Free Daily Podcast Summary
The Strength In Numbers Podcast with G. Elliott Morris: Daily Summaries Delivered
by G. Elliott Morris
Independent, data-driven analysis of politics, public opinion polls, and elections. From author, journalist, and pollster G. Elliott Morris. www.gelliottmorris.com
Latest Episodes
The most recent episodes — sign up to get AI-powered summaries of each one.
- 3 days ago53 min
What's behind Trump's new all-time approval low? (The podcast returns!)
On this week’s Strength In Numbers podcast — the first live episode back from Elliott’s paternity leave! — Elliott and David break down Donald Trump’s new all-time-low approval rating, what gas prices and the war in Iran have done to it, and take a look at The Downballot’s newly updated hexagonal map of all 435 congressional districts.Here are the big takeaways:* Trump just hit another all-time approval low. In the 50+1 polling average, his disapproval is at an all-time high of 60.8% against 36.2% approval, a net of about -25. That’s even lower than the previous low the president set the day before. Across every poll out since Friday, his net approval has fallen an average of 1.8 points in the last week, with the sharpest drops among the best pollsters. CNN’s number is as bad or worse than right after January 6th.* Gas prices explain a lot of the collapse — and cheaper gas won’t undo it. Gas prices and Trump’s inflation approval track each other almost perfectly with a short lag, but the magnitudes on the upswing doesn’t match the downswing. Based on how a small decrease in prices correlated with Trump’s approval in mid-July, we estimate a return to $2.90 gas would still leave him around -30 to -35 on prices. New Strength In Numbers/Verasight polling finds 59% of Americans have cut back on spending, and 51% blame Trump — against 12% oil and gas companies, 12% OPEC, and 8% for Biden. Evidence suggests voters’ opinions of Trump’s economy are hardening.* Trump’s losing on immigration and deportations now. His immigration approval slid back toward its all-time low over the past two weeks, following ICE shootings in Maine and Houston, and YouGov put him at a record low on the issue this week. Since his inauguration, when the consequences of Trump’s mass deportations agenda have made news, his numbers has fallen. Elliott says Trump is now losing on both of the pillars of his 2024 presidential campaign.* The bull case for a Democratic wave. Democrats lead the generic ballot by six points on average. But if you add the two to two-and-a-half points midterms historically break against the president’s party by November, plus the two points likely voters have run ahead of registered voters for seven months, you get D+10. That’s not far off from where the Times (D+11), CNN (+10), and Argument/Verasight (+8) put it recently. * The Downballot’s new congressional hex map is the best answer yet to “try to impeach this.” Daniel Donner’s cartogram gives every district five hexagons and resizes states by population while keeping their shapes — you only get two of geographic fidelity, accurate political power, and districts where you’d expect them, and this map trades away the third. The update covers the ten states that redrew for 2026. Tennessee is the clearest case: Memphis split three ways, the formerly majority-Black 9th stretched 200 miles toward Nashville, every district now Trump+20 or better. Creative Commons, with shapefiles, at dash-db.co/maps.If you value this work and want to help keep it going, please consider becoming a premium subscriber to Strength In Numbers. Paid subscriptions support this podcast, the newsletter, and the time it takes to do original data-driven analysis of politics and elections. Paying subscribers also gain the ability to send in questions during our live streams, so you can directly shape the conversations we’re having on the podcast.If you missed our video livestream, you can watch it by clicking play on the web version of this post at gelliottmorris.com. You can also subscribe to us on your favorite podcast app to listen on your own time. And if you do listen via one of those apps, please drop us a five-star rating and review if you feel we’ve earned it — it really helps people discover the show!A reminder that paid subscribers to Strength In Numbers get to participate in our live Q&A!You can also read the transcript of our conversation by clicking the headline of this article to take you to the web version of the podcast, then clicking the button just below the byline that looks either like a piece of paper or is labeled “Transcript,” lik
- 1 weeks ago1h 24m
Deep Dive episode: Ben Wikler has a plan to save democracy
