For Arendt, facts and opinions, “though they must be kept apart, are not antagonistic to each other; they belong to the same realm.” A fact (her example is Germany’s invasion of Belgium in August 1914) “acquires political implications only by being put in an interpretative context.” Whoever reports what happened, she wrote, “always tells a story, and in this story the particular facts lose their contingency and acquire some humanly comprehensible meaning.”
…
That is what Arendt meant when she argued that organizing people together to change the world—that is to say, doing politics—requires an approach that rejects outright lying while also avoiding a complacent expectation that “the truth” will reveal itself for voters to follow. The narrative wars have begun. If Democrats are smart, they’ll opt for storytelling instead.
Per SRSS voter poll from the election:
Yes, the economy is the biggest thing they had but also coming in second is the state of democracy and corruption was high on the list too.
And as the author stated:
Democratic leadership, if they were smart and effective, would be talking about the war in Iran, ending it, investigating it, hold Republicans responsible for the the war and the prices at the pump, effectively taking care of both issues of the economy and democracy in one go. That would have made those Independents and Demorcrats and Progressives happy.
But no, we didn’t get that at all from leadership.