Comment

The one clear counter-example was Tudor Dixon, who spoke very clearly for families against school closures and lockdowns, but lost to a HORRIBLE governor.

I agree, I'm actually very unclear on why she lost that race. Her message discipline was excellent, her offer was clear and compelling -- her rallies showed that was connecting with people as a real leader, someone people would follow. Polling showed she was 'cutting through' with her clear and heartfelt platform.

By contrast Whitmer was bitchy and short, and got hamstrung in some of her own lies in the debates. Polling showed her losing steam as people saw more of her inauthenticity.

I still don't get how this one went sideways.

She lost her emergency powers last year and that saved her. She laid low, which seems a winner for politicians, had a huge bank, ran a tremendous number of ads telling voters Dixon was dangerous, and the power of incumbency is huge. In Michigan we've gone Blanchard (dem, 2 terms), Engler (rep, 2 terms), Granholm (dem 2 terms), Snyder (rep, 2 terms) and now Whitmer (dem, 2 terms). I suspect we may see a republican next time.

Dems know how to message better. They supposedly care and that connects. And Dems are in it to win it. They are ruthless.

I don't know about that. Proposal 2 passed, which means the Michigan Constitution now mandates no voter ID, drop boxes, and all manner of election-stealing mechanisms. It just got much harder for a Republican to win in Michigan.

Republicans need to get smart fast.