
Director @ EconOne | Editorial Board @TheSlingOrg | NYT: "one expert for the plaintiffs" | Prospect: "preeminent watchdog of The Economist's most wrong takes"
Joined December 2011
- Tweets6.4K
- Following2.6K
- Followers17.5K
- Likes45.8K
Hal Singer retweeted
For those who see this strategy as it odds with a focus on corruption, you don’t get it. Corporate influence in Washington is what voters are referring to when they say Washington is corrupt
NEWS: Ds review 181-page dossier from ex-Warren/Sanders staffers ID’ing hundreds of executives & corporations to target
Envisions “resignations of major CEOs, hauling people in, material restitution”
Tech giants, crypto, sports gambling, gas & more
washingtonsun.com/congress/d…
Hal Singer retweeted
All of these ‘consensus’ policies are pro-corporate. That doesn’t make them bad, but it does show the strength of the neoliberal consensus that excess profits are good.
new - Hakeem Jeffries will have the largest House majority in decades next year, and he’s gearing up to use it.
He's laid out a near-term agenda: repeal Medicaid cuts, restore ACA subsidies, end Iran war + sunset tariffs
But lots of convos ahead:
semafor.com/article/11/04/20…
Still waiting for the mainstream press, including the New York Times, to credit D's embrace of *economic populism* as the reason for the Blue Wave. In a story about the Texas takeover, the D's strategy was characterized as a "middle-of-the-road message." Ok guys. If that's how you want to spin it. But the interventions in markets--and the attack on concentrations of economic power in particular--that will be required to bring relief to squeezed Americans ain't gonna be a shift to the middle.
Even more odd is that the Times interviewed @GinaHinojosaTX in late October, and the then-candidate told the interviewer that economic populism and attacking concentrations of economic power was the theme of her campaign!!!!
nytimes.com/video/podcasts/1…
Bravo to Politico for having the temerity to say what is obvious. Dems didn't win by going down the middle. They veered left. And it was popular!
xitter.gq/politico/status/211802…
Progressive victories are now too loud to dismiss politi.co/4sGXksX
Hal Singer retweeted
🚨NEW: Dems won Congress promising to fight corruption - but so far, the party has matched its soaring anti-corruption rhetoric with small-bore initiatives.
We cannot let them bait-and-switch America with half-measures. Here is a serious anti-corruption agenda - pass it on👇
Hal Singer retweeted
What if the people want you out?
As Schumer says the new Dem majority prepared to take on Trump, I asked him about the new Dems in his ranks — like Adam Hamilton and Troy Jackson — who want him out as leader and say they won’t vote for him.
“The issue is not me. I'll be reelected as majority leader. But the issue is focusing on the American people and what they want.”
Hal Singer retweeted
You should probably hire this role soon because a Senior Director of Communications would tell you you cannot post your way through this
My analysis: what the midterm results mean for tech
✅ AI and data centers ranked 19th on what mattered most to voters
✅ Dem gov candidates who didn’t back data center bans won at higher rates
✅ 98% of pro-innovation Dems have won so far
✅ Now Dems have to show tech works for everyone.
progresschamber.org/insights…
Hal Singer retweeted
Dear dozens of new economic populist members of Congress,
You’ll face fast pressure to deliver economic results. How to do it? Subpoena CEOs. A shocking amount of time, they'll change what they are doing long before you pass a bill or actually cut off their federal funding. So:
- Subpoena Google for cramming AI down our kids throats. Threaten to amend the FAR to prohibit contracting across the U.S. government with any company forcing kids to use AI.
- Subpoena the private equity managers enshittifying hospitals, dialysis centers, your local vet, your local primary care provider. Name individuals, not just companies. Shame them. Show the public (and public pension funds) how they make their money.
- Subpoena health insurers who use AI to auto-deny valid claims, triage mental health emergencies, or upcode diagnoses. Make them stop that.
- Subpoena the airlines for systematically denying cash refunds to travelers. (“Here’s a voucher instead!”) Show your hand – threaten the subpoena now, before Thanksgiving.
- Subpoena Brazilian meatpacker JBS for literally anything. For child labor, for getting fat and rich off of cattlemen, for making their workers work so fast their hands curl into claws, for persistent hygiene allegations.
- Subpoena corporate landlords. Show the public how they get rich off of hidden fees and not fixing their apartments.
- Subpoena any company that has been slow to issue tariff refunds to small business owners. I bet they’ll get their checks a lot quicker!
Will it work? See what happened when Instacart was exposed as secretly marking up your grocery cart... Yes, it can work.
P.S. If anyone tells you “No, you can’t do that” or “No, there’s a process for that,” ignore them. You know what time it is.
Been seeing a lot of election takes by GOPers (Trump, DeSantis) chalking up this trouncing to the war in Iran and higher gas prices. The subtle implication is that the GOP should stick with its regressive economic policies that distribute wealth upwards and permit ungodly concentration of economic power, often in exchange for payouts in a quid-pro-quo corruption racket. Part of me wants them to continue down the same Musk-funded path, as that will guarantee a complete wipeout in 2028. But if instead they come to their senses and recognize their economics is not only bad policy but also extremely unpopular, I would welcome their assistance in tearing down the existing power structures that are smothering middle-class Americans.
