The Democrats' Next Top Influencer
Political Fandom and The Democrats Future
The Democrats’ Next Top Influencer
There is currently a battle within the Democratic Party. The party is coming off an electoral defeat, prompting jockeying for position and questioning what went wrong. These factors are interrelated because to become the leader of a political party is essentially becoming the most influential member of the party. Becoming the most influential indicates that this person has won the argument about the reasons for the defeat, and he or she is viewed as the solution. That doesn’t mean they correctly diagnosed the issue; it simply means the party faithful are willing to align behind the narrative of the top influencer.
When we accept that politics is fundamentally about influence (of voters, media, and donors), it can change our thinking about what drives political success. Along these lines, I think fandom is an underrated political metric.
I like fandom as a political metric because when a voter goes beyond preference to become a fan, you have a fully engaged voter who will be more likely to donate, volunteer, and show up at the polls. Fans are also immune to the news cycle. It’s hard to fathom what it would take for a Green Bay Packers fan to switch allegiance to the Chicago Bears. Same thing with politics.
This last point about Bears and Packers fans highlights a key aspect of fandom; the opposite of fandom is not indifference but anti-fandom or hate. Most Bears fans hate the Packers, and most Trump fans hate Kamala Harris. Anti-fandom rates are instructive because anti-fans are non-persuadable. Someone who marches in the streets in an anti-Trump protest is not worth targeting by the Trump political machine. A candidate with significant anti-fandom is a mixed bag, as it may imply the candidate is unlikable or polarizing. Polarizing is okay, but unlikability is political death. Anti-fandom is especially relevant within a party’s core ideological segment. Relative fandom and anti-fandom rates also reveal a candidate's potential. Some folks might have lower fandom rates because they are less known, but the ratio of fandom to anti-fandom reveals how likable a person is and how easy it is to generate hate.
Today’s post is a data-based look at fandom for a subset of the contenders vying to be the Democrats' next “top influencer”. The list includes Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), who is fresh off the “fighting oligarchy” tour, Gavin Newsom, who is engaged in a podcast that features conversations with conservatives, and Gretchen Whitmer, who seems to be emphasizing odd photo opportunities with Donald Trump. I’ve also included Pete Buttigieg, Josh Shapiro, Kamala Harris, and Michelle Obama. It's an intriguing competition, and more names are sure to emerge as events impact the political arena, but these are some of the key competitors. It is early, but becoming the de facto leader of the anti-Trump resistance in 2025 is likely to significantly impact who emerges as the 2028 nominee.
Fandom Data
The data comes from an annual fandom study called the Next Generation Fandom Survey. The 2025 edition of the survey was executed in late March and early April this year. Among other items, It included questions about fandom for a collection of political figures and questions about respondents' political ideology. The survey collects data across Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Baby Boomers, so the sample ranges from 13 to 79.
The first figure shows the fandom rates for Harris, Newsom, AOC, Shapiro, Whitmer, Buttigieg, and Michelle Obama for self-identified Liberal, Moderate, and Conservative respondents. For liberals, Michelle Obama has the highest fandom at 51%, followed by Harris at 46%. This is expected as Harris and Obama are better known than the other contenders. A former first lady should also have great positive numbers. The next tier includes AOC at 31%, Buttigieg at 30%, and Newsom at 27%. Whitmer and Shapiro trail the others with 22% and 17% fandom rates, respectively. Harris and Obama also have the strongest fandom among moderates and conservatives. The contenders all tend to have similar rates of fandom (~20%) in the conservative segment.
Overall, the fandom data suggests there are only minor differences among the potential contenders for party leadership. AOC has a 1% advantage over Buttigieg among liberals and moderates but a 2% disadvantage among conservatives. Newsom also performs well. Whitmer and Shapiro have significant fandom deficits relative to AOC, Newsom, and Buttigieg among liberals. There is no clear-cut leader in appeal, but there may be tiers of candidates.
