Mediaboss Marketing

Has Joe Biden chosen ambition over political sustainability? Photo: Doug Mills/Getty Images

One striking phenomenon that has surfaced since Joe Biden took office is the contrast between the audacious legislative agenda that the new president and his congressional allies are implacably advancing and the anxiety that so many of them (but decidedly not Biden himself) are expressing about their narrow escape from defeat in 2020 and the probable rough electoral sledding ahead. Even as Congress accomplishes things unimaginable in the Obama administration, Democrats keep fretting about the lost opportunities that the expected 2020 landslide could have given them, the traction that many fear Republicans are obtaining with their anti-wokeness crusade, and the baleful history of midterm elections that have shattered the plans of new administrations.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy told Punchbowl he figures there is a direct connection between the political anxieties of congressional Democrats and their audacious legislative agenda:

Majorities are not given, they are earned. This is not like 1994 and 2010

[Y]ou had to win 40 seats in 2010 I think everybody knows the majority is in play. So the reason why its different, the majority is in play. In 94 and 2010, at the beginning of those years, they didnt believe the majority was at play in the nation. I believe it is, and the Democrats, I think, believe it is too; thats why theyre going so far left, knowing that theyre gonna lose it.

So basically, McCarthy is charging that Democrats are shooting for the moon in 2021 because they understand that their governing trifecta is fragile and will likely end in 2022. Its a hostile, self-serving hypothesis but nonetheless worth considering.

Any governing party implicitly has to balance, if not choose between, the goals of implementing its desired policies and of sustaining its power by positioning itself to win future elections. Ideally, of course, such parties hope their legislative priorities are popular enough to serve as a future campaign platform. Democrats who understand how ambitious their current legislative agenda is are particularly encouraged that it is polling well so far. And as New Yorks Jonathan Chait has observed, Biden himself has adopted a presidential style that downplays the audacity of the legislation he is promoting, which helps get it enacted while giving the opposition fewer ripe targets.

But at some point very soon, Democrats may no longer be able to avoid a choice between accomplishments and political sustainability. Even if they are able to keep big policy proposals on issues like climate change, police reform, or housing supply from becoming politically fraught right away, they must take into account how they may play into Republican messaging on socialism, wokeness, or class warfare. Do they hold back on legislative audacity, then, in order to maximize the odds of hanging on to Congress in 2022 and the White House in 2024? Or do they move ahead as quickly and ambitiously as they can and hope for the best? Id offer four pretty compelling reasons for continuing to shoot for the moon.

Thanks to where 2020 left Democrats in Congress, a screeching halt to their legislative progress is no further away than an unexpected death or the resignation of a single senator, a decision by one senator that going rogue is in her or his self-interest, or an adverse ruling by the unelected Senate parliamentarian on the ability of Democrats to move a major item via the budget-reconciliation process (as has already happened on the $15 mimimum wage and will probably happen soon on immigration reform). Enacting as much legislation as possible before any of those setbacks occurs could be critical, justifying any and all political risks.

Similarly, the Democratic margin in the House is so small that it may be impossible to sustain against the overwhelming historical precedent of midterm losses by the party controlling the White House especially since Republicans will have the upper hand in the decennial redistricting process, which is about to get under way.

If the Democratic trifecta is too weak to rely upon or is doomed anyway, why not get as much done as possible and hope for good luck in 2022 and 2024 and perhaps even better luck down the road?

The idea that pulling legislative punches will improve future electoral outcomes may be a vestige of a bygone era of swing-voter hegemony and plausible bipartisanship. Its not clear exactly who in the electorate will award Democrats for moderation in fully pursuing their policy goals. To put it another way, no matter what Biden and congressional Democrats do, McCarthy and the conservative-media machine are going to accuse them of going so far left. That was the great lesson of the Obama administration, in which every conciliatory gesture simply gave the GOP incentives to radicalize its demands and ramp up the volume of its protests against alleged Democratic extremism.

It also offers an alternative interpretation of the relative disappointment of Democratic underachievement in 2020. Instead of neurotically looking around to see which woke or socialist pol gave Republicans the opportunity to shriek about the terrible consequences of Democratic power, as many Democrats are doing now, it may make more sense to recognize that the Donkey Party can do nothing short of surrender that would undermine such messaging. The Republican base is clearly in a state of cultural panic that has little to do with the specter of the Green New Deal or the Iran nuclear pact or anything else Democrats say or do. Sure, Democrats can try to lower the temperature of political conflict as their chill president is doing, but they may as well use their current leverage as not. Joe Manchin will ensure that they dont go hog wild.

