Are We Too Hard or Too Easy on Democrats?

It looks like the technical issues that Beehiiv and a bunch of other sites were having are now resolved. If you see something today, please drop me a note. Thanks.

Commenter Tam R dropped this link to an Emptywheel post by Marci Wheeler, the gist of it being that lefty pundits are cutting elected Dems very little slack and accusing them of inaction when, in fact, elected Dems are doing some things. She accuses these pundits of “drowning out” the voices of those elected Dems.

I think the part about “drowning out” voices is nonsense. A bunch of very online people on BlueSky aren’t going to keep Democrats’ messages from gaining traction. But, even though I don’t agree with much what Wheeler writes, it’s possible that she could have a point.

I think Wheeler’s characterization of critics as “lefty” misses the point. The left/center distinction is the wrong one, as I’ve mentioned before. I think it’s fighter vs non-fighter.

Still, it’s possible that the fighters may well be guilty of not listening to those who they consider non-fighters. For example, I’ve had it with Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer, so when I listen to them, I don’t give them a fair hearing. Even if they do say something that meets the moment and is a good political statement, I’m very likely to believe that a short excerpt of their latest statement that sounds weak is representative of their entire statement. If you want to hear the case that a statement Jeffries made that sounded weak, wasn’t, and that Democrats are actually doing something about the ICE harassment of one of Nadler’s staff, read Wheeler’s piece.

I do believe that Jeffries and Nadler are doing something about what happened in his office. I also think that some other Democrats are working against ICE (the examples Wheeler cited were in Wisconsin and LA). But, overall, I just can’t accept that they’re doing as much as they can, because I believe a different narrative or frame for their actions, and I have an explanation for why they don’t get attention that has nothing to do with a few loudmouths on BlueSky or me on this blog.

Brian Beutler identifies the issue as the Democrats’ belief that they should work to “reduce the salience” of divisive issues like immigration.

So even if Jeffries or Schumer is saying something about immigration, I’d argue that it isn’t getting out because they’re not saying it directly, forcefully and repeatedly. The reason is that they always want to bend the conversation back to Medicaid and the Big Ugly Bill. They think that’s their winner. Unfortunately, I think what we’re seeing in LA right now shows that saying and doing the minimum possible on immigration won’t work. Newsom is now making some very strong statements against Trump’s military occupation of the largest city in his state. But all the faffing around talking with “reasonable Republicans”, Beutler argues, kept him from thinking about what he would do when Trump occupied his state, something Trump has been itching to do since the moment he was sworn in.

So if Jeffries does make a good statement, I’m going to focus on the mealy-mouthed parts, because I don’t believe that he’s here to fight for immigration rights. I won’t be fair. I don’t know if that’s wrong or not, but it’s human: he’s lost my trust. As an example, he declared victory for Kilmar Abrego Garcia the moment a court ruled in Garcia’s favor, because he wanted the distraction to go away.

Another way to put it is: if you’re going to say that you are fighting for something, I want to see some fight. I want to see some anger, some straightforward words, and some follow-up.