Podcast Summary: "Do Moderates Win More Elections?"

Podcast: On the Media – WNYC Studios
Hosts: Brooke Gladstone (B), Guest: Elliot Morris (A)
Date: November 5, 2025

Overview

This episode investigates the persistent debate in American politics: Do moderate candidates really win more elections? In the wake of Zoran Mamdani’s win in the New York City mayoral race—a progressive victory—host Brooke Gladstone and guest Elliot Morris, journalist and statistician behind the "Strength in Numbers" newsletter, analyze recent elections and research to question the supposed “moderation bonus” sought by Democratic strategists. Through data, polling, and political history, the conversation dissects why moderation's effectiveness is overstated and how voters' identities, not just issue positions, drive electoral outcomes.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. Backdrop: Mamdani's Win and the Moderation Debate

• Context: Zoran Mamdani’s victory draws national media attention for his progressive policies and background (00:25).
• Party Divide: Mamdani received tepid establishment support, reflecting broader Democratic divisions over centrist vs. progressive approaches (01:50).
• Framing the Debate: The episode centers on whether the Democrats need to move to the center to win tough elections, referencing arguments revived after Kamala Harris’s 2024 defeat and a recent New York Times editorial (02:10).

2. The Moderation Bonus: Fact or Myth?

How the New York Times Framed It

• NYT’s argument: Moderates—defined as those endorsed by “moderate” PACs—outperformed progressive candidates in 2024 congressional races compared to Kamala Harris (03:28).
• Critique: Elliot Morris challenges the definition, noting misaligned groupings (e.g., Ruben Gallego), and inherent bias in only examining purple districts (04:37).

Fundamental Flaws in the Data

• Built-in Incumbency & Fundraising Advantages: Many so-called moderates were incumbents or enjoyed more fundraising, confounding claims that ideology drove their margin (06:01).

• Quote:

  “To suck up all of those extra reasons and call them moderation is a sort of dramatic oversimplification of how elections work...” — Elliot Morris (06:39)

• Other Factors Matter More: Incumbency, district fit, and fundraising are stronger predictors of outcome than ideology (06:39).

Magnitude of the Moderation Effect

• Morris’s own findings: The "moderation bonus" is at best 1–1.5 percentage points—much less decisive than other factors (08:16).
• Quote:

  “My big claim here is that the existing empirical models overstate the value of moderation for a few reasons.” — Elliot Morris (08:16)

3. Historical Context & Decline of The Moderate Voter

• Conventional Wisdom Fading: Since Nixon’s "silent majority" speech (1969), the idea was to court moderates, but partisanship has redefined loyalty (09:00).

• Dramatic Shift:

  “The premium that voters place on ideological moderation has declined by 80% since the 2000 election.” — Brooke Gladstone referencing Morris’s work (09:41)

• Identity Over Issues: Voters are now more defined by party identity than ideology, making swing voting rare (10:07).

• Quote:

  “In every case ... group attachments and your identity matters much, much more—orders of magnitude more—now than the issue positions you hold.” — Elliot Morris (10:23)

4. Retractions and Re-examinations in Political Science

• Peer-Reviewed Research Update: Previously, academics (e.g., Andy Hall at Stanford) found a moderation advantage of 6–12 points but have since retracted, stating their case “should not be relied on” (11:20).
• Quote:

  “The most rigorous peer-reviewed empirical analysis has come to the conclusion that moderation is not worth as much as the New York Times et al think it’s worth.” — Elliot Morris (12:10)

5. Polling, Perception, and the "Strategist’s Fallacy"

Polling Misuses

• Welcome PAC report: Echoes the moderation thesis, claiming the Democrats are seen as too far left (12:57). Morris notes similar unfavorable ratings for both major parties (13:33).
• Issue Misattribution: The cited “extreme” Democratic policies (e.g., abolishing police, lowering voting age to 16) aren't actual party platforms, but their unpopularity taints perceptions (14:21).
• Quote:

  “The data that these people are presenting does not actually speak to reality and yields itself to conclusions that are nonsensical.” — Elliot Morris (15:25)

The Strategist’s Fallacy

• Definition: The mistake of assuming regular voters select candidates based on a personal calculus of policy agreement, like strategists do (15:44).
• Reality: Only about 20% of the electorate can define party ideologies or policy positions (16:41).