On this week’s Deep Dive episode of the Strength In Numbers podcast, Elliott sits down with Ben Wikler, former chair of the Democratic Party of Wisconsin, 2025 candidate for DNC chair, and author of the new book This Is the Plan: How to End America’s Meltdown and Save Democracy. We have a wide-ranging conversation that includes such topics as: why no message would have saved Democrats in 2024, how the party wins back the rural voters it has been bleeding since 2008, and the one-shot window Democrats will have in 2029 to unrig American democracy.Here are the big takeaways:* Wisconsin is the proof of concept for unrigging a broken system. Wikler’s home state was, until recently, a “democracy desert.” In 2018, Democrats won every statewide office and 54% of the state assembly vote — and got 36% of assembly seats, flipping exactly one. Years of organizing later, the state has a Democratic governor, a pro-democracy state supreme court, and new maps under which the party that wins a majority of votes can actually win a majority of seats. As Wikler puts it, that’s how democracy is supposed to work.* No message would have saved Democrats in 2024 — and the loss was still agonizingly close. We talk about the difference between “micro” and “macro” theories of elections. When it comes to 2024, the macro: voters in every developed democracy were furious about high prices in 2024, and every governing party lost vote share — in fact, on average, slightly more than Democrats did. A shift of roughly 115,000 votes across Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania — about one-tenth of 1% of ballots cast — would have made Kamala Harris president. The voters who moved were mostly passive news consumers reacting to their own cost of living, not to either campaign’s messaging. Wikler’s advice for Democrats tempted by a single-cause postmortem: don’t lose your soul. Go out into the world and find those voters and talk to them.* Ben says the party’s brand is set by the fights it takes on. Wikler says most Americans get their news about Democrats from Republicans. One candidate quietly moderating on a hot-button issue does approximately nothing to fix its brand problem as an out-of-touch coastal machine. But big public fights present an opportunity. When Republicans tried to repeal the Affordable Care Act in 2017, every elected Democrat fought back loudly — and in 2018, voters who called health care their top issue broke overwhelmingly Democratic. Wikler puts last year’s shutdown fight over ACA funding and opposition to the gas-price-spiking Iran war in the same category: fights that show, over and over, whose side each party is what really moves the needle.* Democrats need to show up, in person. Democrats have lost about a third of their rural voters since 2008, by Elliott’s math, and thousands of local offices. Wikler blames three forces — the collapse of local news, algorithmic feeds, and the party simply not being present — and only the third is in the party’s power to fix. As WisDems party chair Wikler championed a model whereby the state party gave grants to local volunteer-staffed county “storefronts” where party members could relate to everyday voters, in person. He says 44 of the Biden campaign’s 100 field offices grew out of these storefronts. Elliott shares some ideas for taking that program nationwide.* Democrats will get one shot to unrig the system. Wikler argues if Democrats win power in 2028, they will have a small window to enact key reforms to unrig American democracy and give power back to the numerical majority. He wants to pass the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, reform the filibuster that currently waves through judges and tax cuts but blocks voting-rights bills and progressive priorities, expand the U.S. House and elect it proportionally from multi-member districts, add D.C. statehood, ban partisan gerrymandering nationwide, and reform a Supreme Court that would otherwise strike down all of the above.Wikler cites Strength In Numbers/Verasight polling from November 2025 in the book — asked in their own words what their ideal party would fight for, 38% of Americans gave answers that don’t fit the left-right spectrum at all. Wikler says what people want is a party that fights for everyday people and makes their lives better. Ben’s new book, This Is the Plan: How to End America’s Meltdown and Save Democracy, is out now wherever you get your books.If you value this work and want to help keep it going, please consider becoming a premium subscriber to Strength In Numbers. Paid subscriptions support this podcast, the newsletter, and the time it takes to do this kind of data-driven a
- Jun 11, 202658 min
Deep Dive episode: Political scientists were right about Trump
Strength In Numbers is on a short summer break while Elliott takes paternity leave with his new baby. This deep dive episode was recorded in early May, and things may have changed since we recorded it.In this Deep Dive episode of the Strength In Numbers podcast, Elliott sits down with Seth Masket, political scientist at the University of Denver and author of the Smotus Report Substack, to swap interviews on what political scientists got right (and wrong) about Donald Trump, the constitutional fallout of Trump’s second term in general and the post-VRA redistricting arms race, and what Democrats actually learned — or refused to learn — from the 2024 election. Masket is the author of the new book The Elephants in the Room, a review of what the Republican Party learned from its loss in 2020 and how that shaped its decisions (or not) in 2024.Here are the big takeaways:* What