There Is No One-Size-Fits-All Template for Winning Elections

Opinion|There Is No One-Size-Fits-All Template for Winning Elections

My column this week was a quick analysis of the results of the elections in Virginia, New Jersey and New York City, which were about the particular interests and concerns of each place and also a clear referendum on the state of things. I have a few other observations that I couldn’t quite fit into that piece, so I will share them here.

First, I have been a little reluctant to comment on the arguments around the future of the Democratic Party, for the simple reason that I see most of them as beside the point. Any path forward will ultimately rest on public discontent with the president, and beyond that, Democrats are less in need of new messaging than they are in the social and political infrastructure needed to reach voters where they’re at.

It is also clear to me that efforts to impose a single message are incompatible with the broad political and ideological diversity of the Democratic coalition. Better to focus on a set of areas that individual candidates can tailor to their respective electorates, which is exactly what happened on Tuesday. Abigail Spanberger, Zohran Mamdani and Mikie Sherrill — as well as many candidates down ballot — focused on affordability. They all emphasized their opposition to the president’s corruption. But the particulars of each effort varied according to the circumstances of each election and the views of each candidate. There is no one-size-fits-all template for winning, and the party shouldn’t try to impose one. Let a thousand flowers bloom.

Second, the rhetorical centerpiece of the Republican Winsome Earle-Sears’s campaign for Virginia governor was anti-trans demagoguery. She clearly believed that she could weaponize prejudice against transgender people to win the governor’s mansion, under the theory that opposition to trans inclusion was a winning issue Democrats couldn’t beat. When the dust settled on Tuesday night, however, there was no evidence that issues affecting transgender people moved votes in the Republican Party’s direction. Earle-Sears’s attempt to repeat the success of President Trump’s “they/them” ads against Kamala Harris may have shown, instead, that 2024 was the exception that proved the rule.

The question of whether transgender people can use public restrooms that fit their gender identity or whether trans girls can play sports with their cis counterparts just isn’t very salient to the public. Even Trump’s ad played on prejudice to make a point about material concerns. Anti-trans bigotry for its own sake is not a winning issue and may work, instead, to repel voters whose concerns lie elsewhere.

Finally, Tuesday’s results may put a halt to Republican midyear redistricting. Gerrymandering isn’t a magic bullet. When you create a safe seat, you are not generating new voters as much as you are moving around the ones you already have. In many states, the only way to create new Republican-leaning seats is to dilute existing districts that have a strong Republican tilt.

In a normal year, this is no issue. But if it is a Democratic wave, that could overwhelm the gerrymander. The Republican effort to secure a majority in the House could produce, instead, a Democratic advantage. For Republican incumbents, the prospect of a 2026 Democratic wave might be enough to put an end to the plans to draw new safe-ish seats. On the other side, the prospect of a wave might push strong Democratic contenders to throw their hats into the ring, as well as encourage vulnerable Republicans to retire.

Elections send signals, and Tuesday’s elections are telling the Republican Party that it is in greater danger of defeat than it may have realized.

What I Wrote

I wrote about the Democratic victory on Tuesday and why Trump is an albatross around the neck of the Republican Party.

Supporters of the president might pooh-pooh these results as unrepresentative. This isn’t a presidential electorate, they might say; there are different circumstances. But New Jersey and New York City both had high turnout for off-year elections (Virginia had a slight increase). In other words, it really is the case that Trump specifically, in his capacity as president, inspires ferocious energy and opposition against him among a large part of the voting public.

I also joined my colleagues Michelle Cottle and David French to talk about the election results on the latest episode of “The Opinions.”

Now Reading

Rebecca Traister on the gerontocracy for New York magazine.

Henry Farrell on “partyism” for his Substack newsletter.

Peter Beinart on Zohran Mamdani and the new left-liberal coalition on Palestine for Jewish Currents.

James Mann on the world that Dick Cheney built for The Atlantic.

Howard French on the role of slavery in building America’s wealth for The Wall Street Journal.

Photo of the Week

Taken during a brief sojourn to Mobile, Ala., this past summer.

Now Eating: Rice and Peas

My lunches these days have been some variation on rice and beans. It’s easy to put together, reheats well and is a nice balanced meal, especially when paired with a grilled and or pan-fried chicken breast for extra protein. This recipe, from New York Times Cooking, is for a Jamaican-style rice and beans.

Ingredients

• 1 cup dried red peas (red kidney beans)

• 1 (14-ounce) can unsweetened coconut milk

• ½ teaspoon garlic powder

• ¼ teaspoon ground allspice

• Salt and freshly ground black pepper

• ½ yellow onion, peeled

• 4 fresh thyme sprigs

• 2 cups long-grain white rice

• 3 scallions, thinly sliced

• 1 whole Scotch bonnet or habanero chile

Directions

Rinse the peas, then place them in a large pot or Dutch oven and cover with at least 2 inches of cold water. Cover and soak peas for at least 8 hours, ideally overnight.

Drain the peas and return them to the pot. Add 3½ cups of water and the coconut milk, garlic powder and allspice. Season to taste with salt and pepper. The cooking liquid should taste like the beginning of a good soup. Add the onion half and thyme. Bring to a simmer, cover and cook for about 1 hour, until the peas are tender and the cooking liquid takes on a dark red hue.

While the peas cook, rinse the rice until the water runs clear. Set aside.

Once the peas are tender, taste and adjust seasoning if necessary. Stir in the scallions and rice and bring to a simmer. Gently float the Scotch bonnet on top and cover. Simmer the rice for 15 minutes (or according to package directions if it differs), then turn off the heat and allow the rice to steam, still covered, for an additional 10 minutes.

Remove the Scotch bonnet, fluff the rice with a fork and stir to evenly distribute the peas. Serve warm.