The Focus Group Podcast

S6 Ep5: I'd Do Anything To Win (But I Won't Do That)

With Sarah Longwell (host) and Dan Pfeiffer (guest)

Date: October 4, 2025

Overview

In this episode, Sarah Longwell talks with Dan Pfeiffer, co-host of Pod Save America and author of the "Message Box" Substack, about the deep frustrations among Democratic voters with their party’s strategies, especially in the face of Donald Trump’s second term. They delve into why Democrats struggle to unify and respond decisively, the addiction to message testing, the challenge of “going low,” and what qualities the party should seek in future leaders—particularly as the 2028 battle looms.

Main Discussion Points

1. Democratic Voter Frustration & Party Paralysis

• Democratic voters from all wings (progressive to moderate) feel the party's leadership is ineffectual in confronting Trump and the MAGA movement.

• The recurring theme is a desire for the party to "fight harder," but uncertainty remains about the right issues and tactics.

  • Sarah Longwell: “The Democratic Party has seemed to be on its back foot, deer in headlights...the party leaders have gotten outmaneuvered and steamrolled by Trump and MAGA again and again.” [00:38]

• There’s constant debate over whether to make bold stands (like a government shutdown) or avoid actions with unpredictable fallout for everyday people.

2. The Messaging Crisis: Stories, Not Sentences

• Democrats are trapped between dire warnings about Trump and data-driven talking points (like affordability, Medicaid cuts, tariffs) that fail to form a cohesive story.

  • Dan Pfeiffer: “We are speaking in sentences and not stories. And I want them to tell a whole story that encompasses all of it...” [02:38]

• Messaging is described as “piecemeal,” often lagging behind events because:

  • Democrats over-rely on polling and focus groups before deciding what to say.
  • By the time they respond, the public conversation has moved on.

• Republicans, by contrast, have a quicker, more instinctual messaging approach, empowered by leaders with clarity and confidence.

  • Dan Pfeiffer: “We have become, in the Democratic Party, addicted to message testing...it belies a lack of confidence and insecurity in your own messaging and your own values.” [07:56]

• Sarah Longwell describes consulting with Democrats:

  “I started being like, stop testing. You guys are addicted to the testing. It is not helpful...What matters to you? What do you care about? What gets you up in the morning. Why did you run? What are you passionate about?...I'm convinced they'd be better off if every single one of them is just speaking from a gut level.” [08:16-09:48]

3. Government Shutdown: To Fight or Not to Fight?

• Focus group participants are torn: Shutdown could show strength but risks harming the vulnerable.

  • Mixed reactions—some demand a bold stand, others fear collateral damage.
  • Democratic voter: “Feels like we're damned either way...if we go along with this bill, what, 25 million people will lose their health care and people will die...So I pity the position that we're all in.” [13:20]
  • Another: “If you don't stand up to him, [Trump] will keep pushing and pushing and pushing...I mean, I don't want to see a shutdown, but I don't feel like we have much choice.” [14:23]

• Dan and Sarah both agree the political consequences of shutdowns are likely overstated—the memory typically fades before elections—but that unity in the Democratic caucus is essential for any such tactic to work:

  • Dan Pfeiffer: “If you went into a fight not ready to actually have the [shutdown], then that's a failure of leadership.” [16:28]

• However, Democrats risk getting too narrow in their messaging—missing the chance to lay out the broader case against Trump:

  • Sarah Longwell: “Sometimes I think they get so focused on, can we sort of narrow in on this one thing that we think is broadly popular that they miss an opportunity to sort of give a bouquet to people, to demonstrate all of the things that Donald Trump is doing that is out of bounds.” [18:36]

4. Leadership & the Search for Fighters

Who Do Voters See as Meeting the Moment?

• Frequent names: Gavin Newsom, JB Pritzker, Bernie Sanders, Jasmine Crockett, Pete Buttigieg, Cory Booker, and Eric Swalwell.

• Criteria for approval: Visible resistance to Trump, strong communication, and an ability to “fight back.”

  • Democratic voter: “Bernie Sanders...he's not going to change, and I am going to continue to shout it from the rooftops...I'm going to hold my ground and...put my head on my pillow, at least okay with myself.” [25:02]
  • On Newsom: “He's...the only one consistently, I've been like, this is my thing. I'm not going to change, and I am going to continue to shout it from the rooftops.” [25:10]

• Sarah summarizes: “All of those people...are the handful of people who have visibly done something to push back against Trump and that is who is rising up through the ranks...” [27:14]

The 2028 Playbook

Sarah proposes three possible paths to the 2028 nomination:

1. The "fighter/attention" path (Newsom model): High-profile, relentless opposition to Trump.
2. The “winner” path (Shapiro model): Demonstrate clear blue-state governance success.
3. The “outsider”/celebrity path: A figure with fame or unique personal branding.

