The Left's Exercise In Political Self-Deception

Added: 2026-05-28

[00:00:00]Democrats release a political autopsy of their 2024 election loss that fails to provide any cause of death. But does it matter? As President Donald Trump's poll numbers continue to fall and Republicans brace for a tough midterm, the left is riding high. What, if anything, is the Democratic party doing to get itself right with the electorate? And is it working?

[00:00:23]>> From the opinion pages of the Wall Street Journal, this is All Things with Kim Stell. Welcome to All Things with Kim Stell. And joining me this week with insights and answers to those questions is one of the most astute observers of Democratic politics out there, Ruie Tara, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and a co-author with John B. Judas of Where Have All the Democrats Gone? Rury, welcome. Thank you for coming on this week.

[00:00:50]>> Hey, glad to be here. It should be an interesting discussion.

[00:00:54]>> So, yeah, I can't wait to hear your thoughts on this. Um, last week, as mentioned, the Democratic Party released its long awaited autopsy and and having read it, I'm sure you have, too. I'm thinking we maybe could have just kept waiting for all it actually said. In the end, the big takeaway, amusingly appears to be that Democrats, in their view, just failed to win in 2024 because they didn't attack Donald Trump hard enough.

[00:01:21]Uh, which is a little nuts. Uh most of the rest in my read came down to what I'd call uh blaming it on technical or process errors that they didn't direct donor money effectively or use their text messages >> effectively. Or they didn't groom Kala Harris enough to uh you know make sure that she could be a viable presidential candidate. A lamentable oversight I suppose but yeah >> I suppose. Yeah. I mean but they didn't seem to talk about any of the big stuff.

[00:01:50]Anything substantive? Joe Biden's age, the corona, the coronation of Kla Harris, the party's position platforms.

[00:01:57]What's your read on the autopsy as a product?

[00:02:00]>> Well, I think you know my read is pretty similar a lot of other people and probably yours. It's like basically almost useless. I mean, it's fundamentally incoherent. You mentioned they the autopsy among other things they talked about they didn't attack Donald Trump hard enough. On the other hand, they talked a fair amount about well, we didn't offer an alternative either. So, which is it? you didn't have an alternative or you didn't attack Donald Trump hard enough. It was sort of like throwing everything against the wall to see what'll stick. Um while as you say leaving a lot of the most obvious things just sort of not even talking about them like Biden's age. How could you possibly write any kind of a serious autopsy on that campaign without, you know, the glaringly obvious fact people thought the guy was about to keel over for the last part of his presidency and yet you were going to run him again for president? And doesn't that say something about the party it selection processes its priorities? And speaking of priorities, what about all their positions?

[00:02:57]uh which the autopsy I I guess they mentioned the thing about the the famous ad comml they them uh you know President Trump is for you but they they basically well what could we do about that we couldn't reply so yeah you know put that to the side what about the fact that that was your position what about the fact that Democrats are all in on gender ideology and transgender so-called rights and this is an incredibly unpopular issue and symbolized for many voters how are they completely out of touch with their lives and their values and their priorities. So, I mean, you look at all the other things that Democrats tend to be obsessed with like DEI and the so-called green transition and, you know, obviously immigration. I mean, no, no issue is bigger than that except for inflation in the 2024 election. And yet the autopsy had relatively little to say about what a massive, you know, screwup that was for the Democrats and how much it hurt them and how maybe they need a different approach going forward. So the lack of interest in doing anything other than rehearsing some of these technical problems and how they allocated their money and maybe they should have thought more about Kamla might be president. We should make sure she's ready. Um, you know, these were this is definitely not what they needed was a radical critique in a sense to get to the root of things, the root of the problems and they carefully and assiduously avoided doing that and then issued this unbelievably lame document which on every page has we don't we don't think this is right.

