"Progressives can still win many of these issues."
David, IMHO, the imposition of so-called "progressive" policies on Americans is the most important reason Trump beat the pants off Hillary in the Electoral College. I really don't think there is anything progressives can do to change the losing dynamics their policies brought about with their penchant for taxing, regulating, controlling and generally nannying Americans who think of themselves as adults. Viewed from the center of American where the electoral majority lives, progressive policies are a reflection of arrogant pols and 'crats and heir media lapdogs who mistakenly think they know better than the middle's mob. Their attitude remains: "Take your taxes and regulations and shove 'em."
7
Woulda. Shoulda. Coulda.
If Hillary had not....
We would be looking at President H. Clinton's 2nd or 3rd Supreme Court pick. The 2A would be getting it's last rights as a constitutional right. If you wonder how America would look with no 2A, look at Chicago. New York. DC.
I'll sleep better tonight knowing the constitutional right to an abortion "may" be on the chopping block. BTW, what page of the constitution is the right to an abortion?
2
If this is no time for liberal despair, then what is?
3
Why is abortion the issue to roll back? I say let’s resurrect Prohibition! That’s right, all those angry, resentful, white men and the women who love them can’t drink anymore! Yay! Because I don’t drink, I don’t want anyone else to.
1
First things first. Are Democrats the Party of Clinton and Pelosi - white billionaire Hedge fund managers, white Hollywood moguls, white Harvard Professors vacationing on he Vineyard or are they the Party of young Socialist people of color? I don’t think you can be both.
2
So let me get this straight. Democrats shouldn't run on social issues like abortion or marriage equality and we shouldn't run merely against Trump?
Sounds like unilateral disarmament to me.
Mr. Leonhart might be the only adult in the room on the political Left. Barack Obama presided over the hollowing out of the Democrat party, and it will take a generation to rebuild it. As a Trump supporter, I'm actually heartened to see someone finally take realistic stock of their situation on the Left. While its fun to watch Democrats rant and rave about "resisting", and with full knowledge that tawdry "activism" like harassing public officials provides a boon to our President's support by shoring up his base, it's not good for America as a whole.
4
"The best issues are those on which Democrats hold a decisive advantage in public opinion. Health insurance is a good example. So are taxation, corporate power and the Trump administration’s corruption."
Corporate power? You mean like the ridiculous 5-4 Citizens United decision?
I think we should take a few pages from the GOP playbook and "block the vote!"
Remember the Florida 2000 election Khaki Rebellion to block the recount? Organized by none other than...Roger Stone.
1
IMO a very good column that could be summed up in one phrase: "win elections".
2
Mr. Leonhardt forgot to mention this one: Stop insulting everyone with whom you disagree. Dismissiveness and hubris alienate Americans. And this one: Stop infringing on free speech with which you disagree. The recent shift towards shutting down speech is alarming to most Americans. It's a right people of all political persuasions will unite around.
6
Given the Trump economy, it's doubtful that Ginsberg and at least one other geriatric will outlast him. Plan on two more.
2
Now is our moment. Now is the time we take over America and restore it to it's former glory. Now is the beginning of the end to liberal judicial fiats on affirmative action, gay rights and abortion. The morning sun is rising. A new day is dawning. The long dismal night of liberal control is coming to an end. We must now act to support judge Kavanaugh in the confirmation process. Write your Senators and tell them that supporting this nomination is the most important vote they will ever take.
The democrat party is no longer the new deal party . It is the anti white ,celebrate demographics change party . The party that pretends to be for free college , free healthcare and other pipe dreams but hides its big donors lust for neo liberalism . You can't say that your support of sanctuary cities , open borders , and abolishing ice isn't the same trickle down economic neo liberalism that you accuse republicans of. Bernie is a charlatan if he says that he can reign in wall street and big banks but controlling the borders is out of the question , So more low skilled , uneducated , government dependent illegal and legal immigrants will only serve to further undercut employers who play by the rules , make sure unions could never be formed , and hard fought federal, state . and local work rules violated. So the 1 percent can dump the fallout of this on whats left of the middle class and Bernie and wanna be's demagogue it even more with the promise of more free stuff that not realistic. The new deal and reality is dead to democrats.
4
American voters do not support abortion rights up to 40 weeks gestation. No woman's life has ever been saved by killing a baby after 30 weeks. If you disagree, prove me wrong and post the exact details of the case.
3
ruth next
6-3
Winning
2
Tough times do not last; Tough people do. History is replete with examples of how when the political pendulum swings wildly to one side or the other; it never lasts. That said the pendulum this time has just about flown right off it`s. hinges. While millions of citizens around the world consider Donald Trump a disgrace and clown; all we can do is pray come November sanity will be restored. It is usually darkest just before the dawn; but I do recognize the primal scream many Americans are experiencing these dark days. One must be strong and courageous in fighting evil. And believe me ; you are fighting EVIL!
2
There is a full out assault on the center-left from within the Democratic Party itself. It's hard to see how the "potential center-left majority" can ever come together in the face of the cultural revolution the leftists in the Democratic Party want to promote.
1
The only way Democrats can prevail in a center-right nation, is through outright deception—by pretending not to be socialists. This is the lesson of Lisa Murkowski, Joe Manchin, John Tester Claire McCaskill and Heidi Heitkamp—all of whom are going to lose in November. But they are the last in a dying breed of Democrat—willing to pretend to be what they’re not.
Problem is—the deception ends when the voting begins. When it becomes clear these Trojan horses reliably vote against popular things—like tax cuts—and support unpopular things—like open borders, and vote against righteous things—like Brett Cavanaugh, the cloak of invisibility gets torn away—leaving behind a naked liberal. It’s not easy to seek cover after that.
The key to survival of the Democrat Party would be to elect candidates closer to the political center—like JFK, and Bill Clinton—and eschew the progressives like Hillary and Bernie.
As a Conservative, the delicious reality is that liberals are too dogmatic and arrogant to move toward the center. They truly believe in this socialism thing—and would prefer to ride it into the dust, rather than win elections.
November can’t come soon enough for Conservatives like me—as we watch Red State Democrats contort themselves into unrecognizable shapes—and end up losing anyway.
It is time for great despair in Liberal Land. It’s time to go away and sulk—or better yet—just go away.
6
Be Careful. Last time you didn’t compromise with the Dem Light (RINOS) you threw away the Nuclear option. Which you continue as you fight inch by inch in this tug of war not to become DINOSAURs, where else you might regain respect and share in governance. Just let go the rope and watch all fall. Else We're in for a century of Keep America Great, 3% growth a year and accelerating, beat that. Perhaps the Left's next tag line is “Give Socialism a Chance. If we're all equal, we'll all be happy. No Billion-dollar salaries, who needs a cure for Cancer anyway? Will fix SSI as FDR intended. Don’t see, can't miss.
2
Civility has left our institutions in turmoil....it is time for us to have our voice loud and clear at the polls.... and not the phony polls that skew them in favor of who they want.... Each day we all see the attacks on the floors of Congress... the halls of Congress and in the Media.... Senators calling our hard working civil servants incompetent as they risk their lives each and every day, for me it is sickening ....LETS STOP IT AND WORK FOR A STRONGER AMERICA FOR THE PEOPLE.... NOT FOR YOUR ELECTION.....
1
Great insight and advice but like other commentators I fear it will be ignored.
The Democratic Party for years has seemed to regard local and state elections as too insignificant for their lofty goals, ignoring Tip O’Neill’s reminder that “all politics is local.” Therefore it ceded the responsibility for setting voting districts boundaries to Republicans. The result has been tortuous gerrymandering throughout the country and Republican control of many state and local governing bodies, and of course now the country’s legislative, executive and soon judicial branches.
Republicans believe in trickle-down economics and Democrats apparently believe in trickle-down policy. Neither works.
2
Mr. Leohardt gets it right when he says that the Democrats have to change their strategy to counter recent conservative successes. The Party has chosen the anti-democratic method of relying on courts and executive actions short cut Constitutional democratic processes. The Republicans have played a longer game and established control of state legislatures which enable favorable redistricting and enable them to overcome and render ineffective the Democrats massive majorities in the major coastal cities. National voter majorities don't necessarily translate into legislative majorities, as the Democrats have recently learned to their great discomfort. The white middle class in the flyover states that the Democrats have jettisoned for progressive causes can still decide the political fate of our country.
3
I don't see the choice as either/or. Midterms are local elections that are fought based on issues important to local communities, which may or may not coincide with a national agenda (right Crowley?). There is no reason Dems should neglect a fight, win or lose, whose outcome will so deeply effect the lives of many of their constituents. As an African American, I want to hear, loudly and clearly, from every Dem in DC, a condemnation of any nominee for the Supreme court who will reduce the affect of our right to vote. While I have no recollection of the days of illegal abortions, I can guarantee one thing, the chipping away at access to legal abortions will have a lopsided impact on women of color. And lets never forget the children of Flint whose lives are a testament to the potential horrors we face under a court hostile to environmental protections. Pull the covers off these nominees and let the Nation know what's at stake. Dems needn't forsake the Court battle for Midterms or vice versa.
2
This is extremely sound advice, which we can pretty much count on the Party's ignoring. In the financial control of Hollywood and Wall St and the ideological control of suburban upper middle class left libertarians (the ones who are now elevating the reactionary Justice Kennedy into a venerated hero), the party doesn't have a plan for America. "Abolish ICE; toilets for everyone; we are the demographic future..." a sure recipe for more Trump and more defeats up and down the ticket. $15/hr minimum wage, universal healthcare, tuition-free colleges-- no, let's talk about culture and values--0 th eones we insist others have.
7
Thanks. Great piece. Sending it out to everyone I know. "Pass it on."
2
I have long been thinking of writing a book with the catchy title "The Duping of America by the Conservatives." I don't know any Democrats who qualify for conservatives. So the sobriquet belongs to the Republicans, the Libertarians, and the Tea Party members.
I am too old to write this book. Also, being an immigrant, I don't have American history at my fingertips. I would welcome anyone with a flare for writing to research this topic and write a book which matches in narrative power "Uncle Tom's Cabin" written in 1852 by Harriet Elizabeth Beecher Stowe.
1
If any rights and freedoms are eliminated, we will no longer be a democracy. We are hanging by a thread now. I realize democracy does not work for Republicans - democracy is inclusive, secular, and elevates equality under the law for all. Republicans are selfish, tilt the electoral playing field by passing laws making it harder for some to vote, not to mention race-based gerrymandering. Since the social upheavals of the 1960’s, Republicans have built a backlash base to the expansion of rights and freedoms, getting their base angry, fuel their hate toward others, and tell them trickle down economics will one day benefit them. Really, what kind of “ideology” wants to take healthcare away from people, wants to eliminate women’s choices and contraception, wants to eliminate Social Security and Medicare, wants to destroy marriage equality, takes children from their parents as a tactic to dissuade refugees of the non-white variety from coming here for safe haven, and permits a one-year-old to face a judge? The conservative Supreme Court plays god by declaring corporations are “people” and money is “free speech”. I remain unconvinced. We have a president treating migrants, asylum seekers, undocumented immigrants, and their children inhumanely. I consider this all by itself a reason for impeachment, but his bad attitude toward our allies is intentional and benefits our adversaries who want democracy destroyed. People should start asking why. Consider the alternative.
1
Perhaps...just perhaps, when the tilt to the right starts hurting people in ways they never quite anticipated, they'll realize that their political savior was actually a huckster, a snake selling snake oil.
We can all talk until we turn blue about how the dems will regain our branches of government. I fear the truth is ugly but must be faced. From a statement I have seen many times from the many intelligent commenters on the pages of the NYTs I say, it is not who casts the votes that counts, it is who counts the votes that matters. The right wing propaganda machine is in full force. It will take a tsunami of blue voters to turn this around. Arguing about small and petting topics will not win elections. This must be seriously faced and with the determination of not accepting loosing this fight of our lives.
