This Brookings report has more on this. www.brookings.edu/articles/wha...

Explanation/evidence: The national presidential 2020-2024 swing was 6 points (Biden by 4.5 to Trump by 1.5 points). In the pivotal EC states of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and North Carolina, the average swing was only 3.5 points toward Trump. /5

I think you can still believe that Democrats should move to the center, adopt different campaign tactics, whatever. (Understanding voters is my job. Running Democratic campaign strategy is not.) But it's simply not the case that Trump's electioneering was more effective than Harris's. /4

The further away from the election, the further pundit discourse gets from these basic facts. But it makes for a smarter discussion if you remember these basic facts. /3

There was a swing toward Trump across the whole country, but it was bigger in the states exposed to very little campaign messaging. Harris presidential campaign messages appear to have been more effective than Trump's. She lost b/c of that general swing, likely caused by economic concerns. /2

Improving government is essential to human thriving. We need smart minds working on it. But people who think they have discovered a new trick to solve major political problems are often describing an older political science idea/theory whose strengths and weaknesses are already well known.

Or see Andrew M. Henry on the same subject. Fascinating stuff if you like religious history. www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFCm...

There is lots of bad political science. There is lots of bad strategy by practitioners. There are also lots of smart, serious, careful people who do all these things. So there is probably not a simple trick out there that would be easy to execute that would lead your preferred party to win forever.

If you relatively recently started studying politics and think you have discovered a simple trick to generate a perpetual majority party and then win elections forever, and a large portion of the world is just too stupid to see it, I would ask you to consider that you might be overconfident.

4/ (Of course, this started before the Roberts Court—Congress gave itself the legislative veto as a check; the Court gave us the unconstrained executive in Chadha. See papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.... )