Intense partisan polarization isnt the only feature of the contemporary political landscape that makes caution inadvisable for Democrats. Quite obviously, the coronavirus pandemic and its economic and social by-products built a highly conducive atmosphere for the Biden administrations first bold and theoretically risky venture, the American Rescue Plan. And even if the sense of emergency fades and Biden-esque normalcy begins to reign, there could be a significant residual appetite within and beyond the Democratic Party for legislative activism after four years in which the GOP lost its already minimal interest in solving problems through public policy and submitted itself to the chaotic, often pointless rage-based leadership of Donald Trump.

Theres a lot to get done, and, among those who arent fantasizing about a vengeful comeback for the 45th president, theres just one party offering much of anything. Scary as socialism seems to many Americans, nihilism is scarier yet.

As Ron Brownstein has convincingly argued, some form of voting-rights legislation may no longer be optional for Democrats if they want to remain politically viable in the short-term and long-range future:

If Democrats lose their slim majority in either congressional chamber next year, they will lose their ability to pass voting-rights reform. After that, the party could face a debilitating dynamic: Republicans could use their state-level power to continue limiting ballot access, which would make regaining control of the House or the Senate more difficult for Democrats and thus prevent them from passing future national voting rules that override the exclusionary state laws.

Its pretty clear Republicans understand that the power to limit ballot access for Democratic constituencies is something they need to exploit to the fullest right now. If Democrats demur from pursuing every avenue to preempt Republican voter suppression via federal legislation on grounds that its too partisan, the far more cynical GOP will have the last laugh, potentially for a long time. Loyalty to the young and minority voters most endangered by voter suppression should be enough to make voting rights job one in this Congress, even if that means risky tactics like filibuster reform. But it may also be a matter of political survival.

In general, this is no time for Democrats to be afraid of taking risks; like it or not, everything they do right now is risky business. The ancient arguments between progressives and centrists on the best way to appeal to swing voters are largely moot at this moment. They had best make hay while the sun shines.

Daily news about the politics, business, and technology shaping our world.

Go here to read the rest:
Democrats Are Shooting for the Moon in 2021, and Thats Okay - New York Magazine

The longtime Democratic strategist James Carville knows a thing or two about winning an election.

As the chief strategist of former President Bill Clinton's successful 1992 campaign, he helped the Democratic Party end a 12-year streak of GOP control of the White House.

In a recent Vox interview, Carville pushed back against suggestions from some Democrats that the party, no matter the consequences, should be passing its highest-priority legislation since it has control of the House and Senate.

Carville spoke of Sen. Joe Manchin, the moderate West Virginian who opposes axing the filibuster and has called for more bipartisan cooperation on President Joe Biden's proposed infrastructure bill, in arguing that the party currently has a limit for what it wants to pursue.

"The Democratic Party can't be more liberal than Sen. Joe Manchin," he told Vox. "That's the fact. We don't have the votes."

House Democrats have passed a raft of legislation praised by progressives, including the sweeping H.R.1. voting rights legislation as well as the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act, but both bills face resistance in the evenly-divided Senate.

Many Democrats, fearing their agenda will get bogged down by gridlock, have sought to end the filibuster, but Manchin and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona have so far resisted such calls.

Read more: Prosecuting Trump does not look like a DOJ priority under Biden's attorney general. But watch Georgia and New York.

Instead, Democrats should use every opportunity to hammer the GOP about the Capitol riot on January 6, Carville told Vox.

"Two of the most consequential political events in recent memory happened on the same day in January: the insurrection at the US Capitol and the Democrats [Sens. Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff] winning those two seats in Georgia," he said. "Can't overstate that."

He added: "But the Democrats can't f--- it up. They have to make the Republicans own that insurrection every day. They have to pound it. They have to get people towrite op-eds. There will be all kinds of investigations and stories dripping out for God knows how long, and the Democrats should spend every day tying all of it to the Republican Party. They can't sit back and wait for it to happen."

If the shoe were on the other foot, Carville said, the GOP would use the Capitol attack as a racially-charged wedge issue.

"Hell, just imagine if it was a bunch of non-white people who stormed the Capitol," he said. "Imagine how Republicans would exploit that and make every news cycle about how the Dems are responsible for it. Every political debate would be about that. The Republicans would bludgeon the Democrats with it forever."

He concluded: "Whatever you think Republicans would do to us in that scenario, that's exactly what the hell we need to do them."

