Press Rogue — May 23, 2019, 2:59 pm

One Horse Town

“Twitter isn’t real life.” So declared New York Times columnist Michelle Goldberg last week, writing on the budding Democratic presidential primary. In fact, as a source of information on the state of the party, the platform is “actively misleading,” she said, noting that Bernie Sanders has twice as many followers as Joe Biden, yet it’s Biden who’s leading in the polls. “Left-wing Twitter isn’t a microcosm of the Democratic Party,” she went on, “it’s just a small, noisy fraction of it.”

A month earlier, Goldberg’s colleague Lisa Lerer had primed the pump by complaining that Twitter was “totally unrepresentative of America.” She cited an analysis in the Times which found that Democrats on Twitter tend to be more white, more educated, and more liberal than the party’s voters as a whole. And in the wake of Goldberg’s column, Bret Stephens took up the cause as well: “The sensible center of America—that is, the people who choose presidents in this country—wants to see Donald Trump lose next year, but not if it means empowering the junior totalitarians of the left. Now is Biden’s chance to make it clear he’s just the man to fulfill that hope.”

It’s one thing to say Twitter isn’t representative; it’s another to say Democrats want a centrist candidate, or that they’re dead set on Biden. Yet for these writers, the logical gap between these assertions might as well not exist. They point to polling as justification, but neglect to mention that at this stage in the 2016 cycle Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, and Scott Walker were all jockeying for frontrunner status.

Any attempt to articulate the primary’s outcome at this early stage amounts to little more than guesswork, but refuting Twitter as a potential source of information about the Democratic electorate is revealing. By attempting to wrest the narrative away from a bunch of A.O.C. super-fans, the Times’ editorialists are making clear their preference for simplistic horse race coverage over more holistic analysis. Factoring in Twitter, especially when it contradicts the polls, requires a more nuanced view of the race, one that grapples with policy debates about health care and climate change. What these writers seem reluctant to acknowledge is that the more nuanced view would probably be more accurate, too.

Biden’s numbers undoubtedly look commanding compared to what Jeb et al managed in May 2015. Still, it would be foolish to ignore other measures of public opinion. As Goldberg observed, Trump’s following on Twitter in 2015 “far outstripped his rivals. His tweets drove news cycles, and channeled the resentments of a furious base.” She mentions a Times report from October of that year which laid out how the businessman had “managed to fulfill a vision… sketched out a decade ago by a handful of digital campaign strategists: a White House candidacy that forgoes costly, conventional methods of political communication and relies instead on the free, urgent and visceral platforms of social media.”

By the time that article ran, Trump was leading in the polls with numbers that were widely ignored by commentators, including The Atlantic’s David Greenberg, who argued that the story these surveys were telling about “an angry populism” on the rise could be an “illusion.” In that case, it seems, the polls weren’t worth listening to unless they told you something you already believed. Observers aren’t likely to make that mistake again, yet there’s still a temptation to treat Trump’s use of Twitter as a one-off road to electoral success. That analysts took so long to come around to the idea of Trump as the tribune of the GOP is all the more reason to do the opposite of what the Times is suggesting. Twitter, in 2015, was something of a leading indicator, meaning it presaged where the polls were headed. There’s no guarantee that such a phenomenon will repeat itself over the next eight months—but then, there’s no guarantee that it won’t, either.

Instead, the media appears to have embraced a simplistic narrative about the Democratic primary—one that myopically treats the polls as an excuse to hoist Biden up on a pedestal. On Friday, CNN’s Chris Cillizza wrote that the primary was Biden’s “race to lose,” and in the days since, Smilin’ Joe has been called a “frontrunner” by everyone from Reuters to Fox News. Treating Biden’s current lead as predictive promises to be self-reinforcing. As the press narrows in on him as a leading candidate, it will become harder and harder for other contenders to get their messages out, meaning Biden will have little incentive to engage with their positions and proposals in a way that might force him to meaningfully reexamine his own.

On Tuesday, CNN’s lead poll-minder Harry Enten demonstrated why it’s vital to avoid narrowing in on one presidential aspirant at this early stage. He wrote that though Biden’s numbers were consistent with what other candidates who had gone on to win the nomination were garnering at this point in the primary, Biden nevertheless still looked like a “frontrunner who wins somewhere between 40% and 50% of the time, which leaves the door open to challengers.” There are more than twenty Democrats vying for the anti-Biden title. It would be a mistake to shoo them out of the spotlight before they’ve had their say.

