social
Not that one. Not that one, either. Writer and English professor at Howard University in Washington DC. Author of Breaking the Frames (2018) and Grant Morrison (2012).
The curse of the high-engagement low-info voter.
November 10, 2025 at 12:54 AM
The curse of the high-engagement low-info voter.
But enough about Alan Moore.
November 6, 2025 at 9:24 PM
But enough about Alan Moore.
Obviously the correct response is for Senate Dems to filibuster it.
November 6, 2025 at 9:10 PM
Obviously the correct response is for Senate Dems to filibuster it.
Even if we can get to 50 or 51, we still need a caucus willing to nuke the filibuster and reform the SC or we won't have a governing majority. Probably need 53 or more for that.
We need a real plan to win in southern, rural, rust belt states. Pretending it will fix itself doesn't get us there.
We need a real plan to win in southern, rural, rust belt states. Pretending it will fix itself doesn't get us there.
November 3, 2025 at 10:29 AM
Even if we can get to 50 or 51, we still need a caucus willing to nuke the filibuster and reform the SC or we won't have a governing majority. Probably need 53 or more for that.
We need a real plan to win in southern, rural, rust belt states. Pretending it will fix itself doesn't get us there.
We need a real plan to win in southern, rural, rust belt states. Pretending it will fix itself doesn't get us there.
Come on. You started by dismissing Dem losses in rural states that have given Reps a durable Senate/EC advantage, and now your comeback plan depends on winning seats we haven't held in decades. Even your list of 50 depends on seats we struggle with (ME, WI, 2 in NC).
Whistling past the graveyard.
Whistling past the graveyard.
November 3, 2025 at 10:25 AM
Come on. You started by dismissing Dem losses in rural states that have given Reps a durable Senate/EC advantage, and now your comeback plan depends on winning seats we haven't held in decades. Even your list of 50 depends on seats we struggle with (ME, WI, 2 in NC).
Whistling past the graveyard.
Whistling past the graveyard.
I don't do doomerism. But I would prefer the answer to doomerism be something more actionable than cherrypicking and wishcasting.
If your model for future Democratic control of the Senate rests on Kansas, you'd better have a plan to win Kansas.
If your model for future Democratic control of the Senate rests on Kansas, you'd better have a plan to win Kansas.
November 3, 2025 at 2:01 AM
I don't do doomerism. But I would prefer the answer to doomerism be something more actionable than cherrypicking and wishcasting.
If your model for future Democratic control of the Senate rests on Kansas, you'd better have a plan to win Kansas.
If your model for future Democratic control of the Senate rests on Kansas, you'd better have a plan to win Kansas.
I don't like the Nichols/Yglesias solution of moving the party to the right (and I doubt it would work - our problem is rural emptying + media/information system collapse), but at least they admit we have a problem.
November 3, 2025 at 1:24 AM
I don't like the Nichols/Yglesias solution of moving the party to the right (and I doubt it would work - our problem is rural emptying + media/information system collapse), but at least they admit we have a problem.
We can't count on Maine (ME hasn't had 2 Dem senators since 1980) or Wisconsin. IA hasn't elected a Dem senator since 2008, SC since 1998, TX since 1988, KS since *1932*.
This is not a formula for winning the Senate. It's a recipe for permanent loss.
This is not a formula for winning the Senate. It's a recipe for permanent loss.
November 3, 2025 at 1:22 AM
We can't count on Maine (ME hasn't had 2 Dem senators since 1980) or Wisconsin. IA hasn't elected a Dem senator since 2008, SC since 1998, TX since 1988, KS since *1932*.
This is not a formula for winning the Senate. It's a recipe for permanent loss.
This is not a formula for winning the Senate. It's a recipe for permanent loss.
And you don't have to go back to 1978 to see the decline. We held the Senate for two congresses since 2014 and those were both by the skin of our teeth, with majorities dependent on Manchin/Sinema/Fetterman. We won't have a governing coalition unless we can figure out how to win in the Plains again.
November 2, 2025 at 10:51 PM
And you don't have to go back to 1978 to see the decline. We held the Senate for two congresses since 2014 and those were both by the skin of our teeth, with majorities dependent on Manchin/Sinema/Fetterman. We won't have a governing coalition unless we can figure out how to win in the Plains again.
The Plains (and rural states generally) going solid R is the whole story because those states are overrepresented in the Senate and the electoral college. That's what took us from hitting 60 senators in a stretch year to struggling to reach 50.