2
Excellent article. In the 1900s the Democrats watched as Republican progressives stole their ideas and then came up with Woodrow Wilson a phoney progressive who was an open racist and in 1920 the Democrats lost everything for 12 years. Trump is finally a loud noise and gradually his followers will get the point. Democrats should scream and scream about wages and Social Security and the national debt. In the end the Republicans will lose the next generation because their central personality is vulgar bigotry and indifference to the plight of ordinary people. You can have every state house and the congress the Democrats have, but when you stop listening to the voters and you treat them like fools, defeat will come.
1
It's more than the Court. We have a president who lost the popular vote, a legislature where the majority party received a million fewer votes than the minority party and a court whose opinions will fly in the face of public polling showing that most Americans want reproductive choice, approve of gay marriage, etc.. Can we call a country ruled by a minority of its citizens a democracy?
4
Be nice to agree and cleverly outmaneuver the right by accepting gracious defeat and restart the clock on the 20th century again but this is a democracy and by definition has to be done out in the open. Not to mention we owe it to people who brought this far to defend their work.
Imagine the next time you ask someone to make a sacrifice for the good of us all. "Why bother" they'll say, "people of the future will sell us out anyway."
1
Well, David, we'll have to gird our loins for the inevitable repeal of Roe, v. Wade. When that happens, it moves women to defiant action, and, of course, many men with them.
In the pragmatic sense it won't matter because pregnant Republican women with the resources can fly to another country to get their abortions. This happened in a family that I knew before Roe v. Wade. It can happen again. The rest suffer.
Not to get too Hegelian on you here, David, but a democracy tests ideas. What we are witnessing is a test of liberal social legislation, which I claim is beneficial, but conservatives dislike government, unless it's *their* government.
But worse, we are not in conservatism; this is Trumpism. It is decidedly fascist (feel free to think that's overreacting, but Trump demands, and gets, such loyalty from his staff, our government, and American industry). One would hope that a Supreme Court wouldn't go so far as to interpret our democracy as fascism. But this is becoming a *Trump* court, so we'll see.
You are right David, a Democratic victory in November could save our democracy. If that doesn't happen, Trump will unleash his frenetic, egomaniacal, mythomaniac fascist lunacy on this nation. We'll see the elimination of fact in running our government. Trump and his Fox News will stir their irrational trumpkins in the heartland to conduct purges of anyone or any idea that their primitive minds hate.
And that Trump Supreme Court is going to help them.
3
I say all these things as a Democrat. Democrats are lazy. Republicans realized that in order to succeed at the national level the Republicans needed to win Statehouses. Meaning that all political power comes from the States to the Federal government not the other way around was/is their framework for success. As a result of their hard work starting over 20 years ago the GOP has two thirds of all the Statehouses and governorships. Meanwhile, the Democrats have focused so much on winning the Presidency, as if it is the only elected position in the country worth showing up for on Election Day that Democratic voters now only show up to vote during Presidential years. Coupled with...
Democrats have turned their own voters into personality and culture voters. In 2008, we were electing our first black president and in 2016 our first woman, instead of electing our next Democratic Party President. Look at the GOP in 2016, they did not vote for their first openly corrupt, fraudulent, racist, xenophobic, misogynistic psychopath. No, they voted for their next Republican Party President, and that is why they won. Democrats want to win arguments, which is fine with Republicans as they really do not care if they ever win another argument, since they only care about winning elections.
12
"As a result of their hard work starting over 20 years ago the GOP has two thirds of all the Statehouses and governorships."
Excellent analysis, but, I'd go back to 1992. And, credit goes to Bill Clinton and his Greatest Hits.
Assault Weapons Ban.
Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
Hillary's Healthcare Plan.
It may not have been his intention to re-arrange America, but it sure looked like it from the home town bleachers.
And, what ever he may have done right, was lost in the noise created by his behavior.
Bill and Hillary, are both defined by "Woulda, shoulda, coulda."
1
Not *quite* that simple, @Mike. After Clinton, Republicans nominated Bush via some Rovian legerdemain. Republicans *could* have nominated an intelligent, experienced war hero, but they chose the far less intelligent, inexperienced avoider of the Vietnam War.
We got an administration that Republicans hated, so much so that they accept Trump's insults to the Bushes. In 2016 Republicans nominated the worst possible primary candidate of 17, whose election was benefitted by the Electoral College.
But *locally* (all politics is local, of course, as the great Tip O'Neill told us), Red, less densely populated areas distrust government. That, with gerrymandering, generates more conservative candidates. Dems aren't lazy (they are self-deprecating, evidently) but it's difficult for them to spin the fantasy that Trump and Fox News does to cater to irrational voters.
In power, Republicans have to produce something , rather than distrust of Democrats. It's not looking good for the Republican congress right now, given their power. And we could talk about the failures of Gingrich, Hastert, Boehner and quitting Ryan.
Watch and learn. While his critics and political opponents were focused on Bridgegate, NJ Governor Christie oversaw tremendous gains in governships all across the country. Democrats pursue these "gotcha" sensational issues, always looking for the Nixon moment that will finally bring down their political opponents. They waste a lot of time on things that don't, in the end, produce political results. Russia collusion is a perfect example. Polls continuously show that Americans care about the economy, not Russia.
3
Excellent article. But... gerrymandering!
2
"Liberal Despair" is there because it is an innate characteristic of the Liberals. They lack the warrior spirit and talk endlessly, instead of acting. As far as the concerns about the replacement of Justice Kennedy go, Supreme Court has no credibility, as long as its decisions are based on a one-vote majority rule, 5:4. The fact that the Court is divided into two blocks of conservative traditionalists and leftist radical troublemakers, is the result of the politicized nomination process.
7
The problem for the Democratic party is that it has no real, vibrant leadership. Its titular heads (Pelosi & Schumer) are aged, tired warhorses with dirty hands (hooves?)
As for Bernie Sanders, he will be 77 in a few of months. Ditto for Jesse Jackson.
Who will they fire up? What enthusiasm will they generate? The party is being led by stumbling zombies, I tell you.
9
Good piece, one of the best on US domestic politics that I have read in months.
Liberal Democrats ( quit being progressive) need to learn to play 'small ball', one and two base hits, school boards, zoning boards, city councils, state legislative districts.
Yeah, I know, it doesn't inspire the the soul like the Big Issue politics. But it is critical to understanding people. and right now, Democrats don't seem to understand people (voters, citizens) very well.
6
Yes it is.
2010 ...... lost legislatures.
redistricting.
2014.....loss to the Senate
filibuster erosion
Merritt Garland
2016......Trump elected by Bernie and Stein supporters
Loss of the Federal judiciary.
Not much else matters.........
The real battle has been lost.
2
Hey David:
Everyone with any political sense in 2016 knew the bottomless pit of bad consequences a Trumpo presidency would bring, especially having SC justices to appoint.
Yet the progressives, the Berners, the Woke, the Greenies, the Libertarians, and some former Obama voters all decided in large measure to sit out the election pouting over what a bad candidate HRC was.
Add in all the billions of dollars of free media coverage of Trumpo’s every reality TV show antic by major media for the sake of click and ad revenue, including the Times, and endless daily media coverage of Clinton’s email tempest in a teapot, including the Times (thanks Amy) and not surprisingly Trumpo was elected.
Yes we can also blame Comey and the Russians but they didn’t prevent Democratic voters from turning out.
No this isn’t the time for liberal despair. It’s time for liberal acceptance of reality that things will be very different in our country and the world for a generation or two despite how many Dem mayors and state legislators and governors are elected.
“This is what you”ll get,
This is what you”ll get,
This is what you’ll get,
When you mess with us.”
Radiohead
“Karma Police”
4
“infringing on African-Americans’ voting rights”? The sad part is that African Americans don’t vote in numbers. They only rallied behind Obama to be the first African American president. Democrats need to focus on working class and middle class not minorities.
3
African-Americans turn out at rates higher than their personal characteristics (e.g., education) would predict. The aging veterans of the civil-rights era cherish their right to vote and use it whenever possible.
Once you start talking about future generations, it sounds like you believe in the rights of the unborn.
4
The Democratic Party slogan should be...….
"We are the majority just make sure we vote "
2
I strongly agree with the message. Democrats must never forget about the bread and butter issues if they are to succeed. "It's the economy stupid.", and that is what will draw the electorate out in November to support Demos.
4
The democrats need to stop pointlessly emphasizing issues like bathroom bills, immigration, and identity politics. Average Americans do not care about this stuff.
14
You might as well tell them to stop breathing oxygen.
3
Step four: take back power and pack the court.
The Constitution doesn't say there have to be 9 justices.
The important thing to remember here is Republicans have won a single popular vote in the last 30 years. Their brazenly ideological justices have turned the law into an undemocratic mockery, where they have contorted both words, reason, and logic to reach their deeply unpopular ideological ends.
Enough is enough. Pack the court until it reflects the popular will of the people.
1
"Take back power and pack the court"? If FDR couldn't pull that off at the height of the New Deal, I wouldn't bet the ranch on that strategy now.
5
There have been as many as eleven justices on the Court in our history. If the Democrats regain control of all three branches of government in 2020, expect to hear calls to return to eleven justices. It's the only strategy available if you don't want to live in a world governed by Alito and Gorsuch.
1
#3 is the most important guideline. Stick to the issues that matter to everyone: economic opportunity and dismantling corruption.
You could found the Cheese Wiz Party and if you ran on these issues alone (and followed through) you could take over the country right now.
4
100% agree. As McConnell The Terrible has said, “winners make policy and losers go home”. THE ONLY THING MATTERS IS DEMOCRATS WINNING AT LEAST ONE HOUSE OF CONGRESS. Add to that state and local level elections. It would help, by the way, if Pelosi stepped down and allowed someone from the next generation to lead the caucus. Schumer as well.
6
The conservative religious right once Roe is overturned will fully focus on birth control. That will totally change the political outlook when all American women understand the risks. Attacking Planned Parenthood wasn't just about abortion.
4
No, this is the perfect time for liberal despair. The DNC establishment never wants to discuss the economic issues that are relevant to voters, because it would mean addressing the deliberate fleecing of America by the wealthy 1%. Therefore the DNC is left with weak, social issues to try to rally their base. The only time the DNC comes to fight is to beat back the highly energized Progressives at every turn.
Furthermore, liberals must despair even if the blue wave occurs, because it's probably going to be filled with corporatist/centrist/ do-nothings, that are going to push the same half measures, and Republican-light policies that brought us Trump to begin with. Until we get money out of politics I will have nothing but despair for America.
7
A very well-balanced argument!
Just adding that I lost all respect for Kennedy for CLEARLY handing this opportunity to Trump. I couldn't understand why such a seemingly honest and sincere person could possibly do such a blatant thing.
Well... THEN I read that his son is a higher-up at one of the banks that has made the most loans to Trump.
WOW...! NOW, it makes sense...
2
RBG said she was waiting for Hillary to be sworn in so she could retire. So, your respect will remain intact.
Everyone already knows that Democrats have a liberal social agenda. They need to stop talking about that and start talking about economics, healthcare and an immigration policy that is moderate. Super-liberals aren’t staying home on Election Day. They saw what a disaster that turned out to be with the last election. Democrats need to appeal to moderate Republican voters and Undecided voters to sway them to the Democrats in the midterms and in 2020... and they need to spend some serious $ getting the Hispanic and African American communities to the polls, regardless of party affiliation. They need to rent buses and vans and get volunteers to drive people in low turn-out districts to the polls... whatever it takes. Trump has made it easy to guess how they’ll vote. New Yorkers should consider voting early and then driving to Pennsylvania to get people to the polls there. Whatever it takes...
