Politics

Welcome to a new era of West Wing Playbook

Published

2 years ago

February 20, 2025

Donald Trump returned to power exactly one month ago today, and it is hardly possible to overstate the magnitude of the changes he has brought and is seeking to bring to the federal government and to the workings of power in Washington.

The modern federal government — and much of the economy that gravitates around government in the nation’s capital — is overwhelmingly the product of a few big historical movements: the New Deal in the 1930s, World War II and the 45 years of Cold War that followed, and the burst of government social and regulatory activism in the 1960s and 1970s.

The policies and agencies of government that flowed from those movements shaped national life and the lives of many millions of people for decades. It seems certain that the disruption the Trump administration is promoting now — seeking to transform or eliminate vast sections of the executive branch, and to alter the balance of power emphatically toward the presidency — has equally large implications, for the present and for many years into the future.

Today, we’re relaunching one of our signature products to capture this moment authoritatively for this audience: West Wing Playbook: Remaking Government.

Blue Light News has the capital’s most talented reporters covering the White House, federal policy, legal and political beats. Our aim is to harness this expertise in a way that is most useful to the audience that is most interested in and affected by the unprecedented changes and confrontations that are underway.

The revamped newsletter will land in inboxes Monday through Friday afternoon to capture the latest news about President Trump’s effort to remake government: the key decisions, the critical characters and the power dynamics that are driving the day. Our team will report on the actions of the Department of Government Efficiency being led by Elon Musk, the strategy being carried out by the Office of Management and Budget under Russ Vought, related interventions and the resulting outcomes and conflicts playing out in agencies, the courts and Capitol Hill.

We hope this newsletter will be useful to everyone around the country and even the world who is interested in this effort to remake Washington, but above all it must be indispensable to the people with the most at stake. This includes people in the federal workforce, and also the people carrying out President Trump’s directives. We need to know everything about their choices, the ideas and arguments behind those choices, and most importantly the real-life consequences of those choices.

We want the newsletter to reflect and drive the conversation at top levels, deep in the federal agencies, and in every private sector and nonprofit policy operation that is concerned with how government works and how it could work better.

The newsletter, of course, is just one of the ways that Blue Light News is rising to meet this historical moment. Our entire publication, and especially our large roster of policy and political journalists in Washington, is in the midst of organizing itself to illuminate every aspect of this drama. The short-term surge underway is part of our long-term commitment to covering the work of the federal government with more reporting and more authority than any other news organization.

To be clear: Blue Light News’s power flows from our reporting and our zeal to illuminate. We are curious and clear-eyed. We aren’t boosters or adversaries of any party or political movement. We are professionals who are devoted to answering important questions on behalf of our audience.

I’ll close with an observation about Washington reporting. When I first arrived here, in the 1980s, there was a very substantial body of journalists, from multiple publications, devoted to covering the workings of the federal government. For a variety of reasons, many news organizations have retreated from this task. A proliferation of old and new publications are focused, as we are, on the political dynamics of Washington, but there are fewer than ever that harness this reporting to the substantive policy choices of government.

This reality gives Blue Light News special responsibilities, as well as a great opportunity to engage with and deepen our connection to a large audience of people who work on and care deeply about those choices.

Our newsroom is committed to meeting this moment with the best and most vital work of our careers.

John Harris

Editor-in-Chief

Politics

Abdul El-Sayed underperformed with Jewish voters. Here’s what he has to say about it.

Published

8 hours ago

November 5, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Abdul El-Sayed ran well behind other Michigan Democrats in places with more Jewish voters, according to a detailed Blue Light News analysis of precinct-level results.

Statewide, the progressive senator-elect only ran two points behind Democratic Gov.-elect Jocelyn Benson, getting 52.5% of the vote compared to her 54.5%. But the gap was much larger in heavily Jewish communities: In Huntington Woods, a Detroit suburb that is roughly two-thirds Jewish, El-Sayed ran nearly 15 points behind Benson, getting 65.3% of the vote compared to Benson’s 80%.