That's not an advantage for Democrats.
That's not an advantage for Democrats.
November 2, 2025 at 10:45 PM
The Plains (and rural states generally) going solid R is the whole story because those states are overrepresented in the Senate and the electoral college. That's what took us from hitting 60 senators in a stretch year to struggling to reach 50.
That's not an advantage for Democrats.
That's not an advantage for Democrats.
*IL was a loss and regain, NV should be in the gain column, some of those wins and a lot of those losses are doubles. Overall trend is still down since 2007 and way down since 2009.
November 2, 2025 at 10:06 AM
*IL was a loss and regain, NV should be in the gain column, some of those wins and a lot of those losses are doubles. Overall trend is still down since 2007 and way down since 2009.
You can pick good or bad years, but the overall trend for Dems in the Senate is bad. We can't cope our way out of this.
November 2, 2025 at 10:00 AM
You can pick good or bad years, but the overall trend for Dems in the Senate is bad. We can't cope our way out of this.
If you start at 2007, we gained AZ, GA, MN, NH, NM, OR, VA.
We gained and lost AK, AL, IN, MO, NC.
We lost AR, FL, IA, IN, LA, MT, ND, NE, OH, PA, SD, WI, WV.
Gained, lost and regained CO, IL, and PA (but the regain is Fetterman, so...)
We gained and lost AK, AL, IN, MO, NC.
We lost AR, FL, IA, IN, LA, MT, ND, NE, OH, PA, SD, WI, WV.
Gained, lost and regained CO, IL, and PA (but the regain is Fetterman, so...)
November 2, 2025 at 9:58 AM
If you start at 2007, we gained AZ, GA, MN, NH, NM, OR, VA.
We gained and lost AK, AL, IN, MO, NC.
We lost AR, FL, IA, IN, LA, MT, ND, NE, OH, PA, SD, WI, WV.
Gained, lost and regained CO, IL, and PA (but the regain is Fetterman, so...)
We gained and lost AK, AL, IN, MO, NC.
We lost AR, FL, IA, IN, LA, MT, ND, NE, OH, PA, SD, WI, WV.
Gained, lost and regained CO, IL, and PA (but the regain is Fetterman, so...)
United in their common conviction that the Democratic base, who they hate, should put them in charge of the party.
October 31, 2025 at 7:54 PM
United in their common conviction that the Democratic base, who they hate, should put them in charge of the party.
To be fair, a lot of the folks defending Nazi tattoo guy are people who identify as hating Democrats while also assuming they are entitled to run the party.
October 31, 2025 at 12:08 PM
To be fair, a lot of the folks defending Nazi tattoo guy are people who identify as hating Democrats while also assuming they are entitled to run the party.
And instructors didn't have to go along with it, but precarious employment left many feeling like they have no choice.
(tbf my tenured and tenure-track colleagues have no such excuse)
(tbf my tenured and tenure-track colleagues have no such excuse)
October 30, 2025 at 4:34 PM
And instructors didn't have to go along with it, but precarious employment left many feeling like they have no choice.
(tbf my tenured and tenure-track colleagues have no such excuse)
(tbf my tenured and tenure-track colleagues have no such excuse)
This is part of it, but not all of it (and not even a big part at this point). Covid didn't make university administrators cater to students and parents, soaring tuitions did that.
October 30, 2025 at 4:33 PM
This is part of it, but not all of it (and not even a big part at this point). Covid didn't make university administrators cater to students and parents, soaring tuitions did that.
Same with activists/"the groups." It's true that Dem electeds weren't saying "abolish the police," but the loudest activists on social media were and the public took note of Democratic silence. You have to distance yourself from toxic positions perceived as coming from your side.
October 30, 2025 at 1:58 PM
Same with activists/"the groups." It's true that Dem electeds weren't saying "abolish the police," but the loudest activists on social media were and the public took note of Democratic silence. You have to distance yourself from toxic positions perceived as coming from your side.
I'm not sure how this argument helps to get funding back for SNAP or to protect people who are about to lose the benefits.
October 27, 2025 at 1:23 PM
I'm not sure how this argument helps to get funding back for SNAP or to protect people who are about to lose the benefits.
The Washington Post is not a newspaper anymore, not to its owner. It's the lobbying arm for Amazon.
October 27, 2025 at 2:03 AM
The Washington Post is not a newspaper anymore, not to its owner. It's the lobbying arm for Amazon.