Was going to quibble on Lurie vs Mamdani, but the more I think about it the more I’m convinced — obviously, in a raw appeal sense, I’m more taken in by Zohran (and going from 1% to within spitting distance of Cuomo is clear proof of the strategy working, while IDK how much of Lurie’s success comes from his social media).
But the Mamdani social media campaign works at least in part because of Zohran’s own charisma — which is not really a blueprint for any insurgent political movement, unless we think we can find very-adorable-but-message-disciplined 30-somethings in every major municipality and statehouse. The Lurie model instead feels sustainable, a frame that could be retrofitted to any number of politicians (I could see, say, Brad Lander wearing it well. And also probably other politicians who are not middle aged Jewish men, just to be clear!)
yeah fwiw I am also in the Zohran target audience and love the videos lol. but they're like... almost *too* targeted for me, which is suspicious because I'm sooo far from a normal voter. (and I am endeared to Lurie because like you say, I think anyone could do it)
1) zohran works not only because of the produced videos but the unproduced sound bites he generates; extremely smooth responses on the debate stage / podcasts etc. when asked what foreign country he's going to visit first, saying "im staying here in nyc" is a banger - sorry!
2) the socials are targeted at our generation, but he's also running an aggressive traditional campaign to get to the normie voters - showing up all over the city, massive volunteer mobilization, and figuring out how to boil his policy proposals down to concrete outcomes people can visualize - love lander but he really struggled here. no ones gonna read ur 70 page proposal!
3) i think a lot of the attraction is the sheer ambition - unclear whether people believe these policies are realistic vs it's just refreshing to see someone with vision in the democratic party. if you shoot for the stars and end up at the moon that's still solid!
But anyway, back to the facial hair. I think I need a political consultant to explain this to me. Are these guys chadifying themselves, so they can win back disaffected men? Or are they aiming to seem older and more rugged—experienced enough to be commander in chief? Either way, I still get jump-scared every time Pete’s beard accosts me on Substack Reels."
I saw video game critic Tim Rogers give a good account about beards—in his case he was talking about Keanu Reeves
A lot of men with gorgeous babyfaces grow beards as they realize their face is aging. I guess a salt-and-pepper beard is more in vogue than a wrinkling face…
I think all the time about your observation on twitter that Mayor Dan's social media person seems to be a 25 year old asian girl. No matcha shop left unvisited by that man. No ube pork floss croissant left unsampled.
My perception is that the real reason the tech right arose is that they perceived that the Democratic party had become hostile to tech and was trying to regulate it, using Lina Khan at the FTC. That's the real reason they started liking Trump--but then they didn't want to seem nakedly self interested so they had to convince themselves they were into all this other MAGA stuff that they didn't really believe.
The overt falseness of that latter imposture is what became clear in that interview. What they care about is their business. They thought Trump would be better for their business, and now they're learning that's wrong. That's what makes them different from the regular trump voter, who genuinely cares about immigration, DEI, law and order, etc.
Was going to quibble on Lurie vs Mamdani, but the more I think about it the more I’m convinced — obviously, in a raw appeal sense, I’m more taken in by Zohran (and going from 1% to within spitting distance of Cuomo is clear proof of the strategy working, while IDK how much of Lurie’s success comes from his social media).
But the Mamdani social media campaign works at least in part because of Zohran’s own charisma — which is not really a blueprint for any insurgent political movement, unless we think we can find very-adorable-but-message-disciplined 30-somethings in every major municipality and statehouse. The Lurie model instead feels sustainable, a frame that could be retrofitted to any number of politicians (I could see, say, Brad Lander wearing it well. And also probably other politicians who are not middle aged Jewish men, just to be clear!)
yeah fwiw I am also in the Zohran target audience and love the videos lol. but they're like... almost *too* targeted for me, which is suspicious because I'm sooo far from a normal voter. (and I am endeared to Lurie because like you say, I think anyone could do it)
there's also a sense that i get (from descriptions of High Clintonism, Obamania, things of that nature) that copying an approach like Zohran's (which is baiting you and me as directly as anything can) may age somewhat poorly; this moment's authentically hip communication will become a bag of clichés for gen z political consultants to resell much quicker than we're comfortable with
oh god I do not want to see the DNC try to replicate Zohran
riffing on this -
1) zohran works not only because of the produced videos but the unproduced sound bites he generates; extremely smooth responses on the debate stage / podcasts etc. when asked what foreign country he's going to visit first, saying "im staying here in nyc" is a banger - sorry!
2) the socials are targeted at our generation, but he's also running an aggressive traditional campaign to get to the normie voters - showing up all over the city, massive volunteer mobilization, and figuring out how to boil his policy proposals down to concrete outcomes people can visualize - love lander but he really struggled here. no ones gonna read ur 70 page proposal!
3) i think a lot of the attraction is the sheer ambition - unclear whether people believe these policies are realistic vs it's just refreshing to see someone with vision in the democratic party. if you shoot for the stars and end up at the moon that's still solid!
I buy this for sure!!
This post made me cackle IRL
"
Unfortunately, he’s busy baiting Bluesky users instead:"
cmn that's pretty funny
"
But anyway, back to the facial hair. I think I need a political consultant to explain this to me. Are these guys chadifying themselves, so they can win back disaffected men? Or are they aiming to seem older and more rugged—experienced enough to be commander in chief? Either way, I still get jump-scared every time Pete’s beard accosts me on Substack Reels."
shaving is annoying
Brilliant political analysis
Did you catch Cuomos campaign photoshopping Mamdanis beard 😆😆
I saw video game critic Tim Rogers give a good account about beards—in his case he was talking about Keanu Reeves
A lot of men with gorgeous babyfaces grow beards as they realize their face is aging. I guess a salt-and-pepper beard is more in vogue than a wrinkling face…
EDIT: forgot to name the Tim Rogers
the utah DOT is sooo good
I think all the time about your observation on twitter that Mayor Dan's social media person seems to be a 25 year old asian girl. No matcha shop left unvisited by that man. No ube pork floss croissant left unsampled.
he needs to film a ✨✨ what I eat in a day as a 48 year old living in san francisco ✨✨
YES! ðŸ˜
My perception is that the real reason the tech right arose is that they perceived that the Democratic party had become hostile to tech and was trying to regulate it, using Lina Khan at the FTC. That's the real reason they started liking Trump--but then they didn't want to seem nakedly self interested so they had to convince themselves they were into all this other MAGA stuff that they didn't really believe.
The overt falseness of that latter imposture is what became clear in that interview. What they care about is their business. They thought Trump would be better for their business, and now they're learning that's wrong. That's what makes them different from the regular trump voter, who genuinely cares about immigration, DEI, law and order, etc.