In West Bloomfield, the site of the March synagogue attack that shook the Senate primary and a town where roughly a quarter of residents are Jewish, El-Sayed ran 8.8 points behind Benson.

El-Sayed faced blowback from some Jewish Democrats during his campaign, particularly over his calls to end U.S. military support to Israel and his remarks after the synagogue attack that “hurt people hurt people,” for which he later apologized.

El-Sayed, who will be the first Muslim senator in U.S. history, told Blue Light News on Wednesday that he hoped he could “earn support” from Jewish voters who hadn’t backed him in this election.

“One of the big issues of disagreement that kept showing up when it came to the Jewish community was my position on Israel,” El-Sayed said. “I’m not going to change my position, but …I intend to lead on all the issues that we agree on — whether it’s the right to a union or the right to health care, clean air, clean water, or religious pluralism, and respect for the Constitution — and I hope that over time I can earn [their] support on those issues.”

El-Sayed had worked to make inroads with Jewish voters over the course of his campaign, pledging to stand up to antisemitism and for Jewish safety. Still, some Jewish leaders and activists in the state urged voters to blank their ballots in the Senate race, or back Republican former Rep. Mike Rogers.

His former Democratic primary rival, Rep. Haley Stevens, also switched her endorsement from El-Sayed to Rogers days before the election, citing concerns over antisemitism and the Democrat and his allies’ views and rhetoric around Israel. She pointed to an ad put out by a prominent El-Sayed supporter tying high grocery prices to U.S. aid to Israel, which El-Sayed and his campaign distanced themselves from.

Jewish voters, who make up roughly 1.4% of the Michigan electorate, have historically backed Democrats by large margins. But disagreements over support for Israel and how the party should respond to rising antisemitism are testing that voting bloc — both in Michigan and across the country.

A poll of Jewish early voters in the state found that a majority still backed El-Sayed, but roughly one in four who had supported Sen. Elissa Slotkin in 2024 switched to back Rogers.

With Michigan in Democrats’ early primary window for 2028, El-Sayed said his statewide win showed voters were aligned with his positioning on Israel — and that he hopes the next presidential nominee takes note.

“If you want to be where the voters are, if you want to be on the side of peace and on the side of justice and transparency, I believe that that is around holding Israel accountable to its war crimes and on making sure our tax dollars get used to do good things here rather than bad things somewhere else,” he said.

In a post-election memo, El-Sayed’s campaign touted an outside analysis finding that he only ran slightly behind Slotkin’s 2024 performance in predominantly Jewish precincts. The memo also noted he was outspent heavily in both the primary and general elections, including by “MAGA billionaires, AIPAC, Elon Musk, and corporate interests determined to elect candidates who would defend the status quo.”

But he won in a blue wave while Slotkin, who is Jewish, overcame a tough year. El-Sayed’s margins were far better than Slotkin’s numbers across nearly all of the state, suggesting Jewish voters moved in the opposite direction of most Michiganders.

On the other hand, El-Sayed particularly surged in areas with more Muslim voters, who make up roughly 2.4% of Michigan’s electorate. In Dearborn, for example, he won 82.5% of the vote compared to 78.7% for Benson. Two years ago, Slotkin won 41.4% in the city while former Vice President Kamala Harris received just 36.3% of the vote.

Lansing Mayor Andy Schor, a Jewish Democrat who supported Stevens in the primary and did not endorse El-Sayed, said he was unsurprised by that split screen. He expressed hope about El-Sayed’s relationship with the Jewish community going forward, but also said Jewish leaders should continue to raise their concerns to the incoming senator.

“Everybody has to keep talking to him. His views aren’t going to change, and we know what they are,” Schor said. But, “I hope he’s open to hearing the concerns of some of his constituents.”

Nonnegotiable Michigan, a group of Jewish activists that pushed El-Sayed on issues of Jewish safety and Israel, also said in a postelection statement that it was “prepared to work with” El-Sayed “even as we continue to hold elected leaders accountable when antisemitism enters our politics or political discourse.”