political scientists got right about Trump in 2020 and 2024. Masket readily admits the discipline underestimated Trump’s ability to win the 2016 Republican primary, expecting his celebrity-without-insider-support campaign to flame out the way most do. But once Trump was in office, political scientists were largely correct in warning about election denial, attacks on the press, threats of political violence, and the refusal to commit to a peaceful transfer of power. And after 2020, plenty of pundits wrote that Trump would simply “fade away” — despite primary elections and media coverage showing his iron grip on the GOP. * The Callais decision is supercharging a redistricting arms race. With the Supreme Court effectively gutting the protections of minority-majority districts, Alabama, Louisiana, Tennessee, and other Republican-controlled states are moving to redraw maps mid-decade. Masket is optimistic and speculates that now that both parties are going to war over new maps, they may try to find some truce in new redistricting guidelines so they aren’t drawing new gerrymanders every two years. Both Elliott and Masket are increasingly drawn to proportional representation as a structural fix to these problems. A system where politicians can’t draw their own district lines has its own advantages, and having third, fourth, and even regional parties could force coalition-building and blunt the worst effects of partisan sorting. Some sort of system that acknowledges the primacy of parties, instead of denying them wholesale, is probably way healthier for democracy in the long run.* Media pundits and DC analysts learned the wrong lesson from 2024. Masket surveyed hundreds of Democratic county chairs after the election and found the single most common explanation for Harris’s loss was inflation and anti-incumbent backlash. He thinks that’s roughly right — and notes there is little the party could have done to avoid it. Joe Biden’s stimulus, labor support, and broadly effective economic policy yielded him “roughly nothing in terms of politics.” Elliott’s working theory for what actually moves voters is that highly visible, durable empathy with working-class people can buy an incumbent party that is presiding over economic stress some clout with voters, such as the case of Zohran Mamdani in NYC and Taylor Rehmet in Texas’ 9th state seat district. This is an are both agree the parties and policymakers are having trouble figuring out.Thanks again to Seth for joining this second Deep Dive version of the show. It was a lot of fun, and I (Elliott) personally learned a lot!If you value this work and want to help keep it going, please consider becoming a premium subscriber to Strength In Numbers. Paid subscriptions support the podcast, the newsletter, and the time it takes to do this kind of analysis well. Paying subscribers also gain the ability to send in questions during our live streams, so you can directly shape the conversations we’re having on the podcast.A reminder: Elliott and David Nir record the usual Strength In Numbers podcast live every Thursday at 2:00 PM Eastern. We always discuss a few pre-planned topics and then answer questions submitted live by viewers.You can also subscribe to us on your favorite podcast app to listen on your own time. And if you do listen via one of those apps, please drop us a five-star rating and review if you feel we’ve earned it — it really helps people discover the show!A reminder that paid subscribers to <a target="_blank" href
- May 14, 202647 min
A reminder: Very few people support Donald Trump's presidency
On this week’s Strength In Numbers podcast — the last live episode before Elliott heads off on paternity leave — Elliott and David break down just how historically unpopular Donald Trump has become and dig into the surging public appetite for age limits on members of Congress, the presidency, and the Supreme Court.Here are the big takeaways:* Nobody likes Trump, and gas prices are only part of the story. Trump is sitting at roughly 36.8% approval and 59.7% disapproval in the 50+1 polling average — a net rating of about -23, making him the most unpopular president at this point in his term in modern history, worse even than Joe Biden during the 2022 inflation panic. He’s underwater in roughly 40 states, including big red ones like Georgia, Florida, and Texas, and all the swing states. On prices, his net approval is a brutal -40. Trump’s recent collapse tracks almost perfectly with the war in Iran: from late February to now, gas prices are up about 54% — and Trump’s approval on inflation is down by about the same percentage. And don’t count on a bounce-back — even if gas prices fall, Biden’s presidency suggests voters don’t forgive you for price shocks on your watch — and logistically it can take months to ship and refine oil imported from Iran, even if Trump does resolve the crisis.* Voters are losing confidence in Trump’s mental fitness for the job. Worse for the president, 61% of adults (including 30% of Republicans) say Trump has become erratic with age, and only 45% call him mentally sharp enough for the job (down from 54% pre-2024), and just 32% are extremely or very confident in his mental fitness per the Pew Research Center. Among independents, the “mentally sharp” percentage has cratered from 53% to 36%. Those numbers are still about ten points better than Biden’s in April 2024 — but the trend is not Trump’s friend.