Newsletter Subject

David Leonhardt: Left, left, left ... That’s enough

From

nytimes.com

Email Address

nytdirect@nytimes.com

Sent On

Thu, Apr 11, 2019 12:06 PM

Email Preheader Text

The risks in the Democratic Party’s new political approach. View in | Add nytdirect@nytimes.com

The risks in the Democratic Party’s new political approach. View in [Browser]( | Add nytdirect@nytimes.com to your address book. [The New York Times]( [The New York Times]( Thursday, April 11, 2019 [NYTimes.com/David-Leonhardt »]( [Op-Ed Columnist] Op-Ed Columnist American voters lean further to the left on economics than many people realize. If you’re a regular reader of this newsletter, you’ve heard that idea [before](. I think it’s a vital point about American politics: The ideological center is not where many (typically affluent) commentators imagine it to be. As a result, there aren’t that many political risks in calling for, say, expanded government health insurance or higher taxes on the rich. But there still are risks in the Democratic Party’s recent drift to the left. To be blunt, Democrats could help President Trump win re-election if they’re not smart about how they cast themselves in 2020. Two articles in The Times this week highlight those risks. The first, by [Nate Cohn and Kevin Quealy]( explains that Democrats who shape the political conversation on social media are strikingly different from Democratic voters nationwide. Democrats active on social media are whiter, more liberal and more educated (and thus more affluent) than Democrats as a whole. And of course non-Democrats — including swing voters who will help decide the election — look a lot more like the average Democrat than the average Twitter Democrat. No one should be fooled into thinking that winning an argument on social media translates into winning over the electorate. Donald Trump, “moderate” The second article, by my Opinion colleague [Thomas Edsall]( points out that Democratic candidates are adopting some positions that are clearly unpopular with the full electorate, including mandatory Medicare for All and reparations for slavery and segregation. Edsall reviews the political science research showing, not surprisingly, that taking unpopular positions typically hurts a party’s chances of winning. I’d add one other point. Forget for a moment about the radically right-wing way that Trump has governed. As a candidate in 2016, he ran as a relative moderate on many issues, especially economic ones. He talked about Social Security, Medicare and trade in less conversative ways than many other Republicans. It worked. As CNN’s [Harry Enten]( noted, voters judged Trump to be more moderate than any Republican nominee in decades. Vox’s [Matthew Yglesias]( puts it this way: “Trump, for all his weirdness as a political figure, won in part through some very old-fashioned triangulation — telling cross-pressured voters that he was picking up some of Democrats’ most popular positions just as Bill Clinton poached an idea or two from the GOP in the 1990s.” Coming across as moderate isn’t simply, or even mostly, a matter of a candidate’s policy positions. It’s a matter of presentation. A large group of Americans don’t want to vote for a candidate they consider to be radical. Democrats would do well to spend more time thinking about how to appeal to these voters. Doing so could help not only in the general election but in the primary too, surprising as that may sound. Privacy project “Our information — much of it private — is the rocket fuel of the ever-expanding internet. Our data keeps it humming along, even as tech companies abuse that data with increasing frequency,” writes [Kara Swisher]( as part of [a new Times project on privacy]( which starts today. Other pieces are by [A.G. Sulzberger]( [James Bennet]( [Farhad Manjoo]( [Sarah Jeong]( [Jianan Qian]( and [Tim Wu](. The project will take over the entire Sunday Review print section this weekend, and there is [a limited-run newsletter]( by Charlie Warzel. ADVERTISEMENT If you enjoy this newsletter, forward it to friends! They can [sign up for themselves here]( — and they don’t need to be a Times subscriber. The newsletter is published every weekday, with help from my colleague Ian Prasad Philbrick. David’s Morning NYT Read [Israel’s Lesson for the Democrats in 2020]( By ROGER COHEN The election was a referendum on Netanyahu and he nailed it. His playbook will be Trump’s in 2020. The Full Opinion Report [Do You Know What You’ve Given Up?]( By JAMES BENNET Introducing The Times Privacy Project. [It’s Time to Panic About Privacy]( By FARHAD MANJOO We claim to want it, companies claim to provide it, but we all just accept that, well, you have no privacy online. [Where Would You Draw the Line?]( By STUART A. THOMPSON The boundaries of privacy are evolving quickly. Show us where you would set them. [My Phone Knows All, and That’s Great]( By SAMANTHA IRBY Sure, electronic eyes are spying. But look at all this pocket computer can do! [We’re Not Going to Take It Anymore]( By KARA SWISHER We’ve given up too much control over our digital lives. We need a law to take some of it back. [How A.I. Is Changing Insurance]( By SARAH JEONG Some technologies are better left in the laboratory. [Feeling Safe in the Surveillance State]( By JIANAN QIAN In China, where facial recognition cameras are celebrated as a national triumph, many citizens convince themselves that everywhere else is filled with danger. [How Capitalism Betrayed Privacy]( By TIM WU The forces of wealth creation once fostered the right to be left alone. But that has changed. [How The Times Thinks About Privacy]( By A. G. SULZBERGER We’re examining our policies and practices around data, too. [What Women Know About the Internet]( By EMILY CHANG The digital world is not designed to keep women safe. New regulations should be. [How Tech Companies Say They Care]( By CHARLIE WARZEL AND STUART A. THOMPSON Companies have said for decades that we should be in charge of our data. Why now, more than ever, does it seem like we aren’t? [Millionaires and Billionaires and Bernie]( By BRET STEPHENS The Vermont socialist is suddenly rich. Is he any wiser? [I Didn’t Write This Column. I Spoke It.]( By FARHAD MANJOO The screenless internet could be amazing — or terrible. [Hungry and Desperate, but Away From a Country in Chaos]( By NICHOLAS KRISTOF Millions of Venezuelans have poured across borders into Colombia and other countries, fleeing repression, corruption and a collapsing economy. [Bibi Trump and Donald Netanyahu]( By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN They both see the world’s problems as opportunities to cement their hold on power. [Trump’s Other Base]( By CHARLES M. BLOW In preparation for 2020, the president is focused on the minority vote. [Mr. Netanyahu’s Next Test]( By THE EDITORIAL BOARD He ran an ugly, nationalist campaign. Can he be the leader of all of Israel? [A Supreme Court Do-Over]( By LINDA GREENHOUSE Will the court be able to avoid mirroring the country’s polarization? [Why We Need ‘Game of Thrones’]( By ANNALEE NEWITZ The epic fantasy series is more than just escape. It is a way of imagining our way to the future. [Is Indonesia’s Military Eyeing the Republic?]( By EVAN A. LAKSMANA Prabowo Subianto, a former army commander and General Suharto’s son-in-law, is running for president and seeking a return to military’s dominance of Indonesia. [Congress to I.R.S.: Don’t Even Think of Helping Taxpayers]( By THE EDITORIAL BOARD Congress could free most Americans from the annual drudgery of filling out tax forms. Instead, it’s trying to lock the current system in place. [Paths to Fulfillment, Barriers to Success]( Readers respond to David Brooks’s column about the peaks and valleys on the path of life. ADVERTISEMENT FEEDBACK and HELP If you have thoughts about this newsletter, email me at [leonhardt@nytimes.com](mailto:leonhardt@nytimes.com?subject=David%20Leonhardt%20Newsletter%20Feedback). If you have questions about your Times account, delivery problems or other non-journalistic issues, you can visit our [Help Page]( or [contact The Times](. FOLLOW OPINION [Facebook] [FACEBOOK]( [Twitter] [@nytopinion]( [Pinterest] [Pinterest]( Get more [NYTimes.com newsletters »](  | Get unlimited access to NYTimes.com and our NYTimes apps. [Subscribe »]( ABOUT THIS EMAIL You received this message because you signed up for NYTimes.com's Opinion Today newsletter. [Unsubscribe]( | [Manage Subscriptions]( | [Change Your Email]( | [Privacy Policy]( | [Contact]( | [Advertise]( Copyright 2019 The New York Times Company 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