[00:04:31]Don't pay any attention to it. You know, we haven't this isn't well documented. I mean, what is the point? I mean, what I mean, if it's a case that this this uh document is not trustworthy, why did you commission it in the first place? And why wasn't it in better shape when you did release it? What does that say about your priorities in terms of figuring out fundamental problems with the parties? I think with the party, I think it suggests that was not a priority at all really. They just want to >> Well, well, that's the question though is is why, right? So, that that's what I want to ask you about is I mean the the the failures of the autopsy. I think you just laid them out very well. And look, you've been doing this a long time. I've been doing this a long time. It's hard for parties to do an autopsy. Nobody wants to self-critique. And we've had num numbers of them over the years. Some of them are better than others. Some of them are bad. This one strikes me as remarkable just for it's probably one of the worst ever because it doesn't really get into anything. But the question So, so why is that? Why is the party at this moment so unwilling to address some of these issues?

[00:05:38]>> Well, think of it as a triumph of coalition management over coalition expansion. I mean, if you look at the results of the election, you would think, well, okay, I mean, this is kind of our coalition doesn't really have it together here. We need to expand it.

[00:05:51]We're losing altitude among some key constituencies. Um, let's really figure that out instead. You know, there are many reasons why if you bring up the real problems with the Democrats and the real things that hurt him, basically different factions and activists within the party will will basically uh you know, come come gunning for you. So, let's not basically then sort of put things into play or start conversations.

[00:06:17]We'll start troubles within the currently existing coalition. Let's manage those contradictions. Let's not confront them. So, I think that's exactly what they did. And and obviously one thing that really helped them here, I mean, it was um there was a period for what, a couple of months after the 2024 debacle when it seemed like Democrats might be at least sort of kind of entertaining the idea of a serious critique, but it disappeared so fast.

[00:06:40]And one reason it disappeared so fast is because the thermostatic reaction against the Trump administration started to set in. He became less popular. And um there were a lot of things that Trump was doing was that were so outraging the base of the party and the activists and the NOS's and so on that politicians did not feel and you know allied pundits did not feel that they could really start that conversation seriously when all this terrible stuff was going on when that you know the the great Satan was in Washington. He was doing these awful things and plus he seems to be getting less popular. So, hey, maybe we don't have to change at all. We'll just like uh let let it ride. And I think they feel fairly justified, a lot of those people in the party, and there are many uh in terms of how things have turned out. Trump has become massively less popular. The Democrats are set up for a good election in 2026, and they haven't changed hardly anything. So, um you know, I think that from their perspective, uh this seems like a pretty good deal. Now I think one could raise questions about how that's going to travel to 2028 which is a long way away and generally obviously if you do nothing about the underlying weaknesses of the party they remain geographic class in many other ways right I mean there's fundamental ways in which the Democratic part is out of step with huge areas of the country which would rather vote for you know would would rather vote for Satan than vote for the Democrats. So um what are you going to do about that? they're not going to do anything about it because they figure they can ride the reaction against the Trump administration through 2026 and hopefully 2028 as well. And um how at this point I'm not too optimistic that that's going to change anytime soon. I mean, you know, play it out. Look, they do well in 2026.

[00:08:29]And then people say within the party, well, okay, no problem. We just kicked their ass. We took the House. Maybe they come close to taking the Senate. Maybe they pick up state legislative seats and governors and so on and, you know, we're on a roll, right? We're on a roll. And look at the special elections. We we always win by, you know, a gazillion.

[00:08:48]So, how can there possibly be a fundamental underlying problem with the party that needs to be addressed? That's just, you know, that's just um bedwedding and that sort of thing, right? I mean, it's uh really let's just keep it locked and and have faith that our our the wonderful aspects of our party will finally get through to the great unwashed and we will we will ride it all to victory.

[00:09:11]Well, let me let me pose for a minute as a a a Democratic political operative and um and and they would say to you, I would imagine, well, you know, it's it's true that part of what we're doing well in is that uh people are rejecting Donald Trump. By the way, that's because of us. We have thrown attention about what he's doing. We have stood up and we have fought against him. But we have also found the magic key to getting right with the party again and that is our affordability agenda. See actually we are doing things and it's you know getting this message through into all these new audiences we need. So we are actually offering something that's out there. I have actually read some things you've written. You've actually talked about this as affordability washing. the notion that it isn't really real or much of a message. But I mean, what do you say to that argument that they would get?

[00:10:09]>> Well, I think affordability, yes, it's it's definitely a slogan, not a program.

[00:10:14]It's uh it's good for campaigning on.

