Morris also keeps making facile points about how factors aside from ideology also influence elections.

Yeah, no shit! But the main factor Democrats *actually control* is their ideology and issue positions.

Democrats obviously can't expect to change voters' media diets 🤦 5/

By the way, here is Matt Y in that same June post discussing changing the D party brand.

Morris has repeatedly and dishonestly characterized pro-moderation advocates as if they aren't aware of problems with the D brand and nationalization of politics. 4/

His own data shows a sizable moderation advantage, and he has failed to report it. 4/4

No, there is no consensus that the benefits of moderation have disappeared, though many researchers think they are small*er* in recent years.

Bonica has an awful and misleading habit of calling effects "small" when most people in politics describe the same thing as large. 3/

It does seem very awkward to have a debate from behind a paywall. I'm not sure how people are expecting this to work
www.gelliottmorris.com/p/data-over-...

The "composite score" used by Morris combines 8 scores. Out of those 8,

• 1 is DW-NOMINATE
• 3 are derived from DW-NOMINATE (DW-DIME, contributor DW-NOM, Hall and Snyder 2013)
• 1 is a roll call-based method similar to DW-NOMINATE (Shor-McCarty)

papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.... 2/

The squad and the blue dogs are the most prominent radical and moderate groups, respectively, in the Democratic party, so I don't see how this can possibly qualify as cherry-picking.

What, specifically, was "cherry-picked"? Does Elliot think Yglesias secretly compared 20 other groups? 2/

@gelliottmorris.com here you go:

www.slowboring.com/p/elon-musk-...

It's obvious why trans-related issues have become unpopular when they're promoted by ultra-toxic advocates like Alejandra Caraballo.

No one who wants to help trans people or win elections should touch Alejandra with a 10 foot pole.

this is what peak performance looks like

More fundamentally, you can't trust bluesky poli sci because bluesky selects for political scientists who post straw men for clout on social media. It's embarrassing

You can't demand to be regarded as an expert while you act like a high schooler

Here's what the paper has to say.

Why is there a complete disconnect between the paper and the social media posts? The analysis in this paper absolutely, categorically 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 "suggest" or "strongly suggest" anything about moderation suppressing Dem turnout. 2/2

Thought someone hit my bike the other weekend, but just learned from a neighbor that it was blown over by wind.

Somehow I forgot about the snow squalls that day 🤦. Gotta watch out for those 58mph gusts