5
Many replies to the recent columns about abortion (resulting from the anticipated conservative SCOTUS appointment) have put forth fair and well-reasoned arguments, either pro-choice or pro-life, to support their positions. Very helpful for a much-needed open-minded dialogue. However, an alarming number have put forth inane bumper-sticker type arguments that are without merit and serve only to fire up the ignorant elements of the base.
The most common one is some variation of the following:
“If the government prevents a woman from terminating a pregnancy, then the government must assume all financial responsibility for the subsequent support of that child.” Sound legitimate to you? Let’s try a slightly modified version that follows identical logic and see if it becomes clearer how ludicrous this type of argument is: “If the government prevents a man from robbing a bank, then the government must assume all financial responsibility for the subsequent support of that man’s family.”
In both cases, the individual wants to do an act that would be (assuming reversal of Roe) considered illegal. Clearly, the fact that the government is intruding on the individual’s free choice to do what they want (i.e. bank robbing or abortion) does not by extension make the government responsible for all possible consequences of making that action illegal, NOT for supporting the unwanted child and NOT for supporting the attempted robber’s family.
More reasonable thinking; Less bumperstickers!
4
Want to win?
Any Democratic candidates going to Iowa or Illinois and talking about how the trade war is going to obliterate their finances?
Why not?
Talk to conservatives about how Trump will be failing them. Stop the endless repeat about how Trump is hurting liberals.
Appeal to what matters to people. Transgender bathrooms don't to a lot of people. #MeToo doesn't to a lot of people. A guaranteed job doesn't to a lot of people. Health insurance does to a lot of people. Getting rid of ICE doesn't to a lot of people. Plastic straws don't to a lot of people. Falling prices for soybeans does for a lot of people.
Too many liberals think the answer is to convert conservatives. It isn't. In fact, it is counter-productive.
The answer is.....appeals to what matters.
Appeal to what matters.
11
Put me at the top of the list of those who gave absolutely no confidence in Democrats ability to win elections. Before you get excited about winning a few special elections this past year, Fareed Zarkaria recently pointed out that Democrats in 2018, counting statehouses and congress have their lowest representation in 100 years. That, plus completely blowing what should have been a layup running against Trump in 2016 by nominating the worst candidate in presidential electoral history in Hillary Clinton.
The great irony is: over the past 20-30 years, the Democrats have tried to play both sides. They've tried to claim to be fighting for the middle class and poor, while at the same time buddying up to and catering to large corporations/lobbyists, e.g. big pharma, big health insurance, banks etc. The result? They've controlled congress only 4 out of the past 24 years, only winning in 06 - 08 because of black swan events such as the financial crisis and war in Iraq. The latest result is the courts will continue to be pro-cronyist, anti-middle class etc for the next 30 years. The swamp is now deeper and more entrenched than ever.
Meanwhile, they've decided that continuing with Schumer and Pelosi at the helm of the party is the answer, demonstrating that they haven't learned a thing. They still think buddying up to the DC lobbyist class is the answer. The incompetence of the Democratic party isn't stunning anymore...it's just downright pathetic.
9
Their "greatest" president, Obama, oversaw the decimation of his party. Perhaps the problem is with this kind of hero adoration. Obama took them right down the tubes politically, but they felt tingles whenever he spoke. Do they want to feel good or win elections?
4
Thank you for your column. I could not agree more.....ie Democrats (I am a moderate one from Texas) should not waste time, energy and resources trying to defeat Trump’s Supreme Court nominee or trying to impeach him, they will not win. Further Trump’s administration will continue his policies with or without him. Democrats need to work at the local and state levels, focusing on ‘real issues’ and offer concrete yet realistic programs and policies. Listen to their constituents’ concerns which may vary across the country. Democrats need to start from the bottom up and win elections, as you emphasize. I know that will not be easy but we must try.
1
Sorry but this is the sort of high-altitude assessment that catalogs the obvious from 50,000 feet, and in keeping with The Times' tactical acumen, it doesn't ever come down to earth. "Know your strengths" is precisely what the Democrats have failed to do. If they were any good at it, most of the private sector would be on their side; the state legislatures wouldn't be skewed to the right against the economic and voting majorities in the cities; the government's credibility as a leader on energy and climate policy wouldn't be in doubt; and there would be a deep bench of institutions and talent ready to step into a power structure that suffers from stultified absence of imagination and technological expertise. The nation isn't as badly damaged by the Trump phenomenon as one might think, nor is it strengthened much by its political opponents.
Know your strengths? Does The Times?
2
Today my wife and I went to the Social Security Office which WAS in Elmira, to replace a lost social security card. We were stunned to discover that it had been moved 8 miles from the city to a shopping strip, making it out of reach for the hundreds of poor, disabled, and aged - you know, the ones who need it the most. The new office is manned by a single clerk dealing with walk-ins while others who made appointments weeks in advance, still had to wait to be heard.
This is an example of mindless governing that is focused on the ideological rather than the real. The poor, the disabled, and the needy seem to be largely ignored and largely disrespected. American democracy was supposed to be BY the people, FOR the people and OF the people.
Democrats historically have supported that concept - but somehow lost it along the way. And now, the Republican minority has ALL the power. And it's largely due to Democratic hubris vs. Republican ingenuity - the latter being triumphant.
If we're going to take back the night, we had better get wise very quickly. The time is NOW to work on every level of government to remove the conservative mindset and to build on the principles established by the Founders.
3
I disagree
Citizens united and gerrymandering have created a Republican and corporate stranglehold on the political reality of all Americans.
The Supreme Court is about to become even more conservative.
I’m not sure what hope this gives us.
5
Despair and inaction typically go hand in hand.
What do you suggest we do?
I disagree with the statement that two-thirds of the country believe abortion should be illegal at least some of the time. It all depends on what poll you want to cite. I heard a poll this morning on NPR that said 60% favor abortion rights. If there was a national referendum on abortion I think voters would vote to keep Roe v. Wade intact. Pro-fetus groups (they're not pro-life) are hypocritical to the extreme. They will always be able to acquire abortions for their daughters or mistresses. If abortion becomes illegal they'll drive their pregnant women to the airport and put them on a plane to a destination where the procedure is safe and legal. In the privacy of the voting booth abortion rights would be validated by a wide margin.
13
There's a difference between supporting the right to an abortion and providing abortions without any limits. Americans favor abortions AND limits. Ideologues may not be willing to accept these 2 concepts simultaneously, but they really do reflect the majority of Americans' views.
5
"Pro-fetus groups are not pro-life"? Try telling that to any pregnant woman who feels a baby kicking around inside of her. The fetus ceases to be alive only AFTER an abortion, despite those who might "choose" to consider it a malignant growth.
Saturday Night Live's spoof of the current Democratic leadership as old, out of touch losers points to the big issue for the Democrats - their leaders.
New ideas and charisma don't come from old leaders. They come from younger leaders who are fresh with more energy.
Please take two minutes to watch the video below and you will laugh and realize the Democrats biggest obstacle to success is their leaders:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/saturday-night-live-paints-democrats-as-ou...
6
1. Be realistic
Let's not kid ourselves, it's the ineptness of the Democrats who got us into this fix. Reaction from the hill, "we should have fought harder" (referencing the Garland debacle). Ya think?
2. Don't lose hope
Gone with that Obama poster about ten years ago.
3. Know your strengths
Pelosi, Schumer, Sanders? I really doubt it.
13
If we're going to win the midterms, we need a clearer message. I suggest a full embrace of social democracy.
Social democracy can unite all of our interest groups on the left, because at its heart it's about collectively using all of our resources, through the power of planning, to establish better values and then allocate resources accordingly.
It means affirmative action. It means opening the borders. It means abolishing ICE. It means jobs for all. It means a nationalized health system. It means new social codes, like not being able to call the police on black people just because they've violated some small rule, like wearing socks in the pool, or looking in people's cars while walking down the street.
In other words, social justice is the goal of social democracy, and the sooner Democrats embrace this program, the sooner all stakeholder groups will get out the midterm vote!
Turning our backs on socialism is NOT the answer!
5
I like your message, but I'm a "west coast liberal".
Do you think your approach will work to win over people who voted for Obama in 2012 and Trump in 2016, people in "swing states" who have been known to vote both DEM and GOP, thus moving their states into one column or the other?
It's my belief that we need to WIN above all else in 2018. Without that we can't lay the groundwork for 2020. I've come to the conclusion that the most likely route to winning in 2018 is to focus on LOCAL politics, to select candidates for Congress that can galvanize their districts, regardless of what the coastal liberals like me think. That means, for example, that Ocasio-Cortez is a great candidate for NY but not the candidate we want to see running in VA or PA. For those places we need a different kind of candidate voicing local concerns.
I don't think congressional seats are going to be won over from the GOP by focusing on national issues like ICE. And winning is all that matters at the moment.
3
I agree. The mid-terms are very important. But that is just the beginning. Both Republican and most Democrats only pay attention to voters at election time. The rest of the time they pay attention to those that pay; the very rich and large corporations. And the very rich are winning. Look at the tax cuts. They give the average tax payer enough to cover Costco membership, and much much more for the very rich.
We need to make our politicians pay attention to us, and not the very rich and corporations, on every single vote they make as our representatives. They represent us, not companies!
5
Maybe the best advice is to move the Democrats to the 'political middle' where most independents vote and beat the GOP by being more moderate.
I'm getting tired of the extremists on both sides!
2
There is no extreme left in the Democratic Party. There are centrists and democrats to the right of Roosevelt. The right has become so extreme, embracing racism and immigrant bashing, that everyone the left of Attila the Hun looks radical left.
2
The Democrats have been doing this since Bill Clinton. It doesn't work. Tacking to the mythical middle only allows the GOP to pull harder to the right. Democrats need to stand firms on their beliefs, not triangulate
1
Another excellent article. I hope Democrats read these three sentences:
"The best issues are those on which Democrats hold a decisive advantage in public opinion. Health insurance is a good example. So are taxation, corporate power and the Trump administration’s corruption."
I would add economic inequality and how Democrats might help the 100 million Americans who've been left behind.
9
Please remember that in 2020 a candidate should not be foisted upon voters simply because it’s someones alleged turn, or we will have another four years of Trump.
5
Democrats need to take a lesson from history.
The Democratic Party's enormous power during the 20th Century was derived from its economic appeal to the middle class. White, brown, Catholic, Jewish, Protestant, atheist, urban, rural, progressive or conservative, it didn't matter. If you were middle class you were a Democrat.
That huge economics-based coalition is what gave them the legislative power to bring in civil rights and other progressive legislation of the '60s and '70s.
Today's Dems have it backwards. They want to gin up passion among their base by discovering new social justice crises every other week, while maintaining the very same plutocracy ushered in by Reagan and cemented by Clinton. Why? Because they are plutocrats themselves.
Hillary Clinton could not have been a worse candidate, the ultimate insider playing girl power anthems and giving lip service to Black Lives Matter, all while suggesting some minor tweaks here and there to a macro-economic policies which have dramatically failed middle class Americans.
DNC, time to rethink.
23
Excellent
All of which sounds extremely reasonable and moderate. Hasn't the label "progressive" come to mean something all together different?
This is right on point. Democrats, let's focus winning and not fall prey to the noisy distraction the Trump group deliberately creates.
2
We have all wondered why the Republicans have put up with Donald Trump, a genuine threat to our republic. I think it's because of the old political adage: don't intervene when a candidate or a party is destroying itself. The GOP sees more clearly than we on the left that the left is far more divided than it's been (in my experience) since the Viet Nam era and the elections of Nixon over Humphrey (1968) and Nixon over McGovern (1972).