El-Sayed made clear he has no plans to change his views on Israel, but said he will be straight with voters — and that he’ll “show up for you when you need me” regardless of their differences.

“With me, what you see is what you get. And I’ve never once gone and told somebody that I was anything but what I am,” El-Sayed said Wednesday. “We’re going to disagree. I’m going to be honest, specific and direct. And over time, I hope that I can earn support for leading on the issues on which I hope to lead and [by] serving everybody.”

Politics

Bernie Sanders lost the fight in 2016. A decade later, he won the war.

Published

20 hours ago

November 5, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

In 2016, two populist revolutions threatened to remake American politics. Donald Trump’s conquered the Republican Party and delivered him the presidency. Bernie Sanders’ fell short against Hillary Clinton, but introduced a populist economic vision that, at the time, much of the Democratic establishment dismissed as politically impractical.

Ten years later, Trump and MAGA were hit with a devastating midterm repudiation, as candidates across the country in blue and red states echoing versions of Sanders’ message broke through in places that once seemed beyond Democrats’ reach.

Sanders, as cantankerous as ever, isn’t surprised.

“If you’re asking me, am I shocked by that? That the argument about economic justice and taking on oligarchs and fighting for the working class is working in Texas, is working in Ohio, is working in Montana, is working in Florida, is working all over the country — no, I am not shocked,” Sanders said in an interview Wednesday, fresh off over 20 rallies in October alone. “That is what I’ve always believed.”

Sanders’ laser focus on economic populism in 2016 faced criticism from his own party during his contentious primary against Clinton for being too dismissive of identity politics — often couched as his lack of support among Black voters. Now, his brand of relentless focus on corporate and billionaire election interventions and income inequality proved a winning formula not only for Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan, but for James Talarico in Texas, Sam Forstag in Montana and Rebecca Cooke in Wisconsin.

“Bernie normalized the kind of campaigning that really is about making a direct appeal to working people,” El Sayed told Blue Light News. “Wherever I went in Michigan, there are people who remember Bernie 2016 and Bernie 2020 — we stand on the shoulders of giants.”

Given the booming results on Tuesday and the breadth of wins for the left, Democrats will test whether they can avoid the same pitfalls that ultimately dogged them following their last major win in 2020 with Joe Biden’s blue-collar charm at the top of the ticket, after which the party gradually slipped back down the culture war slope.

To avoid that, Sanders said the party can do both, but that Democrats need to have the “courage” to focus on the day-to-day needs of working families, no matter what the billionaires funding the Democratic Party say.

“It’s not either or. You can fight against bigotry and discrimination, but you have got to have the courage,” he said. “The courage now to say to the billionaires who are funding the Democratic Party: ‘Thank you very much for your help, but right now we are going to focus on the needs of the working families of this country, whether you like it or not.’”

Sanders’ reach is perhaps nowhere more evident than in New York City, which has emerged as the mecca of American progressivism, where Mayor Zohran Mamdani — once a Sanders-endorsed local official — is now perhaps the heir-apparent to Sanders’ progressive mantle.

The man behind Mamdani’s seismic rise, progressive wunderkind Morris Katz, had more than most on the line this week. After his top client Graham Platner dropped out of the Senate race in Maine earlier this year amid scandal, Katz worked this cycle for Gina Hinojosa in Texas, Randy Villegas in California and Brian Poindexter in Ohio, while his firm, Fight Agency, worked with El-Sayed and Pennsylvania’s Bob Brooks.

The day before the election, The Atlantic published a 3,500-word piece that put “Katz’s theory of politics” on the ballot.

“A lot of people wanted to know what I’d say if we lost,” Katz said, referencing an infamous Kanye West quote on Wednesday and running on 45 minutes of sleep. “I guess we’ll never know. That’s about how I feel today.”

Like Sanders, Katz sees a progressive future laser-focused on economics as the clear way forward — and nowhere is that more clear than in Texas.

