When the Playbook Fails — Part 2
Strategic Leadership for a Post-Legitimacy Era
If you read Part 1 of this series (The Exhausted Majority), you know where I stand: the largest bloc in American politics isn't left or right — it's exhausted. Voters who've watched the system break, seen trust drain away, and are done pretending political performance can fix structural failure.
They don't want slogans. They want something real — and they can see through the BS.
The Authenticity Gold Rush
Here's the thing about authenticity becoming this week's hot political buzzword: you can't focus-group your way to being real.
Since Democratic Socialist Zohran Mamdani's win in the NYC Mayoral Primary last week, we’ve seen headline after headline with political insiders talking about the need for "authenticity."
Democratic strategists are suddenly talking about it like they've uncovered some brand spanking new political tool that just needs to be added to the mix — and boom! Instant results.
The irony is breathtaking.
You literally cannot poll-test, A/B optimize, or consultant-craft your way to authentic connection.
I know — I've been in rooms where we attempted to engineer "genuine moments" and manufacture "authentic messaging."
It's like trying to schedule spontaneity.
But I’ve found that finding the answers doesn’t come from chasing trends or using the same tired playbook.
Living with the Absurd
In the aftermath of WW2, the French author Albert Camus wasn't writing about swing districts or fundraising blasts. He wrote about what people do when trusted systems betray them — when the world they were promised no longer matches the reality they live.
American politics is absurd in exactly this sense. The rituals keep coming — the debates, the polls, the million-dollar ad buys — but the core contract has rotted: the notion that these people will govern competently, protect my family, or secure my future?
The data from my last piece proves that's no longer the case.
When that contract breaks, you get revolt — not revolution for its own sake, but what Camus called lucidity: the clear-eyed refusal to pretend the lies still work. That lucidity looks different in different places, but it shares the same quality: people who stop playing along with systems that clearly aren't working.
And that revolt won't wear one label. It won't follow one playbook. You see it when a 33-year-old Democratic socialist from Queens topples Andrew Cuomo — a three-time governor whose endorsements from Michael Bloomberg, Bill Clinton, and Jim Clyburn meant nothing to voters.
You see it when a former Navy pilot and self-described “moderate” running for Governor in New Jersey argues Democrats need to "disrupt norms and institutions" to make government work.
Neither story alone explains the path forward. But they all share the same refusal: to keep pretending the old systems work.
When Strategic Clarity Meets Professional Blindness
I saw this dynamic play out in real time this week. A prominent Democratic consultant posted an analysis of Mamdani's win on social media, correctly identifying authenticity as a key factor.
So I asked the obvious follow up: "Will the DNC and consultant class continue to raise and spend $2B on failed messaging and competing strategies?"
Rather than answer directly, he got defensive
“We can’t lose sight of the fact that the candidates matter…the consultants reflect the candidates.”
I pushed back:
Respectfully, not sure it's accurate to say that "consultants reflect the candidates." We focus group messages, ad test content, and A/B/C/D and F-test fundraising emails until any ounce of authenticity is lost. I know I've seen it (and done it) many times. We should be clear eyed about it. It's not working.
His response?
Don’t associate me with that - I absolutely do not do that.
And there it was: the entire absurd cycle in a single exchange.
A consultant sharp enough to see that voters crave authenticity, yet so wedded to the old machinery that he literally can’t see how the system that feeds him kills the thing he claims to want.
The exchange itself became a perfect case study in the very problem we're discussing.
When your livelihood depends on focus groups and message testing, you literally cannot see how those very tools damage the very authenticity you're now desperately trying to bottle and sell.
The exhausted majority watches pundits on cable news and hear “hot takes” like this and draw the only logical conclusion: these people will never fix themselves.
This is the contradiction Camus wrote about: the absurdity of clinging to rituals that fail while pretending the failure is someone else’s fault.
The "One True Strategy" Trap
Still, the usual suspects do what they always do: rush to bottle the latest thing and sell it as a strategy.
This month, they're making Mamdani's win the blueprint.
Progressives call it a signal to go all-in on “populism.”
Centrists point to other races to prove that “only a move to the middle” works.
MAGA screams “communism” and pray the fear sticks.
They're not wrong to react — they just prove the point. When trust evaporates, every faction tries to bottle revolt instead of facing what broke it.
The exhausted majority doesn't have one tactic — they have one test:
Are you real?
Can you speak honestly about what's broken, about trade-offs, about the complexity they live with every day?
Can you admit when your side's slogans don't match reality?
This Isn't About Saving a Party
So let's say it plainly: this isn't about saving the Democratic Party. It's about saving democratic governance — and if the party wants saving too, it won't be by finding a single magic trick.
Revolt doesn't only happen at ballot boxes. It lives in quiet choices, too.
The moment someone refuses to go along when power demands complicity. The stand someone takes when the system expects their silence.
Look at Paul Weiss — one of the most elite firms in American law. When Trump targeted the firm with an executive order, management could have fought in court like other firms did (and won). Instead, they cut a deal: $40 million in free legal work for Trump's agenda in exchange for being left alone.
Senior attorneys at the firm walked away. They chose professional “suicide” over serving a political master.
No focus groups. No polling. Just the clear-eyed recognition that some prices are too high.
That's the same lucidity we need to see in politics: not performative resistance, just refusing to pretend broken systems still work.
Whether it's a NYC election or a corner office decision, it's one standard: truth without spin.
What if there were practical tools for this?
Next week, we stop diagnosing and start practicing. Not more analysis — but a real playbook for when the old playbook is dead.
How do you talk about complexity without losing people?
How do you build alliances around shared reality instead of shared illusions?
How to figure out where your influence actually matters — not where you're told it should?
If you’re exhausted watching the same actors perform the same failures while everyone pretends it’s too complicated to fix — you’re not alone.
The people still running the show either can’t see what’s broken or can’t afford to admit it. The rest of us don’t have that luxury anymore.
This is Part 2/3 of my series on strategic political leadership in a post-legitimacy era.
Please share your thoughts below. I really want to hear what you think.
Thanks for this clear and compelling analysis!