* Voters support term and age limits for federal officials. Roughly 80% of American adults — including 78% of Democrats, 83% of Republicans, and 79% of independents — back a maximum age for House and Senate candidates, a level of cross-partisan agreement that’s almost unheard of on a high-salience issue. Additionally, 61% of independents and 73% of Republicans back a presidential age limit, with 54% picking a cap of 79 or younger; 65% support an 18-year Supreme Court term limit, and 74% favor a maximum age for justices. The catch: the 1995 U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton decision held that states can’t add to the constitutional qualifications for Congress, likely dooming most age-limit laws — though North Dakota recently passed an age-limit law the Court could use to update the precedent, if challenged. In the meantime, primary voters are increasingly opting for candidates Since this is the last live show for a while, Elliott has pre-recorded a couple deep dives that will trickle into your feed over the next 4-6 weeks.If you value this work and want to help keep it going, please consider becoming a premium subscriber to Strength In Numbers. Paid subscriptions support this podcast, the newsletter, and the time it takes to do this kind of data-driven analysis of politics and elections. Paying subscribers also gain the ability to send in questions during our live streams, so you can directly shape the conversations we’re having on the podcast.If you missed our video livestream, you can watch it by clicking play on the web version of this post at gelliottmorris.com. You can also subscribe to us on your favorite podcast app to listen on your own time. And if you do listen via one of those apps, please drop us a five-star rating and review if you feel we’ve earned it — it really helps people discover the show!A reminder that paid subscribers to Strength In Numbers get to participate in our live Q&A!You can also read the transcript of our conversation by clicking the headline of this article to take you to the web version of the podcast, then clicking the button just below the byline that looks either like a piece of paper or is labeled “Transcript,” like so:If you’re a reader of Strength in Numbers and haven’t yet subscribed to David’s newsletter, head to the-downballot.com.And if you’re coming from David’s site, subscri
- May 13, 20261h 7m
Deep Dive episode: Democracy 2.0, with Lee Drutman
In this Deep Dive episode of the Strength In Numbers podcast, Elliott sits down with Lee Drutman, senior fellow at the New America Foundation and author of Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Representation in America, to talk about whether the way out of America’s escalating gerrymandering war isn’t legislation for fairer maps or redistricting commissions, but maybe doing away with districts altogether. Lee is one of the country’s leading advocates for proportional representation, and has a vision for a better democracy that is worth paying attention to!We cover the history of how the U.S. wound up with single-member districts in the first place, why proportional representation would render gerrymandering irrelevant and make multiple parties possible, what PR would actually look like from the voters’ perspective, and how Congress could move to a multi-party system without amending the Constitution. Here are the big takeaways:* Single-member districts are the problem, not how we draw them. Drutman argues that no “fair map” standard can resolve the underlying contradictions of the single-winner district, which force an impossible trade-off between partisan proportionality, competitiveness, compactness, communities of interest, and minority representation.* Proportional representation would make every vote count and give voters real choices. Under an open-list PR system, states divide voters into multi-member districts where parties win seats roughly in proportion to their vote share, making third and fourth parties viable and every district competitive. Lee that PR systems also produce more diverse representation, not less, because party leaders want to put forward lists that appeal to broad constituencies.