“Hundreds of millions were spent against James and Gina trying to tag them on a trans issue,” he said. “It failed in epic fashion because there was no room for misunderstanding or ambiguity over what they stood for, because they had grounded themselves in such affirmative and positive economic messaging.”

“Those attacks have succeeded in the absence of an affirmative message,” he added. “Once you’re able to define yourself and provide a message, it’s just a lot harder for that to work.”

It’s the same formula Mamdani rode to Gracie Mansion — and, Katz argues, the lesson Democrats finally absorbed. “For a long time, politicians accepted the realities of how people felt about the economy but refused responsibility for having to take an active role in changing it,” he said. “There’s no room for that anymore.”

Katz sees his and Sanders’ theory of politics as having won out across the Democratic spectrum — not just on the left flank, but among the moderates who once resisted it.

“The more moderate wing of the party has changed the definition of what a moderate is. I think that’s great,” he said. “We should be a big tent party, but you are seeing a big tent that is unified in opposition to the oligarchy, that is unified in opposition to corruption, and that is united in a pursuit of fundamental and structural change. And that’s going to be really encouraging if that can carry over to 2028.”

For Sanders, it’s vindication of an argument he’s made for years and that Democrats have ignored — despite what he says is its simplicity.

“Focusing on the needs of the vast majority of American people who are struggling in the richest country on earth, while the very rich are getting richer, man, you don’t need a Ph.D. in economics or political science to figure that out,” he said. “That is the issue. How do we create a decent standard of living for all of our people? How do we end the corrupt campaign finance system? That is exactly what Democrats have got to do.”

At 85, Sanders campaigned this cycle like a man running out of time.

In the wake of Trump’s historic return to power in 2024, Sanders launched the “Fighting Oligarchy” tour, which came when many democrats were on the sidelines but provided a lot of the arguments, and even helped discover actual candidates, who a year later would swamp races earlier this week. Since the tour, Sanders has held 58 rallies during the midterms, endorsed more than 150 candidates across the primaries and general election, spent north of $16 million on organizing and deployed staff and volunteers into key Senate states including Michigan, Minnesota and Florida, an adviser to Sanders told Blue Light News.

“People say, ‘you know, Bernie, you’re not 21 years of age. What keeps you going?’” Sanders said. “What keeps me going is you look at the people who we have just elected yesterday, and look at the hundreds of other people who we have elected in school board and city council. You have wonderful people, black and white and Latino, coming from rural areas, urban areas.”

“I hope the Democratic leadership has seen what’s happening around the country,” he added.

Looking ahead to 2028, progressives see Tuesday as evidence the left’s economic politics can win anywhere — and that any doubt from moderates that a progressive should run for president should be laid to rest.

“I think we’ve got to rethink politics,” Sanders said. “We can win over millions of Republicans and independents who are struggling economically if we focus on the issues that are important,” he added, pointing to Villegas in Bakersfield, “a Republican town,” along with Forstag, Cooke and others who flipped Republican-held seats.

“These are people who ran on a progressive agenda, taking on a Republican district, and they won,” he said.

Katz said Tuesday was proof that heading into 2028, voters want candidates who look nothing like Washington — the kind he’s helped elect from Texas to California.

“You saw a hunger for a different kind of candidate — on congressional [level], teachers and waitresses and firefighters and iron workers and smokejumpers. And on the Senate level, pastors and doctors and teachers,” he said. “This hunger for expanding who is in Congress, who’s in the positions of power, feels real.”

What progressive candidate can pick up the left’s momentum heading into 2028 remains a question, but Katz said he viewed Tuesday’s results as more evidence that New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez — who closed out Villegas’ campaign in California a week before the election and stumped in Michigan, Montana and Pennsylvania — should consider running for president.

“You’d be hard pressed to look at the results of the election and say they’re anything other than encouraging in the context of her ability to win nationwide,” Katz said.

Lisa Kashinsky contributed to this report.