Democrats form a circular firing squad.
I respect Democratic activists for their sincere integrity. They have political principles. They don't sell out.
Meanwhile, I scoff at the hypocrisy of Republicans who are maddeningly loyal to the GOP brand, but not to principles. Polls show that 95 percent of Republicans who voted for Reagan, Bush, and Romney now support Trump, who reversed much of what those presidential candidates stood for.
(I realize that Dick Cheney, Liz Cheney, and Adam Kinzinger got off the Trump bus. No generalization is perfect. A few Republicans told me they "held their noses" to vote for Trump. That makes my point. They support a candidate they have contempt for.)
Democrats are fractious. My TikTok feed sent me a video of a young woman telling other young Democrats to tell their parents NOT to support California Governor Gavin Newsom for president.
 |
We all have a personal responsibility at this point to convince our older, centrist Democrat family members that Gavin Newsom sucks before it’s too late. I’m sure I’m not the only person whose moms and aunts and uncles loves Gavin Newsom for the way he sticks it to Trump and tells it like it is. But we need to make it clear that he is the worst before they start donating to the presidential primary. So here is a non-exhaustive list of why this man cannot be the next president and if I miss anything, put it in the comments.
Gavin Newsom will not answer questions on whether or not he takes money from AIPAC.
He also says he is not pro-abolishing ICE.
He is actually cruel to homeless people who he sees only as obstacles on the way to his presidential ambitions.
He has publicly stated that he will fight tooth and nail against California’s billionaire tax ballot measure which would make sure that billionaires are paying their fair share.
He also told Ben Shapiro that he agreed with him and what’s happening in Palestine isn’t genocide.
He is obsessed with finding “common ground” with right wing extremists, platforming them on his podcast — people who have said things like that women are less than human.
Some of this is generational -- youthful passion meets parental moderation, an age-old story, so it might not portend a divided party. As the Beatles sang (Strawberry Fields, 1967) "It's nothing to get hung about." Possibly so.
But the video displays real fault lines in the Democratic response to the late-Trump era. Israel divides Democrats. Hamas and Israel have both done reprehensible things. Both are perpetrators; both are victims. Trump took a stand: Let Israel do anything it wants. Democrats want something more moderate and muddled, and no one will be happy
ICE divides Democrats. Some of its actions are reprehensible, defensible only by Trump's sycophants. But someone needs to enforce immigration laws or we have no immigration enforcement, and Americans rejected that. Democrats want something more muddled and, again, no one will be happy.
Tax policy divides Democrats. A No Kings sign saying "Tax Billionaires", or an AOC dress reading "Tax the Rich," has clarity. But in the reality of governing, tax surcharges on incomes have consequences. People and businesses can and do move to lower-tax places. Musk moved himself and his business operations from California to Texas. Financial firms are moving from New York to Miami. A home-grown local billionaire founder of Dutch Bros. coffee just announced he was moving the business from Grants Pass, Oregon to Arizona. Newsom says the billionaire tax would mean a net loss of revenue to California. Is he right? Maybe, but the burden of responsible governance requires that he consider that. A good slogan is not necessarily good government.
I envision a divided and politically unsatisfying presidential primary season as Democrats search for a unifying leader. I suspect there cannot be one. The Democratic Party is a collection of interest groups led by people with a mission. Abortion advocates tolerate no restriction on a fundamental right. Climate activists do not see natural gas as a transition fuel and a big improvement over coal; it is perpetuation of fossil fuels. Tax activists tolerate no limits because, after all, billionaires are morbidly rich. Immigration activists see the USA as the world's lifeboat, with a moral obligation to save refugees from violence and poverty.
The young woman in the video isn't arguing for self-interest. She wants a better world. She is sincere. Democratic interest group spokespeople are sincere. For the sincere, politics isn't a calculation of what is possible in a democracy. Right is right and wrong is wrong.
A California governor will carry a lot of baggage that will look extreme in Michigan, Georgia, and Pennsylvania. Gavin Newsom is probably at the left-progressive-woke edge of the spectrum of candidates who could possibly win a national election, and only under the most favorable of circumstances.
Yet he isn't good enough. It's my party and I'll cry if I want to.
[Note: To get daily delivery of this blog by email go to Https://petersage.substack.com. Subscribe. The blog is free and always will be.]
7 comments:
Ask yourself: What cabinet position would Newsom have in a Democratic administration?
I'll wait.
Wish those republicans would stop holding their nose and smell the air, they might then understand what they are voting for.
Newsom for Vice President would work for me.
This is a strange column, Peter. While initially faulting Republicans for falling into line behind Trump despite disagreeing with him, you then fault Democrats for voicing more than one opinion on salient issues, like the catastrophe in Gaza (which you wrongly blame equally on Israel and Hamas). I am especially puzzled because I remember your saying that there should be no organized Democratic voice on issues while the party is out of office, but instead leadership on issues should emerge in an unstructured way from various figures contending in the public forum. In that same regard, I seem to recall your saying that the party moves forward in that way. I agree with that last point. Unless there is contention over public policy, the party atrophies. I suggest that you take some time to decide how you think the Democratic Party (or any major political party) should best function over time. The way the Republican Party is now functioning will result in a shambles once Trump fades.
Herb is exactly right. There is no, and there cannot be, a single voice for Democrats as prospective leaders try out and show off their policy ideas. The young woman exemplifies what Democrats do: they don't settle for the possible or view Newsom on a wider scale of electability. They want what they want. I express this as frustration because Democratic intransigence elected Bush in 2000 and Trump in 2016. I agree that internal debate is how a party moves forward, with issues hashed out in public. And often the more charismatic spokesperson gets elevated (e.g. Buttigieg currently, Obama in 2008-- another of my observations of the persuasive power of the spoken word.) I don't mind the debate. What I mind is that, in the end, a critical mass of Democrats don't settle for the best possible candidate in a two-party electoral system. They don't accept well that what they want isn't popular enough to prevail. They don't accept well that popularity matters, since it is a matter of virtue and morality, not subject to mere public sentiment. It is a problem with moral certainty. Indeed, in this case, the near-opponent is more objectionable than the far-opponent. After all, the person who mostly agrees with one is salvageable but refuses. The far-opponent is hopeless, a lost soul. It is a sentiment that perceives that centrist Democrat as no better than Trump, and a much handier target. It is what Democrats do. Yeah, I regret that.
Secretary of Used Car Sales.
Rahm Emanuel is the kind of politician that the Democrats need to nominate if they actually want to win. Or, they can be pure and woke and go down to yet another defeat with their principles intact.
Experience is a cruel teacher, but a fool (like that young girl) will learn at no other.
Post a Comment