The "left" is, today, a misnomer. The rift between "liberals" and "progressives" (a/k/a center left and far left) is severe. And the gap appears to be widening, not closing. It resembles the gap between the Hubert Humphrey (liberal) wing of the Democratic Party and the Eugene McCarty/Bobby Kennedy (progressive) wing in 1968. Nixon won even though George Wallace, the far-right racist siphoned votes from the GOP. It also resembles the split between the McGovern (progressive) wing and the Muskie/Ted Kennedy (liberal) wing in 1972.
The problem for us left-of-center voters (namely a failure to close ranks) is a delight to our adversaries on the right. No matter how outrageously Trump acts, the cynics in the GOP will (rightfully from their standpoint) continue to do nothing about Trump as long as the Dems continue to disintegrate. Why should they intervene when the Dems are calling each other names? The only thing Trump could do to change this attitude would be to lose. And that is not very likely under present circumstances.
3
To say the Democrats "They just shouldn’t fool themselves into thinking that the country is further to the left than it is" is to presume the bogus center left or center right meme that's been shoved down our throats. Polls show on social maters that the country IS strongly to the left. Over 90% of Americans are in favor of basic background checks for guns. The most popular programs in the country or Medicare and Social Security. And yes, most Americans agree that abortion should be legal. They also say pot should be legalized. Let's stop pushing that we need to run to the center to win.
6
I have seen too little said about how the Republicans shredded the Constitution when they blocked Obama’s pick for more than a year. For all their supposed devotion to the document, they have shown what hypocrites they are. If they like what the Constitution says they support it. If not, it is just a piece of paper.
9
And focus on breastfeeding and keeping families together. Who could be against that? Oh, yeah...
2
"Some Democrats will be tempted to turn the next two months into a national conversation about abortion, affirmative action and other social issues that inspire liberal passion. That would be a mistake. Those are not the best issues for Democrats during a midterm campaign."
And for God's sake don't keep beating the "poor illegals" drum. If we do, we might as well not even show up to the polls in November.
5
Good advice: pay attention to state & local races too.
1
If progressives want to win elections they have to show that policies work, not just get passed with nice-sounding names and big tax bills with big union giveaways.
Before we start talking about cradle-to-grave government running of everything, why don't we start with fixing the current state of Universal Education (K-12).
Our schools are rightly the starting point for people seeking prosperity. They are also failing miserably our most vulnerable populations, despite significant funding ($10-25K per student/year...which is $300K for a class of 30 at $10K). Where does that go and how is it used? Follow that trail of failed ideas, administrative bloat, special interests, and policies not focused on improving critical thinking for our kids, and you can see why I'm skeptical on govt being the best solution to anything.
4
Some good points in this article. Thanks for that.
I agree that high profile races, such as the presidential, shouldn't be top priority and an overwhelming focus on issues such as abortion and gender issues is counterproductive.
If the DEMs want to change the current trend that the absolute FIRST step and top priority is to retake majorities in the House and Senate. The only way to do this is to focus on the LOCAL.
1. select local candidates well connected within their constituencies.
2. select candidates attuned to local concerns.
3. run races based on local concerns.
LOCAL - Running local campaigns on national agendas is a mistake, now more than ever.
The house and senate can only be won back seat by seat, one seat at a time. That means beating Republicans in centrist districts as well as holding onto strong DEM seats.
Once the DEMs have a majority we can start to undo some of the damage. Until then no amount of hand wringing and placard waving is going to make a bit of difference.
Now is the time for cold, calculating strategy.
9
too late. i am in deep deep despair. as are most of my neighbors. great article, though.
7
The current events are mere aftershocks to the primary event that took place long before #45 came on the scene. Vast numbers of citizens, from any political persuasion, can no longer distinguish fact from fiction. Structural features now in place will continue to exacerbate the confusion indefinitely. The civil war is well underway already. Public figures will continue to face harassment, their security detail will need to expand. The lines have been drawn, people are choosing sides. The empire is finished. Welcome to your future.
3
Heck of a lot of folks didn't and don't have much truck with the facts anyway.
Outstanding article. It should be required reading for everyone in the DNC.
More organizing and voting, even during the "boring" elections. More pocket book and economic fairness issues, less social justice hysteria.
Dems just need to recognize that Trump ran as an anti-Reagan economically. He ran 180 degrees away from the GOP economic orthodoxy since '80. The fact that rank and file Republicans are no longer under the spell of Trickle Down economics is an opportunity for Democrats.
6
Excellent advice. It seems to me that people in this country are starving for adult leadership. The Democrats are in a good position to provide it if and only if they are willing to provide an alternative vision that speaks to the average American’s need for security and stability and which also points to a future that will be as good and even better than our past. If the Democrats continue to be the party of the status quo they will lose. It is not enough to be Not Trump. Also Democrats need to get reasonable people from all across the political spectrum onboard. This will happen if and only if they stop scolding people for choices they made in 2016 and look forward.
5
The very need that David feels for cautioning liberals against despair constitutes a pretty evident admission that such despair is compelling.
But his strategy for tearing victory from the very teeth of defeat is a good one: Democrats need to focus on winning more elections. However, the means Democrats are employing to do that stink. You may win NOTHING in venues that aren’t already deep-blue by evangelizing “Democratic Socialism” as you are. The country is not as he claims center-left but center-right, particularly on taxes. It’s true that healthcare could be a winning issue, but ObamaCare destroyed you over several election cycles, and defending it is NOT the ticket to a renascence – we need something fundamentally different, and NEITHER party, so far, is bellying-up to the bar to define it. Medicare for all? We can’t afford the Medicare we HAVE, much less an extension of it to cover all of us. If Republicans are too dumb to define something salable and workable and fight to legislate and implement it for all Americans, then doing THAT is your opportunity on healthcare. But all we hear from liberals are warmed-over assertions that despite losing money on a program we can make it up in volume.
And he’s wrong that nothing in American politics right now is as important as the midterm outcomes. The most important political need right now is for BOTH parties to moderate their extreme positions and move closer to the center, where most …
… Americans live, either left or right. You accomplish that for the Democratic Party, and you WILL start winning elections – in purple states and even in a few red ones. Soon enough, you CAN tear victory from the very teeth of defeat, but for a moderate agenda, certainly not for “Democratic Socialism”.
But not if you continue to blunder into DC monuments, still shell-shocked from 8 Nov. 2016 and gibber over a federal court system that you’ve already lost; and not if you succumb to despair.
David is half-right. The problem for the Democrats is that the Party leadership won't focus on the bread and butter economic issues the Party could win majority support for on the state level: increased taxation on the wealthy to pay for extending health care to everyone, free college education and a renewed commitment to good public schools, affordable housing, child care, etc., because they oppose this kind of New Deal Redux agenda. On these questions the Party is unable to distinguish itself from the Republicans by adopting genuinely popular economic measures. If the Democratic Party is going to build from the base to retake the heights it's going to have to change it's policies, or it won't get anywhere.
5
An excellent piece by David Leonhardt. If I may add a few points.
It's likely that Roe will be overturned in the near future. If that happens, I think the evangelicals and other Christian fundamentalists will deeply regret it.
The reality is, the evangelicals harbor absolutist beliefs that the majority of the country doesn't share. Nor do the majority of Americans want to live in a Christian theocracy under Christian Sharia law.
American women will not give up their right to bodily self-determination regardless of whether Roe gets overturned. They will never stop fighting for what every advanced society now affords to women.
If Roe is overturned and abortion is made illegal yet again, it will signal only the very beginning of the battle over the right to life - not the end. Evangelicals don't get this. They assume that if Roe gets overturned, abortion will be settled once and for all. They will have "won."
But this issue will never go away. The reality is, religion or not, the vast majority of American women want to be able to chose what happens to their bodies. And if that right is taken away - even temporarily - I think we're going to see such an incredible backlash against evangelicals that they will be sidelined from social policy debates for at least the next generation.
Evangelicals have lost the abortion debate: legally, socially and politically. If they try to change that by overturning Roe, the counterpunch back at them will be absolutely devastating to them.
28
If overturned, Roe will immediately go back to the states, and most will vote for it. As Ruth Bader Ginsburg said, this issue should have never been forced upon the people by the courts but instead be decided by the state legislatures where it belongs. At that point, politicians could no longer use it to gin up emotion.
Are you a sexist? Only the rights of men should be nationalized? But women's rights should be decided in the backwaters of the states? Double standard. Hypocrisy.
I don't see any downside to saying as loudly as possible that the seat on the supreme court should not be filled until after the midterms because Trump is being investigated. By an reasonable measure he has tried to obstruct justice. Isn't that enough? By not reacting we are again lowering the bar..
7
Interesting how this isn't being discussed anywhere in the media at all. He should not be allowed to fill that seat. But you know, Democrats, just be quiet and wait til the midterms by which time you'll have so demoralized your base by your inactions voter turnout will be 16%.
1
How great that you can sit back. The dems and the left have sat back for 40 years. Look whwere we are and how many have perished on the way. You are fine, though, right?
1
@m. callahan: exactly my view! the current mess is a result of decades of democratic inertia. [to the point that, in germany, for instance, the far-right AfD now picks up more votes than the social democrats, who - once upon a time - represented almost fifty percent of the people.] the effort to undo, or at least control, damage done is HUGE. but what if we don't roll up our sleeves? ... stop large-scale tax evasion. work to establish a global minimum wage. stop over-consuming. stop wasting resources. forget the myth that we're doomed w|o growth ... get busy!
"Stop over-consuming, forget the myth that we're doomed w|o growth"? Speak for yourself, and don't assume others are happy being told to make do with less.
Here's an ironic thought for the Democrat party to ponder: Over turning Roe v Wade so that the issue of abortion rights becomes a state by state political battle ground might be the only hope the Dems have for turning back the Republican red tide of state legislatures and governors. There's been a massive shift from blue to red seat ownership across the country in the last 20 years. If abortion rights are as popular as the left claims they should be able to use that issue to win back those lost seats. Political control of 35 states instead of 15 in exchange for Roe might be worth it to the progressive cause. Especially when interstate travel is so cheap and easy to do these days.
6
There is a lot of wisdom to this, the key thing is you can't implement policy until you are in power. Yes, liberal issues like affirmative action, LGBT rights, equal pay, resonate with groups of people, but one of the problems is as shown in election not enough to get people to vote. Young people in polls show they care about issues like that, and despise the GOP (the GOP should be scared, even in God's little acre the young people under 35 have a pretty bad view of the Republicans), but the problem is despite being a large block, they don't vote (19%? give me a break). Other groups, like blacks, have to realize that the biggest power they have is in the voting booth, if the several millions of blacks who stayed home in the last election voted, Trump likely would not have taken the white house given the slim majorities he took in states with fairly large black populations.
The other things liberals have to do is organize, and they also have to stop being so nice. The religious right are a lost cause, stop believing they will vote rationally, they won't. Point out that the tax cuts have helped create jobs, but ask them if their wages and benefits have improved, if health care comes up point out that the GOP states that refused to help ACA are the ones in the most trouble, and then ask them where the GOP 'plan" is that would help them? And yes, in some cases, let the 'MAGA" voters suffer for their own stupidity.
9
Yes, a 1000 times YES and thank you David Leonhardt.
4
Actually, this is exactly the right time for liberals - true liberals - to despair.
This, because true liberals have been exiled by the rabid statist-collectivist Progressives who have co-opted the Democratic party.
True liberals have only two options now: the Libertarian party, or the Republican party - both of which would happily accept them.
And the new,rabid Democrats, have no chance whatsoever. Their game is over, for decades to come.
8
Social democrats who are truly libertarian on social issues should have no problem winning broad-based support. Economic "libertarians" will be left clinging to their money.
2
Can you imagine the vile criticism if President Obama had nominated a Muslim judge to the Supreme Court and a Republican Senator had asked if his or her religion would interfere with their rulings??