* It could happen with one act of Congress — and the moment may be closer than people think. PR for House elections doesn’t require a constitutional amendment; Congress can amend the 1967 Uniform Congressional District Act under its Article I, Section 4 powers, and pair it with fusion voting (already legal in New York and Connecticut) for inherently single-winner offices like the presidency. Drutman thinks 2029 could open a window for a broader “democracy reconstruction” with PR as one piece.Thanks again to Lee for joining me for this special Deep Dive episode of the show.If you value this work and want to help keep it going, please consider becoming a premium subscriber to Strength In Numbers. Paid subscriptions support the podcast, the newsletter, and the time it takes to do this kind of analysis well. Paying subscribers also gain the ability to send in questions during our live streams, so you can directly shape the conversations we’re having on the podcast.A reminder: Elliott and David Nir record the usual Strength In Numbers podcast live every Thursday at 2:00 PM Eastern. We always discuss a few pre-planned topics and then answer questions submitted live by viewers.You can also subscribe to us on your favorite podcast app to listen on your own time. And if you do listen via one of those apps, please drop us a five-star rating and review if you feel we’ve earned it — it really helps people discover the show!A reminder that paid subscribers to Strength In Numbers get to participate in our live Q&A!You can also read the transcript of our conversation by clicking the headline of this article to take you to the web version of the podcast, then clicking the button just below the byline that looks either like a piece of paper or is labeled “Transcript,” like so: This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.gelliottmorris.com/subscribe
- May 7, 202647 min
America's new redistricting doom loop
On this week’s Strength In Numbers podcast, Elliott and David briefly revisit Elliott’s hypotheses on why economic vibes are still so sour before turning to the alarming speed at which Republican-led states are moving to redraw their congressional maps in the wake of the Supreme Court’s Callais decision last week.Here are the big takeaways:* The economic vibes may not be “normal” again until 2029 at the earliest — and that’s the optimistic scenario. Consumer sentiment is at its lowest level in the 60+ year history of the University of Michigan’s survey. Our model says the main (but not only) culprit is “excess prices”: Household goods cost roughly 15% more than they would have under the pre-2020 trend of 2% inflation, and people haven’t yet forgotten. If inflation returns to ~2.7%, sentiment recovers to its historical median around April 2029. If inflation stays at 3.5% or higher (as Trump’s tariffs, deportations, and the Iran war suggest it might), sentiment may take decades to recover to pre-COVID levels. An anecdote from a reader in Austria suggests it took residents about eight years to stop complaining about euro prices after the country switched its currency from the schilling, which lines up eerily well with our 2029–2030 projection.* Republican states are dismantling Black voting districts at breakneck speed after Callais. One week after the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act, the dominoes are already falling. Louisiana’s governor canceled the state’s primaries by invoking a statute normally deployed after hurricanes; Alabama is passing a law to allow do-over primaries so it can erase the Black-majority district created in 2024; and Tennessee just released a map that surgically splits Memphis into three almost equal pieces, turning one majority-Black district into three Trump+20 white districts. Combined with potential moves elsewhere throughout the South, Republicans could net 13–15 seats from racial gerrymandering alone—and in time for the 2026 elections.* We’re in a redistricting doom loop, and the only way out is structural electoral reform. America has a severe racial and partisan gerrymandering problem. Once one party abandons fairness, the other has to respond — and it’s a race to the bottom that shafts us, the voters. Elliott coded a computer redistricting simulator to show just how easily a 55-45 state can be turned into 80% one-party representation when partisan maximization replaces fair drawing. The Roberts Court has now ruled four times that partisan gerrymandering isn’t justiciable, and Republicans in Congress have derailed Democratic attempts at a remedy. Elliott vouches for a system of proportional representation, arguing that America’s district-based system was built for an era without parties and is no longer fit for purpose.If you value this work and want to help keep it going, please consider becoming a premium subscriber to Strength In Numbers. Paid subscriptions support this podcast, the newsletter, and the time it takes to do this kind of data-driven analysis of politics and elections. Paying subscribers also gain the ability to send in questions during our live streams, so you can directly shape the conversations we’re having on the podcast.If you missed our video livestream, you can watch it by clicking play on the web version of this post at gelliottmorris.com. We record the podcast live every Thursday at 2:00 PM Eastern. We always discuss a few pre-planned topics and then answer questions submitted live by viewers.You can also subscribe to us on your favorite podcast app to listen on your own time. And if you do listen via one of those apps, please drop us a five-star rating and review if you feel we’ve earned it — it really helps people discover the show!A reminder that paid subscribers to Strength In Numbers get to participate in our live Q&A!You can also read the transcript of our conversation by clicking the headline of this article to take you to the web version of the podcast, then clicking the button just below the byline that looks either like a piece of paper or is labeled “Transcript,” like so:If you’re a reader of Strength in Numbers and haven’t yet subscribed to David’s newsletter, head to <a target="_blank" href="https://the-downballot.com