[00:10:17]You're responding to the fact people are discontented about the economy, think prices are too high. Well, okay. If they think prices are too high, we'll say we'll make them more affordable. Uh will we have any idea about how to do that?

[00:10:31]No. But we'll say it anyway. Um, we'll put stuff in play like price caps. We'll put price stuff into play like denouncing price gouging. We'll put stuff into play that has to do with the rate capping in terms of uh electricity rates and so on. Um, none of these are real solutions, I think, to the underlying problems of of economic growth and economic prosperity, which I think voters really care about. Um, they don't just want things to be a little bit more affordable. They actually want to do well in life and have a rapidly growing prosperous economy that uh lifts them up and provides them with avenues for upward mobility. People right now are very cynical about that and they certainly don't think Trump's provided it. But the idea that you're going to basically convince them you have a program, an idea, a vision of how to rework the economy that's based around affordability. I mean, look, they don't even change their underlying positions and commitments. I mean, take uh for example, the whole green energy transition, which you know, the bloom is off the rose on this one, it seems to me, but the memo hasn't reached the uh the heights of the Democratic party. Um you know, we're they're ch they're basically have the they basically just say the reason we need the green transition is for affordability. Climate change, yeah, yeah, it's got a problem.

[00:11:44]Let you know, maybe we're not going to die tomorrow. But the point is if we implement this green agenda, everything will be cheaper. your electricity will be they'll practically be giving it away and there'll be great jobs and all this.

[00:11:56]So, they're basically just rebranding their previous commitment in that area as an affordability commitment and that's what they're trying to do with lots of other things as well. Um, which strikes me as, you know, again re really shallow and I think will only take you so far with voters. And in the meantime, their underlying positions on things like immigration, race, trans issues and so on remain the same.

[00:12:20]all the things that have culturally divorced them from the median workingclass voter remain in place and they think that all voters, you know, will ignore all that and basically focus on the affordability pixie dust that is scattered over the standard Democratic program and that will and again I think that will only get you so far. Look at Abigail Spanberger. I mean, she romped into the being governor of Virginia.

[00:12:44]Now, she's not particularly popular despite the fact she keeps on going on about affordability and she's viewed as a fairly partisan figure because, well, she's followed a fairly partisan agenda as governor of Virginia, including, of course, the notorious gerrymander, which was eventually invalidated, but made her look like a basically a partisan warrior. So, I think I think this is really they're kidding themselves. I wonder if they even believe it themselves that they can really rebrand themselves with voters simply by talking about affordability. I mean, look at the Democratic brand in general. I mean, there's just re, you know, mountains of data now that show the Democratic party as a party continues to be extremely unpopular. you know, not that the Republicans are that popular either, but it's not like the uh the the reaction against the Trump administration and people's continuing discontent for the economy has translated into thinking, well, the Democrats, they're really now that's the party that's got it all together. I'm for the Democrats. That's not happening. And even on the economy, where Democrats typically have been running behind the Republicans and party preferences, uh it hasn't really changed much. It's about even or maybe a slight advantage of the Democrats depending on which poll you look at, but nothing's really fundamentally changed in terms of the image of the party and how it appears to voters. It's just like people are increasingly rejecting the other side.

[00:14:06]So, the other thing they're doing, um, and I really want to get your take on this because I'm I'm fascinated by it, is that you've got Bernie Sanders out there, and he's been on this idea for a while, and I think this is the first election he's really been able to to try to put the entire strategy into play, but he's been out there recruiting these these sort of bluecollar progressives uh to run in races. Um and and that's the other approach which is that um we're gonna find candidates that look like you, talk like you, um you know, seem to be part of your world. And the role model for that obviously who's just getting, you know, obscene amounts of sort of uh slavish attention is is Graham Platner up in Maine, this oysterman who served in the Marines, this workingclass populist who's going to stand up to the billionaire class and Donald Trump. Um and Um, how's that working for them? I mean, he certainly he certainly he pushed the the establishment candidate out of the race in Janet Mills. Um, but uh is that a way to connect with these voters?

