Профиль

Just amazing how many people on here are completely unable to distinguish between something that is offered as an expert's best read of the situation and something that is offered as strategic advice for what "our side" should do.

will you have the courage to prosecute Chart Crimes

ogg, if you'll just come out of the cave for a minute, the light is better out here

Also, see this smart piece from my colleague Ed Wu (also, smartly, not on social media), who notes that self-IDed democratic socialists are among the Democratic Party's staunchest supporters (e.g., they rate the party more highly than do non-dem. soc. Dems) www.cnn.com/2026/07/30/p...

file under "emails I get," file under "lmao"

Full toplines and crosstabs are here: www.documentcloud.org/documents/28...

And fifth, my favorite finding (though it got cut from the final story): most partisans say that they "don't think that much" about their party's campaign strategy for election.

Fourth, a pair of wrenches to throw into some campaign messaging punditry: Americans are about equally likely to say that GOP is focusing too much on race/gender as to say that Dems are, and neither party has an image advantage on "fighting corruption."

Third, anger at Trump is a powerful unifying force for Dems. Check out the share of Dems/leaners who'd be upset with a Dem candidate who sometimes supported Trump, vs. the share of GOP/leaners who'd be upset to see a candidate go against him.

Second, "change"/"something new" isn't always something Americans are conceiving of along strict ideological lines. See this question about what dissatisfied Dems say would change their party for the better -- ideological considerations rank last, and some chose both "move left" and "move center."

First, dissatisfied voters are (as is often the case in a midterm!) looking for something different -- and in a shift from even last spring, Democrats now have the mantle of "the party of change."

Generic ballot numbers tend to get outsized attention, but IMO we asked a bunch of interesting stuff in our latest poll, so I want to highlight some of the findings that aren't directly horserace: www.cnn.com/2026/07/30/politics/cnn-poll-midterm-generic-ballot-democrats-republicans-change

The behavior I'm describing here is posting about survey data or a news article *without* linking back to the survey or article in question (say, an unsourced screenshot). If you post a link to an article about a survey, that is doing the precise opposite of what I'm talking about. Hope that helps!

personally, I enjoy both pancakes and waffles

I'm not sure how this is responsive to my post, which did not in any way suggest that news articles about survey data should not also link to the data!

there's a larger point here, but if you are posting about survey data on bluesky dot social I regret to inform you that you are 100% operating within a niche (as am I!)

also also: using archive dot today is bad (see: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archive...)

also this

If you post survey data, news articles, etc. without a link back to the source whenever possible, you are weakening the informational chain of custody and making it harder for other people to confirm that they're seeing accurate information. This holds even if you're mad at whatever it is.

thank you!