This, read in tandem with

’s Triad, has me wondering: what do politicians & commentators think a “brand” is?

Do they believe it’s possible not to have one?

I largely agree with both of them that trying to corral a messy, big tent party is difficult, perhaps even beside the point. I agree with them for sure that the Democrats should not be trying to define their colleagues out of the tent (I know that when civil rights groups ask that Dem candidates support civil rights those demands are called “purity tests”, but when it’s done by Elissa Slotkin it’s something else).

But do we really believe the problem Democrats have is a lack of a brand, or do we believe that the brand is damaged? Because those are different problems that might require different solutions. Or, they might point to the same solution: I suspect you can solve them both by letting a thousand flowers bloom and becoming a party of ideas, creativity, inclusion, principle, etc. But then they wouldn’t have to go on the defensive if a reporter asks them how it’s possible for both Slotkin and Cortez to be Democrats in the same party. They should just tap the sign and say, “Because we’re the Democrats, and we believe in Democracy, not conformity.”

Or something like that.

Anyway, read them both. Good stuff to chew on.