The Economist provides independent journalism for independent thinking and has been

championing progress for almost 200 years.

With the Economist, you gain access to fact-based, deeply researched expert analysis of world events and topics

ranging from business and culture to politics, science and technology.

Tune into the global conversation with reporting from correspondence around the world, available in-app, online, through

podcasts and print.

So for fact sake, search the economist. Whatever the future holds, I think it will not be the vision of the United States or other Western countries as a college campus.

And now the good fight with Yasha Monk.

Today I want to explain some of the logic for doing the show, for doing this podcast.

There are lots of ways of interpreting the 2016 election. Perhaps Hillary Clinton was the wrong

candidate. Perhaps most Americans are unwilling to accept black or brown or Muslim

people as equal citizens. Or perhaps partisanship is now so deep in America, but it simply

doesn't matter who the Republican candidate is. The lesson I take from the election is pretty

different from all of these possibilities. It is this.

When voters are asked to choose between no vision and a nasty vision, the nasty vision wins.

For too long Democrats have, in the words of Barack Obama,

sliced and dice the electorate.

They've looked for the group soccer moms one year, hockey moms the next year who would supposedly swing the election.

But things don't work that way. To win elections you need people to get excited.

And for people to get excited, they need to think that you have a vision

for how to improve the country. That implies a simple takeaway for 2020.

If you run on saying isn't Donald Trump horrible, we will lose. To

...