12
Would the "vile criticism" be directed against Obama (for nominating a Muslim judge), or against the Senator (for questioning the nominee's religion)?
Both, obviously!
Leonhardt implies that, in calling called the coming nomination “the fight of our lives,” Elizabeth Warren is declaring “generational defeat” and encouraging Democrats to “turn on each other.” What fresh shill is this? We Democrats did not arrive at this liberal nadir by standing up and shouting. We got here by mumbling middle-of-the-road pablum, the kind which Leonhardt would have us serve more of. Shame on those who are cheered by such noxious mediocrity. The division is between those who will stand and those who can’t stand them.
2
There are several flaws in your argument: 1) gerrymandering and fixing by the GOP; 2) Citizens United; 3) Nostalgia for the by-gone Bill Clinton days and of the ersatz hope of Obama; 4) inertia.
The courts do matter: that's how we got little George (Bush). That was the first sign that the Supreme Court was for sale.
The rise of the likes of Karl Rove and Newt Gingrich created a very anti-intellectual, rude, fascist GOP. They have cheated the electorate when the could and molded districts to both marginize and select conservative (fascist) voters. It is in-American.
Robert's decision on Citizen United legalized out-right corruption. The rich are affecting elections out of their own districts.
Bill and Hill's corruption of the Democratic party and those that benefited must pass to the dung heap. The progressives are here to stay. They will be your warriors in the upcoming civil war.
Inertia is why we don't see John Roberts' head on a spike in front of the Supreme Court. When the kids have had enough, they will bond with old radicals, like myself, and we will go to war. I expect the next two elections to make that convincing argument.
10
Yeah. Let's just replace the term "conservative" with "fascist" and send out Democrats to call at least 50% of the American voting population "fascist."
Or better yet, a new slogan: "Vote Democratic, you fascist!" That ought to result in a Democratic landslide.
1
The barricades are calling
Despair is the characteristic of resignation and failure. It's time to get angry, good and angry. Changes are not won by politeness or civility, they are won by hard words and tough action, by carrying that anger further than the enemy. And the enemy in this scenario is the side that's sidling up to dictators, imprisoning asylum-seekers, caging kids, wrecking American businesses, destroying American credibility and values in the world. And all for the sake of what? One attention-seeking narcissist? Despair? Hell no! Livid, perhaps.
6
I certainly agree about recommendations 1 and 3: Democrats must be realistic that the chances of preventing any but the most incompetent or egregiously ideological nominee are non-existent, especially since they gave up the long-held weapon of the filibuster to advance their own nominees. And choosing our battles is always good strategy: hair-on-fire jeremiads for any and all disagreeable proposals by Republicans rapidly lose their effectiveness, and make the stronger issues of healthcare, unfair taxation, and corruption look weaker.
But the second suggestion -- not to lose hope -- seems naive and parochial. Yes, conservatives began building their assault on the Supreme Court and the judiciary more widely in the 1970s, in response to decisions they did not like. And I suppose that if we started now, we might see some results by mid-century. By that time, this senior citizen will have gone to his grave, frustrated that reactionary, mean-spirited, cruel policies that I thought had been laid to rest in the 60s and 70s had zombie-like reawakened to terrorize Americans yet again. And while it is all well and good for a New York columnist to opine that future SC decisions may outlaw abortion in parts of the country, they can't do it everywhere. Just what will you say to poor women in my state who cannot get the care they need here, or afford to travel to New York? And note this term's decision that allowed California anti-abortionists to lie to women who are pregnant.
4
The Democrats should stop promoting liberal progressive candidates like the recent Ms. Cortez or they certainly will have reason to despair. They should have learned from the recent presidential loss to President Trump that they must move to the center if they want to gain new voters and have those that left return.
They need to become a more moderate party and not just one for the coastal elites. They neglected an entire portion of Americans and they paid a very heavy price. They lost elections. They should learn from their past mistakes and not take any voter for granted. They have too much at stake.
5
WHAT did the dems promote here? Ms. Cortez was a come from behind candidate who won by her own efforts. There are things to be learned here but not what you are saying.
2
Huge red wave coming this November.
What feckless Democratic strategists don't seem to get, is that making wedge issues front and center, is terrible strategy.
From NYT's Thomas Edsall:
"The problem for those calling for the enactment of liberal policies, however, is that immigration is a voting issue for a minority of the electorate.[top issue for 13%] And among those who say immigration is their top issue, opponents outnumber supporters by nearly two to one. In this respect, immigration is similar to gun control — both mobilize opponents more than supporters."
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/02/16/opinion/the-democrats-immigration-...
Before you can enact policy, you need to win.
Traditional FDR New Deal economic policy positions are big *winning* positions among voters - particularly swing voters:
- More than 70% of voters support a higher minimum wage.
- More than 80% of *Republican* voters support Social Security - let alone swing voters.
- Workers are alarmed about decades of big trade deficits.
The *minimum* wage of 1969 would be over $19, adjusted for productivity growth and inflation instead of $7.25 today. What did Obama do about that?
Obama tried to cut Social Security.
TPP? Since US workers had no seat at the table - even our legislators were given very restricted access to TPP drafts by the lobbyists involved in writing and negotiating it - you can be sure that workers were on the menu.
Again.
Big changes needed if Dems want to win in 2020.
9
Elections do have consequences. Democrats need to realize this is the case and organize and work to win them at every level not only nationally. We continue to hear that 2018 will be the most important election of our lifetime. The most important election? The real answer is and will always be the next one! Nothing can be gained by litigating the last one. Nor is anything to be gained by saving energy for the next presidential election.
School board elections matter, local mayoral and council elections count, county and state legislative elections matter; the local, county, and state prosecutor, water control authority, and agricultural commissioner elections matter. And, of course ballot initiatives, congressional, and presidential elections matter and have consequences.
So what to do? Be sure you are registered. Work to register others. Be informed on the issues and candidates ... ALL of them ... every issue and every candidate for every office. VOTE! Volunteer to take others to the polls or help them get mail-in ballots. Talk to people, knock on doors, make phone calls. Care enough to do something!
All elections have consequences and the most important one will always be the next one. Don't despair, don't whine, and don't hide! Work to make a difference for whom and what you care about.
6
I often agree with Leonhardt, who is smart and usually cogent in his commentary. Here he sounds like a weak liberal, postponing the struggle for a later date. McConnell snookered us by refusing the Garland vote and moderate GOP and Democrats assented to let Trump replace Scalia w Gorsuch.
Leonhardt writes as someone with little to lose, yet the next conservative justice may overturn much “settled law” such as Roe v Wade. I disagree with him about Senators Collins and Murkowski—I think they will see this vote as substantially different than the Gorsuch one.
Shouldn’t we ask as much of Democratic Senators? With the support of the party they should be able to make the case that a court in radically conservative hands for perhaps the next 40 yrs isn’t healthy. What does it mean to be a Democrat? Before the Civil Rights Movement and the War on Poverty--almost a lifetime ago--for many it meant supporting segregation in the unreconstructed South.
2
Of course the Democrats will make the Supreme Court nomination about abortion. This has been a hot button issue for sometime now and this is not going to go away anytime soon. We have been reading about the pro life/pro abortion debate just about every week in the New York Times and other liberal media outlets.
Some states have even been chipping away at abortion and have been placing stricter restrictions on those who want to get an abortion. Pro abortion folks see the writing on the wall and are afraid that Roe v Wade will be overturned if not immediately in the near future. This has been the Democrats platform and they have been so concerned since more conservative justices have been elected to the bench. They talk about a woman's right to choose as though this was the only policy that mattered. To them it is and to have it taken away would be devastating. Of course, it would not be for the many babies who would be spared the gruesome and barbaric death from abortion.
The Democrats have reason to worry about the lessening and eventual death of roe v wade. This is what the pro life people have been working towards for years now and it may actually happen. It will be glorious when this does happen. Our efforts will not have been in vain.
A woman's right to control her own body--just like men do--is a fundamental human right. Controlling her fertility--yes, the Evangelicals will go after birth control too--gives a woman a much greater opportunity to support herself economically. This is all about men trying to take away women's jobs and independence.
3
The chips will fall where they fall. The Republicans already stole and inserted an illegal conservative on the bench through the despicable actions of Mitch McConnell, how could it get any worse. I don't think our nation is ready to turn back the clock and revert to back alley abortions for the poor and discrete under the table abortions for the well to do. After getting a taste of equality, the LGBT community is not going to stand still for conservatives trying to shove them back into the closet. As to gerrymandering, with potentially more Democrats winning they can gerrymander their way into their own safe districts-- what goes around comes around. The genie is out of the bottle and the conservatives will not be able to put it back in.
2
For solutions to our problems, read Naomi Klein's" NO IS NOT ENOUGH". Resisting Trump's Shock Politics and winning the world we need.
3
Wouldn't it be wonderful if after a Democratic sweep in 2020 Garland and Obama were appointed to an expanded court?
2
Yes, Democrats should be thinking about the midterms. But not making the Supreme Court choice about Roe v Wade risks letting Collins and Murkowski off the hook by letting them vote for a conservative who can be even more destructive with health care, corporate power, voters rights, separation of church and state and, maybe even, the dismissal of the special prosecutor and the investigation into the Russian attack on our democracy. There are no easy answers here but only women's rights will put the spotlight on Collins and Murkowski.
1
Democrats need to remember that "all politics is local." An emphasis on local and individual issues, like infrastructure, healthcare, the environment and clean water, will go a long way in winning elections.
Our local party is putting most of its efforts into promoting our Democratic candidate for governor and encouraging party members to work actively for other candidates as well.
When we win local and state elections, we will have much more power on the national stage.
3
Instead of trying to push for more progressive activism onto the entire country, maybe Democrats should first fix places like San Francisco where progressive ideology runs amok and has some of the highest income inequality in the entire country.
Not everything conservative is wrong or evil, and not everything the progressives do is remotely good, despite good intentions.
11
Don't despair? I have been hearing variations of this theme for half a century.
Take heart. Anything that Republicans can break, Democrats can fix. However, nothing will be fixed by staying home during midterm elections or by casting protest votes for third party Presidential candidates.
10
I whole heartedly agree with your analysis. The Democrats cannot stop the Republicans from nominating and confirming a new Supreme Court justice. Not going to happen unfortunately. We can win in the mid-terms and retake the House. That is the fight of your lifetime, not the confirmation hearings which we cannot win.
19
Excellent piece! We can only hope that the Ds pay attention. David is spot on - social issues are not the major concern of the majority of Americans.
The Ds need to focus on the real key issues - and win the Fall elections. That is by far the bigger prize!
18
Well, now that we can clearly see that McConnell's stances were purely about power and not principle, maybe the Democrats can simply add more justices to the court when they have a chance.
3
Why did this piece not make me feel any better about the future of this country?
1
Why didn't this article make you feel any better? My guess is it is because you are a pessimist and are rightly horrified by the current state of politics in this country. But try to look at the glass as being half full rather than half empty. They are both valid judgements - its just that one is based on hope, the other on despair. Your choice.
1
The only honorable thing for senators to do is to demand that the president nominate Barack Obama's choice, Merrick Garland. This may seem extreme, and certainly not something that Donald Trump would do on his own, but Mitch McConnell's action that preemptively killed advice and consent on Garland was one of the most dishonorable governmental acts in the history of our nation.
34
That’s a non-starter. It was a lousy and dishonorable thing to do but it is done. How about we pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off and look forward.
3
The right wing erosion of the Warren Court was made possible by a serious LBJ mistake - the nomination of Abe Fortas to be chief when Warren announced his retirement. Fortas was a great judge, but had baggage that allowed right wing attacks to derail the nomination. So Fortas resigned. With Warren's retirement, followed by the expected departures of Harlan and Black, Nixon quickly had four seats to fill. That was the beginning of the end. It will take much longer now to fix what will be the most right wing Court since Taney.