- Apr 30, 202649 min
What the SCOTUS VRA decision means for the midterms — and the future
On this week's Strength In Numbers podcast, Elliott and David unpack the Supreme Court's decision in Louisiana v. Callais and explain what it means for the midterms and beyond. Then Elliott pushes back on a trendy take that Democrats' "only" 7–8 point generic ballot lead, despite Trump's –22 net approval, proves the party is fundamentally misaligned with voters on cultural issues. Here are the big takeaways:* Republicans could redraw ~10-15 seats because of the Callais decision. Plaintiffs in racial gerrymandering cases now have to prove intentional discrimination, which is nearly impossible since states can just say they drew maps for partisan reasons. Eight Southern states hold at least a dozen VRA-protected districts that Republicans can now dismantle, with Louisiana already racing to redraw its map before 2026.* The U.S. is increasingly governed by minority rule, and Callais is the latest symptom. Democrats have won the effective popular vote for the Senate in every cycle but one since 1992, yet two popular-vote-losing presidents went on to stack the Court with justices confirmed by a minority-elected Senate that have decided cases decisively against the popular majority on dozens of key cases. That Court just trashed legislation 67% of voters say is still needed — and 65% of voters now support Supreme Court term limits.* The “Democrats should be up 20 points” narrative is built on a misunderstanding of the data, and the claimed cause (crime and social issues) is wrong. Our investigation of the Trump disapprovers in the Strength In Numbers poll finds that most disapprovers who have not committed to voting Democratic on the generic ballot are in fact “closeted partisans” — voters who say they identify as Republicans and are strong conservatives. Accounting for that, the realistic ceiling for Democrats is around D+13, not D+20; treating every Trump disapprover as a winnable Democratic vote is a misread of the data. Additionally: only 3% of persuadable Trump-disapprovers name crime as their top issue, while 66% cite the economy, prices, or health care — and most say they don’t even know which party to trust on those issues. If you value this work and want to help keep it going, please consider becoming a premium subscriber to Strength In Numbers. Paid subscriptions support the podcast, the newsletter, and the time it takes to do this kind of analysis well. Paying subscribers also gain the ability to send in questions during our live streams, so you can directly shape the conversations we’re having on the podcast.If you missed our video livestream, you can watch it by clicking play on the web version of this post at gelliottmorris.com. We record the podcast live every Thursday at 2:00 PM Eastern. We always discuss a few pre-planned topics and then answer questions submitted live by viewers.You can also subscribe to us on your favorite podcast app to listen on your own time. And if you do listen via one of those apps, please drop us a five-star rating and review if you feel we’ve earned it — it really helps people discover the show!A reminder that paid subscribers to Strength In Numbers get to participate in our live Q&A!You can also read the transcript of our conversation by clicking the headline of this article to take you to the web version of the podcast, then clicking the button just below the byline that looks either like a piece of paper or is labeled “Transcript,” like so:If you’re a reader of Strength in Numbers and haven’t yet subscribed to David’s newsletter, head to the-downballot.com.And if you’re coming from David’s site, subscribe here to get the numbers behind the news. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.gelliottmorris.com/subscribe
- Apr 23, 20261h 15m
Voters rate the Democrats poorly — but are voting for them anyway
In this week’s first-ever live, in-person recording of the Strength In Numbers podcast — at the America Votes State Summit in Washington, D.C. — G. Elliott Morris and David Nir debut exclusive new polling on the midterms, dig into what voters actually dislike about the Democratic Party, and explain why none of this changes the trajectory of a brutal midterm for Republicans (even though it could matter for 2028 and beyond).Here are the big takeaways:* Trump’s numbers keep getting worse, and Democrats hold a commanding generic ballot lead. Our April Strength in Numbers/Verasight survey finds Trump’s approval at an all-time low of 35% and Democrats ahead in the generic ballot by 7 points. Combined with special election overperformances averaging D+13 and the historical pattern of the out-party gaining roughly 5 more points on the generic ballot between April and November, Elliott and David argue Democrats are overwhelmingly favored to retake the House, with the Senate a genuine toss-up.