Anti-Fandom
The second figure shows anti-fandom rates across the ideological segments. These rates are critical because they show each candidate’s limitations within each segment, as anti-fans are unpersuadable. Within the liberal segment, Harris and Obama have much lower anti-fandom rates than the others. This is interesting given Harris’ performance in the 2024 election. Her problems as a candidate were not within the core liberal segment.
Of the contenders, AOC has a slight advantage relative to the others within the liberal segment, while AOC and Newsom have the highest anti-fandom rates among conservatives. There are only differences across the contenders in the moderate segment.
A potentially significant issue is the contenders' anti-fandom rates relative to Harris and Obama. While Harris and Obama are actively disliked by about 15% of liberals, the contenders all have anti-fandom rates of greater than 20%. The implication is that the current crop of contenders may not be viable party leaders.
The third figure shows the ratio of fandom to anti-fandom for Newsom, AOC, Shapiro, Whitmer, and Buttigieg. The ratio provides a sense of the politician’s ability to generate positive relative to negative engagement while controlling for familiarity. This figure shows AOC’s core strength within the liberal segment. Buttigieg also performs well within the liberal segment. Whitmer and Shapiro seem to have relatively little resonance with the democratic base. Shapiro does have the strongest performance with the conservative segment.
The Anti-fandom data again points to AOC as having the brightest future in the party. She has advantages in both fandom and anti-fandom. This means she is better at creating engagement and less vulnerable to attacks (within the base). Buttigieg and Newsom are the next-level candidates, while Whitmer and Shapiro appear to be unlikely options.
Generations
Future party leadership also has a dynamic component as the electorate is constantly evolving as Gen Z comes of age and baby boomers exit the stage. The fourth figure shows the contenders' fandom rates across generations. This figure shows that AOC has an advantage with relatively younger generations, as she has the highest fandom rates in the Gen Z and Millennial cohorts. Buttigieg does the best with Baby Boomers. A notable finding is that Gen Z is much less enthusiastic about all the contenders than the Millennials.
Generational differences are a vital data point. The Boomers have dominated American politics for decades, but about 2.5 million Boomers die each year. On the other hand, young people tend to vote at lower rates than older people. A candidate with particular strengths among Millennials and Gen Z may have to wait a bit longer than 2028.
Commentary
Examining political fandom provides insight into core support (and core resistance) and the potential to become the party’s key influencer. The data suggests that there is no clear-cut new leader of the Democrats, but rather tiers of candidates. The data suggests four key insights:
AOC is a slight leader with somewhat stronger appeal among liberals and moderates than Newsom and Buttigieg. AOC performs worse with conservatives, but this is less relevant given that party influence is determined by the party’s primary ideological segment.
The contenders all have significantly higher negatives than Harris. This may mean the party should look elsewhere for its next standard bearer.
Shapiro and Whitmer have significantly less fandom and higher anti-fandom among liberals. While these candidates may not have had the exposure of the top tier, the ratios of fandom and anti-fandom suggest that they will struggle in a Democratic primary.
AOC is relatively strong among the younger generations, while Buttigieg is strongest among older people. Given the inevitable shift in the voting rolls from the Baby Boomers to Gen Z (almost all Gen Z will be old enough to vote in 2028, while 2.5 million baby boomers die annually), this is another sign of strength for AOC.
From a high-level perspective, the top tier of potential democratic influencers is fascinating. The three leading contenders share few demographic and professional similarities. One is an ultra-polished governor from a hard-left state, the second a woman of color who is a youthful media (social and traditional) darling, and the third an openly gay small-town mayor who was elevated to cabinet secretary. In American politics, identity drives decisions more than ideology, so this diversity within the top tier might predict a long-term battle for party dominance between identity rather than ideological segments.
What does this mean for the party’s future electoral prospects? At the start of the article, I mentioned that becoming a party’s standard bearer is about winning a rhetorical argument within the party base rather than diagnosing the true cause of losing the last election. The data suggests that AOC is the strongest candidate with the party’s core ideological segment, not that she will be a strong general election candidate. She may be the influencer the Democrats want, but this may mean she represents a vision that America rejected in 2024.