1
It all comes down to this phrase:
"Democrats fall in love, but Republicans fall in line".
4
So, no despair. How about disgust?
5
How about we all stop relying on Courts to win political arguments and instead organize to win elections? Pass clear laws that describe the society we want to live in? Laws passed by duly elected legislators, perhaps? That way, Judges can get back to focusing on the law itself and not have to manufacture outcomes to suit constituencies who are upset about having lost electorally. Of course, that would mean NYTimes readers would need to believe in the constitution again, the separation of powers, checks and balances, and the rather foundational fact that we live in a Federal Republic. So...probably won't happen.
12
You lose you otherwise merit-worthy argument by the partisan blame of NYT readers for the current state of affairs. Separation of powers & checks & balances work well in the context of diverse parties &/or distribution of power among the branches of government. Polarized, single-party, extremist rule undermines all the best intentions of the constitution writers. If "NYTimes readers" had any power, we wouldn't be here. Kinda like the "Deep State."
1
REDMAP, the Republicans secret plan to control the statehouses and US House was created to withstand a blue wave. Of course, it doesn't help that the establishment Democrats seem to be so inept at winning elections. The next two elections will prove to the left what the uninvolved 39% who don't vote already know: voting doesn't work against gerrymandering. Then, perhaps we can see the revolution that will finally be necessary to return this country to a democracy or create a bare-knuckle oligarchy that treats the constitution as a joke. It is, you know, if we do nothing.
Actually, this is time for countering despair.
Oh yes we can.
The only reason we haven't yet is we are all so thrown by the antisocial art of war style assault on our culture.
But hey, I bet a lot of you are starting to acclimate o this new high tide drama filled bully culture we somehow created - actually, I know how...you do too - we need to create a prosocial culture...it's not just gonna happen by it's self. There is no "other" getting you out of this mess. There is no there, either. And sure, if you wanna live in a world run by the people who are somehow compelled to experience dominion over others and collect power, versus a world where power is distributed and leadership focuses more on collaboration than domination, stay isolated. Meanwhile, the few of us so compelled to do something with also no interest in violence or feeling good by kicking others, we needs to get together and build our resilience. We need to connect across our platforms of care. You know what I mean? We need to network. I recommend we adopt a college peer based resiliency building practice, where we meet in small, story telling groups and build resilience, build diversity, build critical thinking skills, a sense of belonging, and broader world views. Let's unite, through tiny peer groups around the country - the world - and use evidence based practices that unite us and drive volunteerism. Hey Trump grasp what a thousand points of light is.
7
Thank you for this. When some of our anti-Trump side seem determined to alienate those we need to win over by harassing and screaming at the enemy, it is encouraging to read a mature and effective plan.
13
I agree with the article about where the focus should lie - local and state house elections. The "50 state" strategy. However, the Republicans keep having success with their old play book - harping on wedge issues, and appealing to fear and hate.
Karl Rove used gays, guns, Defense of Marriage, pray in school, etc. Trump rallies: the Dems want to take away your guns, Mexicans are rapists and drug dealers, they are stealing job, all Muslims are terrorists, Roe v Wade, etc. It's the same play book that the willfully ignorant fall for, as they are convinced to vote against their own interests.
Until that ignorance and manipulation is addressed, and people are persuaded they are being played, the Republicans, along with big money, will keep on winning with this strategy.
2
I always begin my LifeInThisAdministration day with your weekday emails, thank you. Today, you quote Theda Skocpol saying the left-center has to unite. This nation—and this is still a young nation, not an aging one—has been skewed so far right that our mean has really passed reasonable conservative. The left is truly fragmented.
But yes! Unite! Here is why we are not united:
First, when Hillary looked at the DNC, it was penniless. That is corruption and neglect. The leadership went soft in its comfort zone of tranquilizing gradualism, slowed by corporate donation. Triangulation failed. No corporate donations. My Senator Harris has rejected what David Hogg has rightly called BRIBES. Follow her lead.
Second- you write: "They simply will have to do so in a small-d democratic way, by winning elections." I'm smiling at the Captain Obviousness of it all. In fact, they won Bush v. Gore and Clinton v. Trump in the popular vote. They never stop snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. To this day, corporate Dems will fight harder against the Progressive movement than they will against Republicans. I have YET to see them do anything but purge Progressives and insult them. Unite by reaching out to Our Revolution, Justice Democrats, Sum of US.
Joe Crowley was in charge of MESSAGING. That says it all. Oprah! Give us our OWN FOX!
People respect conviction. Rather than pitch and craft to the polls, why not just do what's right. How would that be.
8
Might be worth pointing out that in 2016 there actually was 'a bottom-up progressive movement to counter a conservative Supreme Court' - & much else.
Numerous entities, including the Democratic National Committee and the New York Times, ensured that it could not succeed.
It was called the Sanders campaign.
63
You are darn right about that!
'Bottom-up' lost by 3 million votes in the primary.
GET. OVER. IT.
Unfortunately, if you ask most Americans about being involved in government, you will hear “I’m just not interested in politics”.
That is the foundation of the Republican corporate takeover of the US government,
The only real hope comes when things get bad enough for enough people for them to get out and vote.
Not a great state of affairs.
35
The dangerous implication of waiting for that, is that the vote may be gone, manipulated, suppressed, even tainted before this change comes.
1
"The only real hope comes when things get bad enough for enough people for them to get out and vote."
Exactly. So where is Mueller? Where are Democrats in the media? What are Democratic plans for jobs when we are already at low unemployment with modest tax cuts for the middle class? What is the viable plan to get good jobs, wages, and benefits back for the average person?
Things are not bad enough yet. Democrats may make modest gains, but they won't be enough this November. Trump and his GOP enablers will continue to get the green light, and it will go on as long as it has to. How long that will be is anybody's guess.
Eventually, the center will not hold, things will fall apart, and Democrats (as the only alternative) will be back in power. They will work to "fix" things (social issues, balancing the budget) until voters don't like the pain anymore (and Democrats continue to be incapable of selling themselves), and then another Trump-like creature will return. It's an endless vicious cycle.
Maybe the U.S. has passed a corporate/greed tipping point, and we will never get past it. No one has said the U.S. will last forever.
It's beyond voting now. You should prepare, like me.
It does little good to model what Democrats must do after how the Republicans gained power. It took them 50 years. We don't have 50 years.
For the average American, winning political campaigns is mysterious. We get these robo-appeals for money, and perhaps, TV ads. These are not convincing opportunities for participation.
This is particularly true for Democrats who live in safe Democratic districts. A lot of local organizing, held up as the new solution, already has been done. The trick is how to export it effectively without turning it over to the robo-marketers.
For example, I don't see organizations like Red to Blue, a statewide effort to flip Republican Congressional seats, organizing people to go door-to-door in neighboring districts. All I see are emails from Act Blue.
As for issues. The problem is that Trump controls the media agenda, and the media, as always, sets our agenda. Local issues are pushed out of consciousness by national ones.
Nationally, Democrats need to be problem-solvers, to oppose the great problem-creator.
They should list he major problems and concrete solutions for each, along with a contract to enact them, no matter the lobbying. Crafting the solutions is crucial. They must fall between the banalities of establishment Democrats and the logical but idealistic proposals of those further left. They must be enough of a change to make a big, real difference, but also be clearly workable.
Then we need leadership to achieve unity.
8
Mro Leonhard: Actually, what you're saying is that Dems need to emphasize economic issues, & the fact that Trump hasn't delivered in that area, rather than so-called 'liberal', identity politics issues. The reason that the latter rather than the former are emphasized by 'new' Democrats is because they are, in fact, as dependent on banksters, CEOs
of mega corporations & the interests of the military industrial complex as are the Republicans.
13
I largely agree, but to suggest that Democrats should downplay the social issues as non-winners - in spite of consistent support by the American people, including for abortion sights - is part of what led us to this day. We never mounted a well-argued, reasoned fight against the "pro-life" zealots, allowed them to frame the argument on their terms. They have never been with the majority opinion, shouldn't be allowed to claim that mantle now.
5
Except for Leonhardt, the Editorial Board occasionally, Blow, and Krugman, and occasionally Thomas Friedman, the Times has been tepid. Their public opinion leadership has been taken over by CNN.
Good thing the fate of the nation does not rest the way it used to do with the NY Times, because the tepid response of the Times--reportorial and op editorials would leave the US vulnerable to sever deterioration of democracy.
Times does not realize what we are up against. Or is not providing leadership
3
Liberals may have no reason to despair, but the rest of us do if the Democratic Party Establishment takes power again any time soon.
If Obama's 8 years in office are any indication, it would mean a return to the willful neglect of the domestic economy and American workers in favor of globalist plutocratic interests. Abroad it would mean a return to the ferociously destructive neocon/neoliberal interventionist regime-change chicanery we saw in Libya, Syria, and Ukraine. Moreover, the Democrats’ blood feud with Russia over the absurd accusation that it is kept HRC from mounting the throne poses a serious threat to world peace.
18
The level of delusion in that post are beyond response. By all means, let's blame Obama & ignore Putin's creeping takeover of our policies & our elections.
5
Think: 2020 census. We may have lost the battles (two!) on SCOTUS. But, the bigger battle, if not our chance to change the war, will be the census in 2020. This is why the 2020 election takes on importance well beyond just giving djt his eviction notice. It means Congress and state governments in which the day to day battles are fought. And, as your article rightly notes, this is why a grassroots movement building takes on even greater importance -- and immediacy.
8
The 2016 election was a lesson. Don't let the perfect get in the way of the good. Those who were not enthusiastic about Clinton and either stayed home or voted for someone else gave the presidency to Trump. Second lesson: elections have consequences and we now have Trump picking a justice who could turn SCOTUS balance and he has the possibility of choosing again. The impact could last for decades.
Of course the analysis here is correct. The Dems have to organize from the bottom up with a credible campaign not only to retake the House and Senate in the midterms, but also to retake state legislatures and governorships across the country. They have to reaffirm their commitment to bread and butter issues that matter to working class and middle class Americans: the economy, healthcare, retraining for a knowledge economy, and holding Trump accountable for all that has transpired during his tenure.
So, less angst and more action. Organize voter registration. Work for local candidates. Use the midterms as a base for the infrastructure needed for the 2020 campaign. Do not be baited by the GOP to defend extreme positions. Take the offense in challenging Trump on his record and ethics. Last time too many people allowed the GOP and Trump to win without taking the long view as to the impact of those wins. Think strategically and win. There are many of us outside the US who cannot do anything about this and wish we could.
8
But let's be clear: The extreme position on abortion has been on the right. Even if you think Dems have been too resistant to some limits, the right has been absolutely rabid in attacking reproductive rights, even stretching to contraception.
3
Sorry, Judy.
Democratic's backed/pushed the wrong candidate. Again.
Read the article and tell me who's campaign it resemble.
But it is becoming clearer that the lesson of '16 has yet to learned, implemented or sink in.
Yes, do think strategically and win. Repeating the agenda, with the same players is not strategic. Yet it is the 3rd way, establishment game plan for decades now.
1
I agree with you. I was referring to some other things that have come up like abolishing ICE which the GOP has translated to completely open borders.
Progressives are playing checkers while Republicans are playing chess. The more "socialist" democrats get elected, the more middle America will move center-right.
Progressives are led by Hollywood and Entertainment Media and they're not interested in small-d tactics.
4
I sorta favor democracy. You've succeeded in seeming to be opposed to both small-d and uppercase-D.
5
Baloney! Republican government at this time is anything BUT center-right.
3
It is looking more and more like the 2018 election will either be a draw, or slightly in favor of the GOP.