[00:15:15]>> Well, it's certainly a way of connecting with Democratic voters in a primary context, right? Where you get a lot of the most um active and attentive voters uh following the contest and and voting in it. And obviously you can pick up an enormous amount of small donor support by mobilizing the online community in your favor. And that's exactly what Platner did. But yes, Wat he is he certainly poses as a populist. He says he's for the, you know, a working-class guy, even though of course he isn't.

[00:15:42]He's from a fairly wealthy family. He went to Hodkkins briefly. Um, you know, he is uh he is not from he is not the salt of the earth. He's the salt of the affluent suburbs or whatever. So, but he certainly talks a good line about what a big working-class guy I am, even even as he sells his oysters to his mom's upscale restaurant. Um, but he w certainly is willing to denounce the billionaire class. He certainly is willing to say, "I will really stand up to Donald Trump, unlike those other weak need Democrats. You know, I'm I'm the guy you can really rely on because, you know, I'm I don't know, I'm an ex-Marine or something." So, um, this is all kind of cosplay to some extent. Um, I mean, if you scratch the surface of what he actually stands for, what he actually believes, his underlying positions on a lot of issues are basically the same positions as any other Democrat these days, including pretty liberal Democrats, right? I mean, you look at immigration, you look at trans, you look at climate stuff, I mean, he >> Medicare, I mean, he he's basically a down the line, you know, sort of culturally radical, you know, liberal Democrat. Um but he but you know that's to to sort of say that is the kind of populist approach will endear him and the Democrats to the working class is of course completely ridiculous because the working class doesn't share a lot of these positions. And whereas Platner been doing the best in this primary contest among the more affluent and educated areas of of Maine have given him more support than the sort of more rural and working class. Now that's not to say he can't beat Susan Collins.

[00:17:15]>> Um he maybe could, right? You know, it's going to be as as we were talking about a good Democratic year. Maybe people finally decide Susan Collins do, but I wouldn't count her out. I mean, the last poll I saw, for example, Platin was running ahead of her, but man, there's a long way to go. And last time Susan Collins had an opponent, she was eight points down going into the election and won by eight points. So, >> she's tough.

[00:17:37]>> She's tough.

[00:17:38]>> And she knows that state inside and out.

[00:17:40]She's, you know, she's got a good political operation.

[00:17:43]>> So, yeah. I mean, I think that uh you know, I think Democrats are really they will grasp at straws in terms of these faux populist candidates. They will grasp at straws in terms of, you know, the the sort of man of God James Telerico in Texas who is somehow going to turn Texas blue despite the fact all his underlying positions are basically the same as any other, you know, culturally radical liberal Democrat. Um, you know, this is like basically trying to trying to sort of rework your image without changing any of the underlying problems and weaknesses and sort of you being on the wrong side of 8020 issues that are actually undermining your image and have have for years. This is changing things without changing anything. And I think that uh again, as we were discussing, I think that's facilitated by the fact that they see a good opportunity in 2026. But it also tells us a lot about the character of the party and what its real priorities and willingness to rethink things are, which again is exemplified in that that silly autopsy that came out. They don't want to do it. I mean, as as your psychiatrist will tell you, people don't change until they're they're willing to change. They don't listen until they're willing to listen. And I don't think we're there yet, frankly, with the Democrats.

[00:19:00]>> Is there I mean, you work in this world.

[00:19:02]You spend all your time with Democrats.

[00:19:05]when you look out there uh is there anybody who's actually trying um that you see as or or places or candidates where there is a different approach going on? Do you see any governors or local candidates pres any presidential aspirants who you know are have a chance well first of all who are making the case for uh smarter politics because you know I I don't know what you think about these but me but I don't know if you think how you think about this if you would agree with me but my view is that there's a real opport there would be an enormous opportunity for Democrats right now if they were to actually moderate their positions.

[00:19:48]>> Um, you know, you have this very unsettled electorate and if there was an actual kind of uh what they what voters viewed as a more rational choice to sort of Trump style flamboyant politics, it strikes me that there could be a real uptick there. But is there anybody out there really making that case and succeeding on that type of an approach?

[00:20:10]>> Well, I think that the pickings are pretty slim. Um, in a sense, what the Democrats need is is is their own Trump.