Marketing emails from nytimes.com

View More
Sent On

08/12/2024

Sent On

08/12/2024

Sent On

07/12/2024

Sent On

07/12/2024

Sent On

07/12/2024

Sent On

07/12/2024

Email Content Statistics

Subscribe Now

Subject Line Length

Data shows that subject lines with 6 to 10 words generated 21 percent higher open rate.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Number of Words

The more words in the content, the more time the user will need to spend reading. Get straight to the point with catchy short phrases and interesting photos and graphics.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Number of Images

More images or large images might cause the email to load slower. Aim for a balance of words and images.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Time to Read

Longer reading time requires more attention and patience from users. Aim for short phrases and catchy keywords.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Predicted open rate

Subscribe Now

Spam Score

Spam score is determined by a large number of checks performed on the content of the email. For the best delivery results, it is advised to lower your spam score as much as possible.

Subscribe Now

Flesch reading score

Flesch reading score measures how complex a text is. The lower the score, the more difficult the text is to read. The Flesch readability score uses the average length of your sentences (measured by the number of words) and the average number of syllables per word in an equation to calculate the reading ease. Text with a very high Flesch reading ease score (about 100) is straightforward and easy to read, with short sentences and no words of more than two syllables. Usually, a reading ease score of 60-70 is considered acceptable/normal for web copy.

Subscribe Now

Technologies

What powers this email? Every email we receive is parsed to determine the sending ESP and any additional email technologies used.

Subscribe Now

Email Size (not include images)

Font Used

No. Font Name
Subscribe Now

Copyright © 2019–2025 SimilarMail.