Tepid Takes #12: Endless Re-Litigation at the End of the World

In the wake of this morning's declaration that it's Mueller Time, many folks across the various social media platforms I've extricated myself from (but logged back into because band stuff) are salivating like eager little truffle pigs. Others are still in despair mode, anticipating the latest unconstitutional gambit from a President known for them and a complicit congress. I personally think that as things ramp up, more Republicans will jump ship; not because they possess any sort of moral fortitude, or care about the republic, but because their big gambit hasn't proven legislatively useful. The potential radioactivity of covering for a President who is not only hopelessly corrupt but largely incompetent will likely lead a lot of them to back away, hands in the air, whistling.

Still, what does this all mean for Democrats, and the larger Left, moderate-to-far? Frankly, not a helluva lot unless "we" get our shit together. And at local and grassroots levels, I think there's a lot to be hopeful about. But as 2017 has at times sped, and at others crawled, forward, the initial Moment of Unity has all but dissipated. Instead, you have Tom Perez purging the left flank of the Dems from many official positions in the party. Twitter, a medium I've excused myself from because, frankly, I wasn't helping, is basically a hammer fight between Dems who supported Hillary and those who supported Bernie.*

Much of this was spurred on by What Happened, a tome whose very existence spurred endless controversy. For the record, I hold these three semi contradictory opinions:

1) Hillary had every, every right to write that book. Many of the "she should just disappear" people are the ones who jumped down her throat two days after she didn't weigh in on Harvey Weinstein.  For many, there's a perverse fascination that turns every issue into a referendum on Her. It's stupid, and unless you want to have a lot in common with Newt Gingrich, you should fucking stop.

2) Jesus fucking Christ could the timing have maybe been a little bit worse? COULD YOU HAVE SPECIFICALLY PLOTTED IT OUT SO YOU COULD DO MORE TO DAMAGE THE PARTY YOU STROVE TO LEAD? The book could have come out on the year anniversary, or two years later, or  after the 2018 midterms, or maybe just any time besides six months later. As such, it re-cast the terms of the Dems as H vs. B, instead of a coalition finding its mission statement.

3) I didn't read it. I spent the last six years of my life in Seattle's Literary Scene, so the number of out of touch, classist, self righteous, "liberal" patricians I've met is uncountable. I voted for Her and told others to  vote for her, goddammit, but reading a whole tome of H Eat Pray Loving her way out of the guilt of handing America over to Fascism because she hired tech bros and robots to run her campaign. . . well.

That said, the clips from it that bothered me weren't the ones where she talked about Bernie Bros-- that's basically what her fans are paying to read. It's the red meat. The clips that bothered me were, in fact, more policy based, and more telling. When talking about the hardships faced by rural communities and small towns, her basic take is "We need to create more opportunities in the Cities, so the kids can move." It confirms the Right's talking point that Liberals Don't Care About You Unless You're Rich and Hip**.
If you're not already sick of the topic read A Wonk on the Wild Side. It's the most thoughtful critique of the book by someone who's actually. read. it. that I've seen. Admittedly, no one at The Baffler is gonna be too sympathetic to someone who goes to the Hamptons to relax.*** But Lehman shows a remarkable sympathy towards the human being, while examining the policies and ideas that got us here.

Because this didn't start in 2016. Dems didn't hemorrhage house seats in 2010 because of Hillary Clinton. Dems didn't lose most of the governorships across the nation because the Bernie Bros sabotaged them. It wasn't Russia that flipped the Senate in 2014. There has been a rot in this party for years, but said party still remains the most viable political options for people who give a shit about other people and want results, instead of just stickers. As Mueller circles his wagons, and Republicans start to shed their faux loyalty, Dems need to figure out what to do and fast-- because the world is on fire.

And I'm pretty sure there's something worse than Donald Trump out there, waiting.