[00:20:18]Uh, not necessarily someone as flamboyant as him, but someone who's willing to break with the orthodoxies of the party and sort of bring in and expand, you know, key con bring in more constituencies, expand old constituencies, the person the person who's willing to break with the orthodoxies of the party and say, "I'm I'm really a different kind of Democrat.

[00:20:37]I actually am not like, you know, what you think a real, you know, standard issue Democrat is like. I'm willing to reject positions X, Y, and Z because they're stupid and we shouldn't do them. Um, we don't really see candidates like that. We see some candidates uh like Josh Shapiro comes to mind who are willing to say them things that sound pretty sensible in some areas and is willing, you know, famously he's going to live on this forever, rebuilding I95 in 12 days. Um, that's great. I mean, more Democrats should try to do stuff like that. But has John Shapiro really, you know, gone out of has he really sort of established himself as a truly heterodox Democrat who's willing to break the rules and call out the shibilists of the party and say we must get rid of them? I'm not seeing it. I mean, I think he's a very cautious guy. Uh, and we So, we don't really have Democrats who are willing Well, I mean, John Futterman, his Pennsylvania comrade, uh, is willing to do that. Of course, he's on his way out of the Democratic party and he's got his own problems, right? So, >> uh, but he's, the fact that he sticks out like a sore thumb in terms of a Democrat is actually willing to disscent, you know, sort of openly and unapologetically from party orthodox, he just shows you how slim the pickings are. Um, but arguably what Democrats would need would someone who who would signal to the median voter that they truly are a different kind of Democrat and would ostentatiously reject some positions of the party and deliberately annoy some of the interest groups of the party that will stand in the way of of doing that in a sense. You know, who is a Democrat who's willing to have a true in-your-face sister soldier moment?

[00:22:18]Again, I'm not seeing them yet. Now maybe I think there's a lane for it in the broad electorate as you're alluding to. I think that's absolutely true and that's one reason why I've been wrote all this stuff I did for the last several years. Like wait a minute guys.

[00:22:33]I mean this is an opportunity here but you really have to change a lot of the way you're approaching things. So you're closer to what people actually want instead of you know what you think they should want which are two very different things right. Um uh so uh you know but again I'm not seeing someone coming you know obviously uh to the four who would who would have that kind of position and that kind of that kind of courage. They got to run the gauntlet of the Democratic primary electorate. And I think that that is really going to crowd them all into you know basically uh Trump resistance and and defending the basic positions of the party with a slight sprinkling perhaps of common sense every once in a while. But uh I don't see a huge lane now for the the truly heterodox Democrat. I mean Rahm Emanuel I guess comes closest to it. I should have mentioned him earlier I suppose but he still does seem like an afterthought in the you know evolving uh you know sort of campaign the shadow campaign to be the presidential nominee.

[00:23:38]But he certainly I think comes closest to the people who ever mentioned as a possible presidential candidate. I mean, Federman really isn't to being somewhat heterodox, >> right?

[00:23:48]>> So, >> we'll see what happens with Rahm, but >> yeah, >> I don't know. I mean, >> but barring that, >> I mean, I mean, la last question here.

[00:23:58]If let's just assume that uh the Democratic party isn't in a mood to listen to a Ram Emanuel or or make that turn. And it certainly sounds like from everything you have said that that seems unlikely uh at least in the near term.

[00:24:12]looking out, you know, we both did this.

[00:24:14]You you've done this in the past with with your great book, The Emerging Democratic Majority, which you wrote back in early 2000s, and you're looking out ahead at the sort of demographics and the the way the country is uh turning and moving. But this midterm aside, you look to 2028 and beyond, if you have a party that's not really changing, has had that kind of a defeat.

[00:24:36]I mean, what in your mind is the best case scenario for the Democratic party overall and the worst case scenario like four or five years out? Well, I think the worst case scenario is pretty clear, which is that since they haven't changed their underlying positions in a lot of things, the weaknesses remain the lack of attractiveness to workingclass voters uh except in the sense of leveraging a thermostatic reaction against Trump.