If the Dems want to compete, they'll have to think through their program more carefully. The existing system needs to be drastically reformed, but the Dems are paralyzed by the affluent professionals who control their party - and society. Radical reform would threaten their power.
Given the Dems' unwillingness to consider reform, the GOP platform looks relatively more attractive to blue-collar workers and the middle class. They are starting to pick up some blacks and hispanics, threatening the Dems' base. At the same time, the gentry liberals are getting uneasy about the proposals and actions of the progressive wing.
The economy and immigration are the major issues. In the short term, the GOP may get the upper hand on these, and have a surprising degree of success. That would send the Dems back to the drawing board, trying to come up with proposals that would satisfy their constituencies without alienating anyone.
12
Funny how CEO's and those making millions a year or more aren't on the radar for attacks by progressives. Instead, you say all the problems are the fault of affluent professionals. CEO's and billionaires control this society, not affluent professionals. If the Democratic party wants to throw out professionals, we'd be happy to vote for an independent, like Mike Bloomberg. I am not a socialist, I'm a Democrat who hailed from an old time, blue collar, midwestern, lunch box Democratic family. I wanted a different life and went to college, thus becoming an enemy of the people, I guess. Now I live in Vermont where progressives load town hall meetings to vote for "free" stuff. " Free" private school tuition, for example. Guess who pays extra for that? Everyone who already chips in more than their fair share in taxes. All the rest of us pay more so off the grid, underground economy progressive parents- who do not pay their fair share to begin with- don't have to pay anything. Makes my blood boil. I'm all for stronger unions, better wages, but am no fan of give away programs. Neither were my FDR loving parents who worked for everything they had. I guess you and I will both be happy if Bloomberg runs as an independent. You get rid of our loathsome professional votes, and we get a chance to vote for a pragmatic leader.
2
What is it about the GOP platform that should appeal more to blue-collar workers? I think your characterization of the direction things are taking & Americans' positions on issues may be skewed by your news sources.
1
@MadNana - I get my news from the NY Times. They have been reporting on factories and businesses in the midwest having trouble finding assembly-line workers and truck drivers, even at high wages. Like it or not, the industrial rebirth is associated with Trump, because he is the cheerleader for it.
Long overdue, this admirable call for a return to democratic principles. The Democratic Party has in the last several months of state nominations and special elections cleared out some stiff Republicans who were supposed to have benefitted from our Mad King's campaign appearances on their behalf. Starting with the defeat of Tea Partyer Ray Moore many months ago, and Pennsylvania's nomination votes, and Beto O'Rourke's surprising poll numbers in Texas against incumbent Senator and Salem witchunter Ted Cruz -- all of it leading up to Ocasio-Cortez' victory in NYC -- the more serious Democrats are making themselves felt, even if most media try to stay away from covering Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. Sooo.... Democrats have got to move left, now, where they've been successful. That move would only be toward the center of modern and successful democracies that already provide housing and training for the poor, healthcare for all, and real jobs in fields other than the military and tourism.
Offer us a real choice and we'll overwhelm the voting booths.
22
I wish there had been more comments to David's good, but perhaps simplistic column.
If we are ever to dominate in places besides NY and CA, we must tone down the rhetoric. Sen KG from NY played right into the GOP hands when she kangaroo courted Al Franken out of the senate. Needlessly weakening the democratic caucus without a care to the baloney being spewed by women with GOP credentials. Now that same mouthpiece is saying to shut down ICE, and the GOP has seized on this as if it is the platform of the Democratic party, for which she speaks not at all. They will use this as a slogan to beat vulnerable dems. Liberal Californian here-- crying inside over trump's kidnapping of kids-- but still desirous of very strong immigration enforcement. The democratic party needs to embrace the 4 freedoms of FDR and become the party of workers again. Period. Talking about transgender bathrooms has never gotten the dems a single vote: here in CA we do not care what bathroom people use, so we vote for a Democrat because we are aligned with their total vision and values. But in the mid-west, they most assuredly do care, and thus no democrat should die on this or any other marginal petard.
Finally-- the dems must acknowledge they do not have a propaganda machine to the scale of FOX news. And once in power, dems must legislate the heck out of a politicized FCC which has been a loyal handmaiden to fox for over 20 years.
47
Fox News is a cable provider, and these are regulated much more lightly than over-the-air broadcasters, who get to use public airwaves in exchange for certain behaviors. (The only FCC-engendered cable regulation I can think of off the top of my head is constraints on commercial loudness with respect to program material, which was made possible by a specific act of Congress known as the "CALM Act.")
Even if Fox News *were* an over-the-air provider, I would strongly oppose any regulation that attempts to weaken its First Amendment rights. In this case, "regulating content" (which the FCC does not do for over-the-air programming except for obscenity, indecency, and children's programs) goes to the heart of the First Amendment because it would give the government power to regulate political speech it does not like. Anyone with a passing knowledge of history knows that this is the first thing that happens in budding authoritarian regimes.
The correct response to content you don't like: don't watch it! Broadcasters and cablecasters are highly sensitive to ratings and audience share, and these are constantly being measured by Nielsen and others.
2
Agree completely. Democrats must be strategic now. It is not “a perfect time” to engage issues like abolishing ICE or establishing free college tuition. There should not be a dramatic move to the left — the population doesn’t support that. Pushing for it now is not brave, it’s lazy.
9
We are an aging nation, the majority of Americans want to feel confident that they or their loved ones will be able to afford the medical care they may need in the future without being at risk of losing everything they've worked for. The Democrats need to be the party that commits to ensuring that ALL Americans will be covered, its a winning platform.
68
"We are an aging nation" yes with a declining birth rate and a decline in immigration. That does not bode well for the health of the nation.
You are so right. I am 62 and my biggest fear is that Social Security and Medicare will be gutted by the time I am ready to collect.
The singular focus on Trump's pick for the Supreme Court, and other issues that seem to arise out of thin air every passing day, is taking us away from what you note in your concluding paragraph:
Nothing in American politics matters more right now than the outcome of the midterms.
What is needed, right now, this very day, this very week, are strong democratic candidates for President of the U.S. to declare their intentions to run for this high office in the 2020 election.
These democratic leaders need to go to state by state, and publicly, directly lay out the strong case for why democratic leadership is needed to take over both the executive and the legislative branches, and why they need to be the torch bearer for this democratic wave.
There is significant angst right now with Trump at the helm of our government. Much of this angst will find a vehicle in the strongest democratic leader we can find right now.
This democratic leader is out there if they get their message in order, and work hard to get that message out.
For the good of our country, and for the sake of the world, be bold democratic leaders!!
Take This Guy On!!
15
We had the person who could has beat Trump, Sanders. Unfortunately, the Clintons & 'new' Dems'
(liberal, Republican lite) owned & still owns the Democratic party. Taking that into consideration, the political future in the US looks pretty bleak.
3
What we need right now is a younger version of Sanders. Like an American Trudeau, more or less.
Liberals have won the culture wars while Republicans play fast and loose with ethics and morality to squeeze out what they can as their party dies from within.
Your final prescription - vote, is right, but I don't think it's especially accurate to say that the progressive strategy to this point is wrong-headed.
11
Infringing on the voting rights of African Americans? Please keep singing that tune. It's been a proven electoral farce, MAGA!
5
Really? Where's your proof?
http://www.brennancenter.org/publication/challenge-obtaining-voter-ident...
It should never be forgotten that most (not all) of the last 5-4 decisions would have been different had Al Gore and more recently Hillary Clinton been president. We would not have Citizens United ruling because that was a 5-4 decision where the 4 were all justices appointed by Democratic presidents and more recently the Muslim ban and public union cases broke along the same lines as have so many more. You cannot claim to care about getting money out of politics or stopping gerrymandering and then not vote for the Democratic candidate. Those things are incompatible.
5
Gore lost because he refused to be allied with Mr. Infidelity, which Gore thought, wrongly, Americans were enrage about it, when actually, most of us simply thought it was fun entertainment. Hillary is a different matter. By 2016 many Democrats cared as much about economic justice as liberal values & Hillary obviously didn't fill the bill.
4
One areaof this article that goes without saying, is for Democrats to become the Congressional majority again.
Accomplish that, and stripping the Emperor of his new clothes will certainly be far easier, and will definately show, once and for all, that Trump is not only an "empty suit," but an empty head, as well.
6
Would be nice.
But rich, greedy people are most the highly motivated, and know how to get people to vote against their own best interests by stoking fear and hate.
The Republican Party is a business.
They have betrayed the country to enrich themselves, and now, all three branches of our government are basically corporate entities.
It will take a nearly impossible movement to right this evil.
Many governments have succumbed to the power of greed.
I hope that I am wrong.
45
The Democratic party is a business too. It simply caters to a different style of consumer.
1
"But rich, greedy people are most the highly motivated, and know how to get people to vote against their own best interests by stoking fear and hate."
Certainly they are stoking fear and hate on the Republican side. Nevertheless, your initial premise is wrong. There is no evidence that rich people are more highly motivated than others.
My own experience is that often it is the opposite. I know a number of middle-class people who are putting their money--and energy--where their mouths are. They are volunteering full-time for the Democratic Party, even here in SC, a blood-red state. One couple even bought another car so that they could both volunteer.
2
I have watched this progression to fascism for over 40 years. Americans, like Germans in the early 20th century, have gradually surrendered. I have watch citizens try and rebel: in Michigan, ballot measures to bring democracy back have been tagged with a budget, where none was necessary or required so that the state legislature could kill the measure in committee. They violate the 1st amendment and nothing is done.
Sadly, the rich think they've won. They haven't. We are one supreme court decision or law from a rebellion. Sure, Trump can put 30% of the population against us. Sure, the police and army may fight for these rich --- maybe not. Perhaps we crush the fascists and the rich scurry away one step ahead of the noose. Perhaps they wind up like Donald Trump: dreaming of the past in some attic apartment in St. Petersburg. We can only hope now, that democracy can flourish again. That we can beat the tyrants and their powerful backers. We can hope.
If not now, when will it be time for despair?
8
A little too late, Mr. Leonhardt. The progressives should have come out and voted for Clinton instead of wallowing in hate/disappointment over Sanders.
34
Actually, they did. Not enough to win in the electoral college, but the large losing popular vote in history.
1
Alternatively, the DNC could have gotten out of the way and run an actual primary instead of an attempted coronation of HRC.
We Bernie supporters *did* vote for HRH. She won the popular vote by around 2.8 *million*.
I've read estimates that 80 to 90% of Bernie primary voters pulled the lever for Hillary. What do you want?
2
The 58% of the American people who oppose Trump must not dispare; they must actively support, give money to and vote for all democratic candidates on Nov. 6, 2018.
51
Regarding the upcoming SCOTUS nominee "fight", the are no good scenarios. Should this nominee not be confirmed, then what? Maybe the Dem's take control of the Senate (by one seat!?) will Trump's next pick be voted down too? Are the Dem's waiting for Trump to be impeached? That may not even happen. Thre reality is that the power of the executive is to make appointments to their own liking. The mistakes were made in 2016 & will be lived with until 2056.
3
Are you suggesting the approval process should be a mere rubber stamp of the choice of the president's "own liking"? If so, what's the point? With polarization, the outcome may be fixed, but that doesn't mean a fight of good conscience is not valid, or even necessary .
1
Yes, people will have to look to their states and local governments, but the federal government is hard at work undermining that ability by transferring all wealth to a very few people. So blue states, which have always paid higher state taxes which serve local interests and, by the way, support the red states, fared poorly under the recent tax law, which now limits their ability to keep the feds from seizing a greater share of taxes and may thus make it harder to maintain necessary state services. And there is virtually no chance to elect enough democratic senators to override a presidential veto of new laws designed to reverse the damage already done. So the federal government may again grind to a halt, jeopardizing the democrats' ability to succeed in 2020. While my state is progressive and responsible, it is not immune from federal interference. I really am in despair, I can only soldier on, work hard and vote, hoping against hope for some return of sanity to Congress.
