Discussion about this post

User's avatar
DerekF's avatar

I think that you and other political observers overestimate the importance of money in political campaigns. It is too easy to look at fundraising numbers and use that to declare the current leader in the horse race. It is true that a candidate with $100K running against an opponent with $10M is at a significant disadvantage. I am not sure that the same can be said once ad buys have reached a certain level of saturation. At some point, an extra dollar does not translate into more votes.

Julia's avatar

I'd like to point out some wording in this piece I find questionable. On its surface the language comes off as benign, but I can't help but feel an overall hard bias against Talarico throughout.

- Talarico has been encouraging and welcoming Trump supporters and especially Republicans to join his coalition since day one. The claim that he learned this "belatedly" feels disingenuous.

- It was painful it was to read the problems with Paxton (bribery, election interference) vs. the "problems" with Talarico (vanilla statements mixed with objective truth, the domestic threat comment is objective truth) in this post, written in a way as to suggest these issues are in any way comparable.

- Suggesting Talarico "cloaks" his Democratic views in Christianity. Many Democratic views fit in really well with biblical views- particularly the views of Jesus. Cloak means to conceal or hide - which isn't a fair description of how he's discussed religion and how it aligns with his politics.

14 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?