• Dan Pfeiffer notes the ability to get attention is more important than traditional resumes:

  “The number one, like, defining characteristic of electability in 2028 is going to be your capacity to navigate the attention economy.” [35:28]

5. The “Go Low” Debate: Should Democrats Change Tactics?

Revisiting “When They Go Low, We Go High”

• Many voters feel the Michelle Obama maxim has become obsolete against Trump’s scorched-earth tactics:

  • Democratic voter: “We've tried to follow that, and we've taken the higher road, and we continue to, frankly, lose. The Republicans are playing to win...So not that we need to go scorched earth, but we've got to have a different playbook.” [39:01]
  • Another: “It’s generally a good concept...But...all those norms...that kept things like ‘when they go low, we go high’...doesn’t work anymore because that side is...okay with being mean for meanness sake, being kind of cruel, all those types of things.” [39:16]

• However, there’s ambivalence about mimicking Trumpian tactics—voters want boldness, but not at the expense of core Democratic values:

  • Voter: “Can we bring some of that aggression...but not in the way that he does it. Can we bring that aggression and determination and grit instead of...a strongly worded letter?” [41:16]

• Dan Pfeiffer: “If we ever get back to power, we can be more aggressive...but I don't think trying to be like a lesser Satan to Trump will work in 2028 for us with our coalition...We have to be tough.” [42:16/43:57]

6. Gavin Newsom’s “Go Low” Performance & The Attention Economy

Newsom’s Twitter “Trolling” and Performance Art

• Voters express mixed admiration and disquiet at Newsom’s aggressive use of parody/meme humor online to mock Trump:

  • Voter: “He’s using parody and satire to its fullest extent...he’s showing people how ridiculous this stuff actually is...” [46:39-47:19]
  • Another: “There's a part of me that feels like it’s appealing to the worst parts of us...at some point is mockery the only way to go?” [47:19]

• Despite misgivings, his posts have “broken through” even to less-online voters—a rarity.

  • Dan Pfeiffer: “People are hearing what he's saying. They're paying attention. The fact that these people all knew about Gavin Newsom’s social media is somewhat mind blowing.” [50:46]

• Sarah and Dan agree: mastery of the attention economy is necessary but not solely sufficient to be a nominee. Newsom opens the door but must still make the longer, substantive case about governance.

7. Redistricting & Constitutional Hardball

• Democratic voters are squeamish but pragmatic about Newsom’s push for California to counter Republican gerrymandering by redrawing maps mid-cycle.

  • Voter: “I don't always know if fighting fire with fire is the best thing to do...but if they need to do it, then they have to do it.” [57:21]
  • Another: “The aspect of gerrymandering is kind of uncomfortable to me...but if they need to do it, then they have to do it.” [57:28]

• Dan underlines the political importance for Newsom:

  "Imagine a scenario where Democrats take the House by three seats, and it's entirely based on the margin that Gavin Newsom delivered...He will be able to get a lot of credit for that." [58:20]

• Sarah’s final reflection: “Democrats are so sweet...They know they need to fight back, but, oh, God, they still like their norms and all that stuff.” [59:07]

Memorable Quotes

• On stories vs. sentences:
  • “We are speaking in sentences and not stories. And I want them to be a whole story from a legislative perspective...”
    — Dan Pfeiffer [02:38]
• On message-testing addiction:
  • “We have become, in the Democratic Party, addicted to message testing...it belies a lack of confidence and insecurity in your own messaging and your own values.”
    — Dan Pfeiffer [07:56]
• On leadership & attention:
  • “The number one...defining characteristic of electability in 2028 is going to be your capacity to navigate the attention economy.”
    — Dan Pfeiffer [35:28]
• On “go low” ambivalence:
  • “We've tried to follow that [go high], and we've taken the higher road, and we continue to, frankly, lose...”
    — Democratic voter [39:01]

Notable Timestamps

• 00:00–03:00: Introduction, Democratic frustration and fight vs. values dilemma.
• 05:43–08:16: Addicted to message testing; comparison to Republican instincts.
• 13:29–15:57: Democratic voter reflections on the government shutdown—tension between fighting and consequences.
• 21:13–22:47: Leadership skills—are current leaders up to the task?
• 23:40–28:32: Voters’ preferred “fighters” and the hunger for bold, attention-getting candidates.
• 35:28–37:36: Discussion of electability, the “attention economy,” and future candidate archetypes.
• 39:01–43:57: The “when they go low, we go high” debate and the search for a tougher Democratic posture.
• 46:39–54:55: Gavin Newsom's meme-driven strategy, social media performance, and its impact.
• 57:21–59:07: Voter ambivalence on counter-gerrymandering tactics, normative discomfort, and realpolitik.

Takeaways for Listeners

• Democratic voters are desperate for visible, confident resistance to Trump.
• The party’s overreliance on message testing undermines authenticity and agility.
• Winning the “attention economy” is now seen as a fundamental requirement for political leadership.
• While voters want more toughness, they remain wary about abandoning core norms and ideals.
• Gavin Newsom’s success online exemplifies the new rules, but old questions about substance and strategy linger.
• No clear 2028 favorite has emerged, but the demand is unmistakable: fight hard, communicate clearly, and seize the narrative.