11
It's funny. I'm Canadian. I generally lean conservative and understand why people want to uphold the status quo. But as a Canadian, when I look at the 'progress' we've made compared to the US:
-Strict Gun Control
-Universal Health Care
-1 year long Maternity leave (with some government Top-up up to nearly 30K a year or a % of the salary), now up to 18 months but payment stretched out.
-Much cheaper prescriptions, with the State covering if your income is low
-Much more balanced/funded public school system
-Acceptance/tolerance of many different sexual orientations, gay marriage, wanting peace and happiness for all without discrimination,
I would definitely be Liberal to achieve these basic things that make life in Canada very much equitable to its citizens.
169
natrix88
Part of the reason is that large swaths of the Canadian people are not convinced that the federal government is their enemy.
Here in the USA too many citizens appear to want to return to the Articles of Confederation, whereby most states are on their own. They have been convinced to denigrate the value of social contracts--including infrastructure repair of roads and bridges, upgrading rail systems, universal health care, and national efforts to aid in job retraining. Big corporations have the money and inclination to work against the common good, for the sake of cheap labor and profits to a small group of citizenry.
4
And you have succeeded in avoiding paying the costs of your own self defense, simply by depending on the US taxpayers to take care of you.
1
The need for Democrats to focus on grass-roots coalitions was apparent to some astute analysts long ago. Below is a quote from political theorist Michael Walzer, over 30 years ago:
“We have won victories far beyond our political base—and this over a very wide range of issues. Civil rights, school integration, school prayer, affirmative action, criminal law, capital punishment, prison reform, electoral reform, abortion, pornography: in all these areas, with only the partial exception of the first, victories have come not because of the political strength of the left but because of the persuasiveness of its lawyers. The case of the right has been exactly the opposite. Whereas we have won in court, again and again, and failed to build a movement, they have lost, again and again, and organized outside... committees, alliances, even single-issue parties, at local as well as national levels: an extraordinary proliferation of groups, which participatory democrats might well envy.”
Conservatives have also expanded their advantage in the lower courts--not just at the level of SCOTUS. The "best and brightest" from elite law schools--whose aid has been purchased by wealthy corporate constituents--have turned that court system to the advantage of those who were willing to pay. Yet no matter the influence of big money, our citizens--due to ignorance and/or cynicism about the importance of central government--allowed this to happen. There are no quick solutions.
6
Very well written. The column provides guidelines and encouragement to Democrats. Sanity, substance, and creative solutions to problems such as healthcare, education, and our future economy need to be positioned at the forefront.
64
Agree. Secure policies are popular policies, and popular policies emerge through a democratic process--not by judicial fiat. Abortion rights would be more secure today if they had been fought for more painstakingly on a state-by-state basis.
18
Of course you're correct in your analysis. Here in NYS among longtime registered Democrats there is at present only one issue of consequence, and that is to defeat the members of the State Senate who make up the renegade so-called Independent Democratic Coalition. Capturing effective control of the State Senate is the key to control, and control is what politics is all about. Everything else is fluff.
6
Another issue Democrats could use is the whole sale dismantling of environmental protections occurring under republicans since Reagan. Most sensible people realize we must have regulated industry to protect the envrionment. I hope.
131
Probably the best written column I have seen in the NYTimes for a long time.
It should be must reading for liberals.
One way to generally sum up what you wrote is to get what you need not what you want.
Right now liberals need to protect fundamental progress that will have made in this country that a majority of citizens want not social engineering projects that most of the country is not for but what liberals want.
459
Paul,
Totally agree. Perhaps another way to phrase it is that the liberal leaders in *Congress* want social engineering projects but liberals in the *country* differ. I see it as need to change the leaders of the party - too old and are ossified.
3
Paul, I generally agree with your comments but am wary of your use of the phrase "social engineering projects" which sounds suspiciously, perhaps inadvertently, like the "dog whistle" phrases sent out to to the Trump Base. It also sounds like the frequent false equivalency of the "far-right" and "far-left." Has the left really moved that much? Perhaps these days more liberals are in favor of universal health care (as is the rest of the world) or and in favor of some controls/restraint on financial laissez-faire, only to protect the country and the Wall Streeters from themselves. I know we as a people tend to quickly forget, but is 2007-2008 really that long ago?
BTW, perhaps you or someone else could specify exactly what these social engineering projects are. The phrase is also reminiscent of the old argument against civil rights laws that we can't legislate morality, If that's true, why are the old Confederate states still fighting so hard to weaken these laws? Somehow, I think the left and right are pretty close to where they've been for years.
7
"Over the last half-century, conservatives have put more energy into building a movement — creating ideological institutions, grooming judges and, perhaps above all, winning local, state and congressional elections."
Give the GOP more credit than this, their funding plutocrats have also made the decision to achieve their goals through propaganda based on lies and tribal hatreds- essentially using weapons that people of conscience cannot use- but nevertheless, highly motivating.
However, your advise is good. Conservatives want the argument to be about abortion because this glues an essential element of their base to the GOP, even if they disagree on every other Republican issue.
I wish Democrats would say that murder is defined by society and if the majority of citizens believe a fetus to be a citizen, it is time to consider protecting them as such, but that means all are culpable including the mother.
The actual power in the GOP is not dealing with even this issue honestly, framing opposition to abortion in a way that makes doctors the villains and women the "helpless victims". In what other crime are women treated as children like this?
What is wrong is when a minority enforces their moral views on a majority and claims to have the right based on their closer relationship to God.
Any tyrant can claim to have God on his side.
835
And most tyrants do.
It makes their evil beyond question, at least theoretically.
Most people create “god” in their own image to give legitimacy to their evil.
A perfect example being “Christians” whose beliefs are totally the opposite of everything that Christ taught.
Bizarre, but all too common.
7
As long as the Democratic Party continues to have no discernible position on immigration other than "Abolish ICE" or "We're all immigrants" any November landslide is starting to recede as we speak. Even most Democrats I know, myself included, want to see some order, control and numerical limits of the immigrant flow into our country, but the Democratic Party leadership appears afraid of alienating the open border advocates for unknown reasons. Why continue to let Trump define the Democratic position in his hostile rants? It's a losing position.
1
Lee Marshal, I'm a Democrat who doesn't want open borders (although a reasonable temporary non-citizen work program would be helpful). However, anyone who would vote with the current Republican party because they feel so strongly about sealing the borders, no matter how cruelly it is done is not someone I want to be associated with the Dem party. At this point it is hard for me to understand how anyone could stand with a leader who is clearly a psychopathic sadist. I honestly believe he relishes inflicting pain on others.
"Some Democrats will be tempted to turn the next two months into a national conversation about abortion, affirmative action and other social issues that inspire liberal passion."
No. Democrats want to run on the issue of open borders, abolition of ICE, the police and the military.
Good bye blue wave.
Hello red tsunami.
51
Please take a moment to look at polling. Or keeping believing a 'red tsunami" is coming which is quantitatively impossible and ridiculous. November is going to be a cruel mistress to you.
When did the police and the military get folded into this? Lemme guess, you heard it from someone on the radio...
Name me a senator who has called for open borders. Name me a senator who has called for abolishing the police. For abolishing the military. Start naming names, or sit down and stop spouting propaganda.
A very level-headed approach to countering the conservative Supreme Court. If Democrats become a left-wing extreme party from a policy point of view there is a high probability that the current administration remains in power. I agree that focusing on key issues like health care and the new tax legislation affords an opportunity to rally leftist, moderates and independents for the upcoming election. Then add the obvious current administration corruption as the "icing on the proverbial cake", should provide Democrats with the potential to control Congress going forward.
55
The only way the Democratic Party is going to regain its majority status is to end its obsession with responding in-kind to Donald Trump and the Republicans, ignoring them, avoiding wasting energy on losing propositions and passionately embracing a navy blue, progressive economic justice agenda that addresses America’s gross wealth and income inequality gap that has left hardworking Americans stuck in the moribund middle and lower classes behind. Our liberal social issues are important and should be sold to America, but in a gentle manner over time as they often deviate from the values of Americans in the heartland. We must put the pursuit of living wages, better pay, secure jobs and basic income front and center.
123
I think a number of elections where the Democrats had success have shown what the path to success is and it is relatively simple. Stick to the issues the voters are concerned about and offer solid plans for how to move forward. Issues like health care, education, gun control, infrastructure, better wages, taxes are all issues voters care about. In small d politics potholes matter. Fix the potholes. Raise the minimum wage. Make our schools and neighborhoods safer with commonsense gun control. Provide good education for all. Support health care for all. Ranting about Trump or the Supreme Court doesn't help.
109
Yes, but it would help if the Democrats connect the dots to how Republicans have worked and are working to dismantle anything that helps working people. They want to get rid of regulations and safeguards to health, safety and economic security and want to get rid of any social program put in place by FDR.
2
"Make our schools and neighborhoods safer with commonsense gun control."
How do you enact such legislation at the state and local level if Trump's SCOTUS will find such laws "unconstitutional" when they are inevitably challenged by their buddies in the NRA?
Part of me agrees with Leonhardt.
But as a middle-aged woman, I have to say that this piece is rather man-splainy. Don't tell me to take a deep breath and not talk about abortion or race. Most of the women that I know are sick to death of white male pundits and political consultants telling us how to maneuver.
Many women I know are in the middle of a prolonged primal scream. Don't tell me that it wouldn't be prudent to discuss immigration or the degradation of the planet.
These are emergencies. We need to be vigilant and get as many people as possible to the polls. But get outta my way if you think that we should do and say what we've always done and said on these issues that are vital to women and families.
88
"We need to be vigilant and get as many people as possible to the polls."
Just remember, it doesn't matter if we achieve 100% DEM voter turnout in NY or CA. The GOP will still have its majority based on all the swing states.
We need to focus on swing voters in swing states, places like OH and western PA. We need to be supporting DEM candidates who appeal to the people in those places. That's the ONLY way we'll win back Congress and be able to put some brakes on Trump for the next 2 years. If we can accomplish that then we have at least a chance at victory in 2020.
1
For these reasons, electing women to office at the local, state, or national level is the name of the game. We have the talent! We just need to elect that talent, and if the choice is not there, we need to elect men who understand women's issues.
For women's issues are issues of caring. Caring for families, for the environment, for others. The caring for others piece is how women's issues can parallel and also embrace other social issues.
Women have also been running households forever. This means that women's issues include economic issues. We keep the checkbook.
So, yes, I agree that Democrats would be smart to ask economic questions and justice questions and constitutional questions of the nominee at the hearings and not get sidetracked by social issues. Here's a justice question--how would the nominee handle the separated children, especially the littlest ones, at the border? As Ghandi once said, "A nation’s greatness is measured by how it treats its weakest members." I am sure we will learn quite a lot.
2
Cousy - May I suggest, if you are sick of "man-splaining", that you may save yourself some heartache by simply not reading Op-ed pieces written by men? The NY Times offers many similar articles written by women. So you won't really be missing much.
Personally, I like articles that go beyond asking questions or pointing out problems and move towards possible solutions and strategies. But if you feel that is someone telling you "to take a deep breath", then it's probably safest to stick to articles written by women.
Regarding the various issues you raised, immigration, degradation of the planet, issues vital to women and families - It seems to me our immediate focus needs to be on winning back Congress and that is done seat by seat, NOT on the basis of a national agenda. This is where the adage "all politics is local" comes into play. I believe we Democrats need to set aside our macro-concerns for the moment and focus on the micro, on the issues that concern voters in each individual district. In this way we can win the individual districts and regain an overall majority. At that point we can actually accomplish some of our macro-concerns.
My 2 cents.