The Trump Example

• Trump’s Unpopular Policies: Despite many unpopular policies (e.g., immigration actions, Medicaid cuts), Trump wins by connecting with group identity, not issue moderation (19:02–21:46).

  “How did someone with this mix of unpopular issue positions become President of the United States? That would be the question that I’d ask the pro moderation crowd.” — Elliot Morris (22:43)

• Contrast with Democrats: Republicans win by sharpening group appeal, not through moderation (22:48).

6. Democratic Strategies: Communication and Identity

• Democratic Errors: Relying on poll-tested policies to fix perception issues, while ignoring group identity attachments (23:49).
• Authenticity vs. Manipulation: Trump is perceived as authentic, cementing working-class support, while Democrats struggle with a poll-tested image (25:02).
• Quote:

  “Trump definitely has an authenticity advantage ... because they don’t think that the Democrats look out for them. So fixing that problem—the do you care about us? problem—would drive a lot more votes...” — Elliot Morris (25:02)

7. Issue Prioritization vs. Ideology in Campaigns

• Case Study: Mamdani vs. Spanberger: Both run on affordability and working-class themes, differing ideologically but sharing key voter focus (26:13).
• Message: Success lies in prioritizing economic issues and signaling alignment with the working class.
• Quote:

  “...it’s really not the policies themselves. It’s really all about focus and group attachment here.” — Elliot Morris (27:28)

8. Media and Local Organizing Recommendations

• Decline of Local Media: Undermines geographic identity ties, making party connection harder in rural areas (32:14).
• Creative Proposals: Suggests investing in community spaces (coffee shops, theaters) and regional party conventions to connect with local voters (32:14–33:26).
• Quote:

  “Diverting money from political advertising to actual on the ground benefits.” — Brooke Gladstone (33:26)

Notable Quotes and Moments

• On the "moderation bonus" myth:

  “The value of moderation has decreased by at least 10 times and maybe closer to 20 times over the last 20 years.” — Elliot Morris (12:31)

• On misdiagnosed party unpopularity:

  "We're talking about two parties that people are deeply unhappy with." — Elliot Morris (14:12)

• On the real divide in the Democratic Party:

  “The solution that [moderates] are marketing is not up to helping the Democrats in the way that they need help.” — Elliot Morris (29:21)

• On strategy over substance:

  “There's always a well-known solution to every problem. Neat, plausible and wrong.” — Elliot Morris quoting H.L. Mencken (30:09)

Important Timestamps

• 00:25 — Episode setup: Mamdani’s win and its national implications
• 03:28–06:01 — Elliot Morris dissects the New York Times’ “moderate outperformance” argument
• 08:16 — The actual statistical “moderation bonus”
• 09:41–10:23 — Discussion of the decline in value for political moderation
• 11:20–12:10 — Review of shifting academic analysis: peer-reviewed research walks back prior claims
• 13:25–15:44 — Critique of polling/Welcome PAC & definition of the "strategist’s fallacy"
• 16:41 — Only a fifth of voters can accurately define party ideology
• 17:48–21:46 — Case studies: Trump’s policies and strategy; the role of party identity
• 23:49–25:31 — Democrats’ perceptions problem and authenticity gap
• 26:13–28:09 — Discussion of issue prioritization vs. ideological distinctions
• 32:14–33:26 — Discussion on the importance of local organizing and concrete tactics

Conclusion

The episode dismantles the myth that ideological moderation guarantees electoral success in today’s polarized climate. Instead, it highlights the declining impact of issue positioning, the rise of identity politics, and the need for authentic, localized, group-based appeals. The Democratic Party’s focus on moderating policy, according to Elliot Morris, mistakes the way most voters actually decide and is less effective than forging genuine community connections and projecting care for the working class.