Add JD to the list of GOP politicians claiming “It was just the war, everything else is fine.”
JD neglects that the second reason cited by voters for shifting towards Dems, right after the war, **per his favorite pollster** was cost of living/inflation. The GOP did nothing to address affordability. (In fairness, neither did the Dems under Biden.) This is why the electorate is so pissed. There’s just zero tolerance towards falling real wages. The war wasn’t helpful. But it doesn’t explain the totality of the rage.
One of the things the data analysts on our side obsessed over was "composition"—whether the electorate looked close enough to 2024 for Republicans to win. And despite polls that showed a Democrat blowout, the data kept on telling us the same story: in some states turnout was merely OK, in other states it was downright amazing, and in no state was it catastrophic. There was a genuine sense of optimism on our team: our people were showing up.
So, I asked the smartest data guy I know, does that mean we're going to shock the world? "No," he told me. "We might do better than the polls suggest. But the data is telling us that a lot of Trump/Vance 2024 voters are pissed and planning to vote for the other guys. Our voters are turning out, but they may not vote for us."
Well, that looks prophetic now. Our voters did show up. In Florida, for example, the electorate was 9 points more Republican than Democrat, just a couple points worse than 2024. Undoubtedly there were places we could have done better on turnout. But the main problem is not turnout. The main problem is that many people who voted for Trump/Vance in 2024 voted for Democrats in 2026.
There will be a lot of infighting and arguing over what happened and why that is. One of the pollsters I really respect told me that our economic messaging wasn’t sharp enough down the stretch. I’m sure that’s true.
But the real reason we lost is obvious to almost everyone.
Another pollster—one of the smartest people I know in politics, told me yesterday we’d lose the generic ballot by 13 points. I felt negative going into Tuesday, but even I was shocked by this. In his polling, he saw that a lot of Trump 2024 voters were angry and planning to vote for Democrats. He asked those voters who had abandoned us what would cause them to come back on our team. The top four answers, accounting for nearly all of the responses were:
1) End the war
2) Focus on cost of living/inflation
3) Put America First
4) Change our relationship to Israel
Our voters showed up. And the above four reasons are why many of them voted for Democrats. This is according to a pollster who nailed the results. While many spent Monday attacking Rachel Campos Duffy for calling for a diplomatic resolution to the conflict, it turns out her political advice was sound. (She’s also a great person.)
In the next few months, there's going to be a lot of gaslighting. Expect to hear any number of establishment politicians say the solution to our woes is amnesty. I'm open to the idea that we should change enforcement—by focusing more on businesses that hire illegal labor, for instance. But anyone pushing amnesty is lying to you.
The reason we lost is the war. The president himself said so last night.
If you'd like to argue it was worth it, that losing the Senate for the next 6 years was worth it, then do so. Argue it was a worthwhile cost to pay. Agree or disagree, that's at least honest.
But everyone knows why we lost. And any honest conversation about where we go from here must start there.
I remain hopeful about our country. To the people who are pissed off and want to say, “I told you so”: you’re right, you did tell us so. Take that energy into electing Republicans who share your worldview. To the people who are just pissed at the results, you should be. Let’s take that anger and get back to the work of saving our country.
Hal Singer retweeted
the worst thing Dems could do right now, with both Houses of Congress, would be to go back to business as usual with Big Tech. Voters gave Dems a tech accountability mandate. We can't squander this
.@NBCNews Exit Poll: Voters are concerned about AI and overwhelmingly oppose data centers nbcnews.com/politics/2026-el…
Hal Singer retweeted
Elon Musk moving to Texas to get away from Dems, becoming the biggest partisan megadonor in history, then spending around a half-billion dollars to have his own state go blue immediately in the next election — with data centers the top gov issue — is pretty impressive
Hal Singer retweeted
dear economic populists:
whatever concepts of a plan you've had on back-burner,
when you wake up this morning
tear them up
then go 10x them
everything's on the table now
Just a subtle suggestion for this week’s cover of @TheEconomist when interpreting the U.S. election results:
Economic Populism Prevails!!!
(with photos of Hinojosa, El-Sayed and Talarico)
Alternative cover:
Neoliberalism Is Dead, Baby. Neoliberalism’s Dead.
I realize the latter would be a big pill to swallow, as the magazine has been peddling the “let wealth concentrate but use taxes to redistribute” milquetoast message for 180 plus years.
Hal Singer retweeted
Tonight shows that the path to a multi-racial democracy runs through economic populism. Build an economy where healthcare, groceries, housing, and tech work for working people of every background, not for oligarchs and monopolies. Taking on those fights is how we build solidarity
Hal Singer retweeted
After tonight the blue wave better keep on rolling and break up health care monopolies and financial cartels and make AI firms subject to law, and if it does, if it really reorganizes POWER so that people get a little, then we can have a new politics and a new moment.
Pain and anger and powerlessness gave us tonight, not love of the D name. We've got to do something about each of those.