Horse-race coverage makes sense to some degree—we all want to know who’s going to win, and a policy position only matters if one is in a position to execute it—but with so much time before any votes are cast, why are observers in such a rush? What’s preventing them from directing their attention to the debates happening among leftists on Twitter about the Green New Deal or the student loan crisis? A primary’s raison d’être is determining the nominee, but the process serves a double purpose: it allows the party to take stock of what it stands for and what needs to change ahead of the next election. Even if Twitter doesn’t end up being much of a leading indicator for the Democrats this time around, the political conversations happening on the platform nonetheless need to be heard.

The Times’ analysis makes clear that activists’ opinions on social media don’t represent the party as a whole. Fair enough. But that doesn’t mean they aren’t real. Observers like Goldberg and Stephens will be proven wrong again and again in the next eighteen months; as they whittle away the time before average voters start paying attention, these writers would do well to demonstrate a bit of humility about their own powers of prognostication. There’s a dissonance between the voices online and the voices at a Biden rally, sure. But that dissonance tells us something about what the electorate wants for the nation. Try listening. The small, noisy fraction might have something useful to say—if their ideas seem to stretch beyond what the opinionator class considers real life, well, maybe the editorialists need to take off their blinders.

Share
Single Page

More from Kyle Paoletta:

Press Rogue May 16, 2019, 4:00 pm

Playing With Fire

Press Rogue May 9, 2019, 4:00 pm

Boys on the Bus

Press Rogue May 2, 2019, 3:41 pm

Correct the Record

Get access to 169 years of
Harper’s for only $23.99

United States Canada

CATEGORIES

THE CURRENT ISSUE

July 2019

New Books

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Trials of Vasily Grossman

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Ramblin’ Man

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

“Just Keep Going North”

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

El Corralón

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Marmalade Sky

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

view Table Content

FEATURED ON HARPERS.ORG

Article
“Just Keep Going North”·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

On February 5, 2019, the president of the United States (a certain Donald Trump) in his State of the Union speech warned of “migrant caravans and accused Mexican cities of busing migrants to the border ‘to bring them up to our country in areas where there is little border protection.’ ”? Wishing to see the border for myself, I decided to visit Arizona, where my ignorance of local conditions might save me from prejudgment.

Post
English Referendums and Scotch Voters·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

After years of post-Brexit uncertainty, Scotland’s independence movement has become resurgent

Article
No Joe!·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

In the heart of the US Capitol there’s a small men’s room with an uplifting Franklin Delano Roo­sevelt quotation above the door. Making use of the facilities there after lunch in the nearby House dining room about a year ago, I found myself standing next to Trent Lott. Once a mighty power in the building as Senate Republican leader, he had been forced to resign his post following some imprudently affectionate references to his fellow Republican senator, arch-segregationist Strom Thurmond. Now he was visiting the Capitol as a lucratively employed lobbyist.

Article
Marmalade Sky·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

On a November Saturday in 1990, Pam went over to Joe’s place to listen to records. It was raining in sheets that whipped around the corners of buildings and blowing so hard that women in heels were taking men’s arms to cross the street. Cars were plowing bow waves through puddles of scum.

As Joe was letting Pam into the apartment, a man emerged from the bedroom with a square sheet of black plastic in his hand and said, “Hey, man, you have the Sassy Sonic Youth flexi!”

Article
New Books·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Discussed in this essay:

Semicolon: The Past, Present, and Future of a Misunderstood Mark, by Cecelia Watson. Ecco. 224 pages. $19.99.

Four Men Shaking: Searching for Sanity with Samuel Beckett, Norman Mailer, and My Perfect Zen Teacher, by Lawrence Shainberg. Shambhala. 144 pages. $16.95.

Japanese Tales of Lafcadio Hearn, edited by Andrei Codrescu. Princeton University Press. 224 pages. $22.95.

Cost of renting a giant panda from the Chinese government, per day:

$1,500

A recent earthquake in Chile was found to have shifted the city of Concepción ten feet to the west, shortened Earth’s days by 1.26 microseconds, and shifted the planet’s axis by nearly three inches.

Boaty McBoatface, an autonomous underwater vehicle that was named in a 2016 internet poll, discovered that stronger Antarctic winds, the result of a growing hole in the ozone layer, have been causing more ocean turbulence, which in turn has raised sea levels and temperatures.

Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!

HARPER’S FINEST

Happiness Is a Worn Gun

By

“Nowadays, most states let just about anybody who wants a concealed-handgun permit have one; in seventeen states, you don’t even have to be a resident. Nobody knows exactly how many Americans carry guns, because not all states release their numbers, and even if they did, not all permit holders carry all the time. But it’s safe to assume that as many as 6 million Americans are walking around with firearms under their clothes.”

Subscribe Today