*It's stupid that I have to, but I think my next one of these Tepid Takes will be a run down of my Complete Opinions About Bernie Vs. Hillary. 
**It's a sign of the right's sickness and sadism that "hip" can also just mean a Person of Color, or Gay, or Trans, etc. That when Dems are defending the rights of poor black people, the right casts it as some sort of Hollywood Stunt. This doesn't mean, however, that the Rich part of the equation can't be examined or that Dems shouldn't get smarter about messaging.
***The next person who whines about "reverse classism" or "that's ALSO discrimination" can put their head through this nice little wooden collar I've made for them. . .

Tepid takes is a new series of occasional, usual anecdotal musings a few days to months after the fact, usually around politics or social issues, for when a status update or series of tweets simply won't suffice.

Tepid Takes #458: Ossoff and You and Everyone You Know

A few weeks have passed-- or months, not sure, the world's been busy-- since Democrats most recent soul-crushing shock defeat in a race they were sure they could win. Indeed, this was just one of three elections in areas that haven't voted blue in decades that Democrats had confidence in winning because some of these voters who never vote Democrat Don't Like Donald Trump That Much. Of the three, Jon Ossoff's race was seen as the closest, polls had him ahead at points. But if you're reading this, you probably know the whole story, and there's plenty of dialogue, much of it profoundly unconstructive*, about What It Means, How Could We Lose, etc.

Honestly, while Moral Victories mean jack shit electorally, the fact that Dems could run competitive races in historically red (who picked the colors anyway?) areas is a legitimately encouraging sign.

One of the arguments I keep seeing is that if Rob Quist or James Thompson had had the sort of massive financial backing that Jon Ossoff had, they'd have won their respective races. I think this is entirely plausible, but hardly a given. Still, let's accept that premise for a second-- that with funding equivalent (even equivalent to half of) the Georgia race, we'd have two new Democrats in office, and the beginning of a Grand Populist Wave on the Wings of Bernie. The embittered argument tends to be that the Democratic Establishment is hell bent on keeping a tight fist around the party, and that a hatred of true progressivism, as well as crony capitalism, has hopelessly corrupted the DNC.

I think the real answer is far simpler, and a little more depressing. Dems** are more invested in winning over moderate suburban Republicans than historically Democratic working class counties is because suburban Republicans are their peers. These are their people. College educated home-owners who take at least one international vacation per year, these are folks they know how to talk to. When Chuck Schumer claimed that for every out-of-work rust belt worker who they lost, they'd gain moderates in the suburbs, he wasn't just espousing dubious political strategy, he was expressing the subconscious hope of a party that just simply doesn't know how-- and increasingly hasn't cared--  to talk to anyone they couldn't see themselves at a dinner party with. They want the votes of people their kids are going to private school with. Folks for whom student loans, health care, rising rents are social concerns, rather than personal ones, so all the arguments can be removed and civil.

This isn't nefarious, or evil, or even unusual-- it's a pretty normal trait to want to associate with, reach out to, and commiserate with people you have things in common with. It may be the most clumsily, sadly humanizing thing about a party apparatus that ignored urgent pleas from people on the ground in favor of data-models and is more likely to source from Tech or Wall Street than community organizers. I get it-- I'd rather hang out with my fellow jaded bartenders and musicians than pretty much anyone who works for the Democratic party. And maybe I'd go my way and they'd go theirs, and I'd trust them and all their vastly reasonable logic if it was working.

But it's not.


(*my favorite question is "How can we more effectively tie people to Trump. Let's make this state/local election a referendum on Trump." My my. If ONLY THERE HAD BEEN SOME ATTEMPT TO DO THIS ON A NATIONAL SCALE. If only we had some way to gauge whether running a negative campaign against Trump is effective. SADLY NO SUCH TRIAL HAS OCCURRED, SO WE BETTER JUST KEEP BAGGING ON TRUMP.)

(**Dems here refers largely to the funding/donor class, and many of those currently holding national office. Not the little old lady who volunteers after church. Feel free to comment with examples of the working class Dem Senator with a history of protecting workers rights; but do know that yes, I know they exist. And that there's a range of grassroots campaigns in the works or underway that are potentially transformative, etc etc)

Tepid takes is a new series of occasional, usual anecdotal musings a few days to months after the fact, usually around politics or social issues, for when a status update or series of tweets simply won't suffice.