[00:25:01]It's all still there. So what happens if as we move into the 2028 election we get a kindler gentler right populism that can more appeal to you know wider swath of voters than than Trump currently does and maybe the Trump administration winds up on a higher note than it is now. I mean, you could certainly see it being possible that uh we'll have another Republican administration in in 2028 uh and maybe a better managed Republican administration because the one I mean realignments are hard. I mean, I still think as I wrote with my colleague at AIU Balivin, um, we're in a politics without winners era where the parties kind of toggle back and forth between having control over politics and then completely screwing it up when they are in power because they don't really make an effort to expand their coalition. I mean, I think we saw that with Trump. He did and said a lot of things that just haven't worked out that well. So maybe he had an opportunity after the 2024 election to build on the things he got elected on that actually were popular and you know above all really convince people he knew how to manage the economy and get in on a better keel than the Democrats had and it just hasn't happened. So um but what if in 2028 that does happen? What if, you know, Marco Rubio gets elected and he actually manages things well and he he's able to bring in a lot of disaffected Democrats as well as keep Republicans and and Republican leaning independents on the farm uh and just really expand that Republican coalition to the level Trump had in 2024 and perhaps even more. And then you have the reaportionment that comes in in 20 2030 that's just going to increase the Republican lean fundamental advantage in terms of the distribution of strengths among states. Um and you you might find yourself in a position where suddenly the party of the working class and the dominant party in America is the Republicans, not the Democrats.

[00:26:56]Uh and maybe that'll be >> right >> there for a while. And if they successfully govern and manage the economy, uh, that could definitely put them on the back foot for a while. And I think Democrats are are are really remarkably like much calmer than they should be about this possibility. I mean, I guess they just don't have much imagination. They just can't imagine that a party that gave rise to Donald Trump who they just hate with a passion and think he's the total script. I mean, how could it possibly ever work out for them? How they Well, one reason is because you're so weak yourself. you're not and you're you're leaving a lane open for them to correct their mistakes to get on a better keel to do a better job with governance and expand their coalition even while you're not. So I think that worst case scenario is pretty obvious. I think the best case scenario is let's say Trump continues to be very unpopular, his administration continues to screw up. Um the economy is still viewed as being in bad shape by the time we move into that cycle. And Democrats, you know, against against our predictions here, our inclinations, our suspicions, actually do moderate it.

[00:28:02]Nominate a candidate who ostentatiously moderates their approach on a lot of hot button cultural issues. that actually comes up with an economic program that seems to go beyond you know affordability uh and you know basically promising to spend more money when they get into power which is sort of a contradiction I suppose in some ways but uh will will such a candidate emerge would they be able to get the nomination would they be able to carry the general election against JD Vance or Marco Rubio whoever we don't know but if they did and then all important I mean remember Biden got elected in 2020 he was going to restore normality uh he was going to, you know, make America a veritable paradise uh by undoing all the terrible things Trump did and implementing all their great ideas. But they got into power and the moment they did, they actually moved quite significantly to the left in a lot of areas. And and I think their economic policy, we can safely say, did not work out that well. So, um, but what if a 2028 govern democratic government actually did the anti-Biden and, uh, you know, governed thoughtfully and carefully, maybe in some ways conservatively and actually shephered a new era of dynamic capitalist economic growth, which is what we should all want, right? uh and were more cautious about what they spent money on and gave up, >> I might add, I mean I always annoy my Democratic friends with this. Give up on this ridiculous green transition stuff.

[00:29:27]Just come on. What people want is energy abundance and they don't particularly care that much.

[00:29:32]>> Uh cheap, reliable, abundant energy whether it's green or not. And you know if you got if you're concerned about that kind of transition well put it in the back seat and concentrate on delivering what people really want which is you know basically a fast growing economy that delivers avenues for upward mobility and and and that and that process you know things may work out better than they think. I mean, capitalism is a pretty dynamic system and you really have to give it its head to uh for things to work out and for you to be able to do the things you say you want to do for, >> you know, ordinary working people, the poor, what have you. So, uh I mean as as we spin that out, it seems a bit implausible at this point, but I mean it could happen.

[00:30:13]>> Well, it will be absolutely fascinating to watch and I hope as we go down this journey, you will come back and join us and uh document it as we go. Ruth Terara, thank you so much for coming on.

[00:30:24]We also want to thank our listeners for tuning in. We are here every week. If you enjoy the show, please do hit the subscribe button. And if you'd like to write to us, you can at atkimwsj.com.