* Yet the Democratic brand is at a historic low. The Democratic Party’s net favorability is the worst it’s been since the post-9/11 rally for Republicans. Our poll asks voters to name, in their own words, something the Democrats have done recently that they dislike. Across party lines, they call Democrats “weak,” criticize their leadership, and say they lack a clear message. Nearly half of all Democrats cited one of two things—the party’s perceived weakness against Trump and caving to Republicans on the recent government shutdowns—as their top issue with the party.* But electoral implications are mixed. Historically, there’s zero correlation between party favorability ratings a year before the midterms and actual electoral performance. In 2014, Democrats had a huge favorability advantage and got destroyed. And in this poll, only 1% of self-identified Democrats say they’re so unhappy they won’t vote, while 31% say they’ll vote Democratic despite being dissatisfied with the party.* And swing voters don’t want Democrats to generically “moderate” their brand — they want someone who gets them. When we asked U.S. adults in open-ended questions last November what they want from a political party, roughly half of Americans expressed generic criticism of both political parties, said that everyday economic life was getting too expensive, or wanted greater support for social programs like Medicare and Social Security. Most voters just want a party that has a plan to make everyday life less of a struggle.* Capitulation is not a strategy—and it exacerbates the Democrats’ brand issues. When Democrats leaned into opposition to mass deportations in the spring and summer of 2025, Trump’s numbers on immigration dropped sharply — and so did the GOP’s favorability advantage. The biggest risk for Democrats isn’t being perceived as extreme (our data show it’s Republicans who get docked by voters on this front), it’s failing to show everyday Americans that it cares about them and will fight for them.One note if you’re watching the video recording: a technical glitch on our end caused the video of this recording to freeze at around the one-hour mark, but you can still hear the audio throughout the podcast. The video feed will resume after a few minutes.If you missed our video livestream, you can watch it by clicking play on the web version of this post at gelliottmorris.com. We record the podcast live every Thursday at 2:00 PM Eastern. We always discuss a few pre-planned topics and then answer questions submitted live by viewers.You can also subscribe to us on your favorite podcast app to listen on your own time. And if you do listen via one of those apps, please drop us a five-star rating and review if you feel we’ve earned it — it really helps people discover the show!A reminder that paid subscribers to Strength In Numbers get to participate in our live Q&A!You can also read the transcript of our conversation by clicking the headline of this article to take you to the web version of the podcast, then clicking the button just below the byline that looks either like a piece of paper or is labeled “Transcript,” like so:If you’re a reader of Strength in Numbers and haven’t yet subscribed to David’s newsletter, head to the-downballot.com.And if yo
Customized Recaps
AI-powered recaps with compact key takeaways, quotes, and insights.
Straight to Your Inbox
Get key takeaways from The Strength In Numbers Podcast with G. Elliott Morris in a 5-minute read.
Save Hours Every Week
Stay current on your favorite podcasts without falling behind.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Podzilla's The Strength In Numbers Podcast with G. Elliott Morris daily summary?
It's a free AI-powered email that summarizes new episodes of The Strength In Numbers Podcast with G. Elliott Morris as soon as they're published. You get the key takeaways, notable quotes, and links & mentions — all in a quick read.
How does the The Strength In Numbers Podcast with G. Elliott Morris podcast summary work?
When a new episode drops, our AI transcribes and analyzes it, then generates a personalized summary tailored to your interests and profession. It's delivered to your inbox every morning.
Is this an official The Strength In Numbers Podcast with G. Elliott Morris product?
No. Podzilla is an independent service that summarizes publicly available podcast content. We're not affiliated with or endorsed by G. Elliott Morris.
Can I get summaries of other podcasts too?
Absolutely! The free plan covers up to 3 podcasts. Upgrade to Pro for 15, or Premium for 50. Browse our full catalog at /podcasts.
What topics does The Strength In Numbers Podcast with G. Elliott Morris cover?
The Strength In Numbers Podcast with G. Elliott Morris covers topics including News, Politics. Our AI identifies the specific themes in each episode and highlights what matters most to you.
Start getting The Strength In Numbers Podcast with G. Elliott Morris summaries tomorrow morning.
Free forever for up to 3 podcasts. No credit card required.
Free forever for up to 3 podcasts. No credit card required.