Follow this link:
James Carville says Democrats 'don't have the votes' to be 'more liberal' than Joe Manchin - Business Insider

WASHINGTONSpeaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) is now leading the slimmest House majority since World War I, putting a premium on party unity as leaders this spring craft trillions of dollars of infrastructure and antipoverty legislation.

A handful of Democratic lawmakers have said they would try to block any tax changes proposed by President Biden that dont also restore state and local tax deductions. Others, including members of the outspoken progressive wing, are lobbying for Medicare expansion, longer-lasting child benefits and more spending to address climate change, although for now they have emphasized cooperation rather than issuing ultimatums.

The narrow margin gives each House Democrat an unusual amount of potential leverage. With the House split at 218 Democrats to 212 Republicans with five vacancies, Mrs. Pelosi can lose just two votes to pass legislation if no Republicans cross over. The number will become three after the swearing-in of Troy Carter, who won a special election in Louisiana over the weekend. In the event of a tie, legislation fails.

The $2.3 trillion infrastructure package outlined by Mr. Biden in March provides billions of dollars for transportation, housing and manufacturing, among other provisions, while proposing an increase in corporate taxes to pay for it. A second package, released Wednesday by the White House, focuses on education and antipoverty efforts, with a price tag of about $1.8 trillion, paid for by higher taxes on high earners.

No Republican support is expected for the spending plans as now laid out. The White House has held talks with Republicans on making changes to the infrastructure package, but it has said it is prepared to move ahead without GOP support if needed.

Read more:
Democrats Thin House Majority to Be Tested by Multitrillion-Dollar Plans - The Wall Street Journal

With roughly a month before they plan to complete the weighty task of drawing new maps that will determine the lines of political power for the next decade, Illinois Democrats say they have not determined what data theyll use.

Whatever that data is were going to use, we havent made that decision yet, Sen. Elgie Sims, a Chicago Democrat who serves as the vice-chair of the chambers redistricting committee, said Tuesday on Chicago Tonight while giving assurances that the drawing of district boundaries will be done in a transparent way.

The Republican spokesperson of the House redistricting committee, Rep. Tim Butler of Springfield, said the Republican Party has asked questions about what Illinois population data will be used during the redistricting process, but has received no answers.

We have huge concerns about what data is going to be used, Butler said, and whether it reflects truly the diversity of Illinois.

Typically, Illinois and other states would use information from the census.

But due to the pandemic and changes made by President Donald Trumps administration during a particularly embattled census enumeration process last year, the federal government isnt set to deliver the census results until August or September --- after the Illinois legislatures scheduled May 31 adjournment date.

READ:Illinois to Lose Congressional Seat as States Population Declines

State Rep. Will Davis, D-Hazel Crest, said the blame lies with Trump.

Wed be well on our way had the previous administration not done what it had done to delay this process and I think our objective is to try to pass something by May 31, Davis said.

An August or September arrival of the census data would also come after a June 30 deadline in the state constitution that would hand over map-making power from the Democratic-controlled legislature to a panel of eight lawmakers four Democrats, and four Republicans who would then have until Aug. 10 to approve a map on a bipartisan basis.

Video:Lawmakers weigh a ComEd rate hike nearly a year after a bribery scandal broke. Our discussion continues on that topic and more with state Sens. Sue Rezin (R-Morris) and Elgie Sims (D-Chicago); and state Reps. Tim Butler (R-Springfield) and Will Davis (D-East Hazel Crest).

Past that, Illinois constitution effectively leaves to chance which party gets the upper hand in drawing districts that could give its candidates an advantage in future political races: The constitution calls for the secretary of state to draw by random selection a ninth legislator to serve as the tie-breaking vote on the panel.

The constitutions drop-date is Oct. 5 for the map-making work to be completed.

Republicans accuse Democrats of rushing the process so they can maintain control and predict Democrats will use data from the American Community Survey (ACS) a survey performed by the U.S. Census Bureau thats done on a significantly smaller scale than the once-every-decade census.

As long as my colleagues across the aisle want to use the ACS as a point for drawing the map, this is not a fair map. ACS data is simply an estimate, state Sen. Sue Rezin of Morrisonville said. There should be no rush using this estimated data from the ACS.

Sims said its misleading to reduce the gravity of the June 30 deadline because its clearly delineated in the states constitution, he said, adding that if it gets the point that a legislators name is effectively drawn out of a hat, the result would be totally partisan.

He repeatedly committed to the General Assembly, in which Democrats hold supermajorities in both chambers, passing a bill containing a new set of maps before June 30.

If there is a map that the Republicans want to propose we certainly want to see it, but you cannot just say no, Sims said. We want you to be partners with us.

Republicans allege Democrats amassed those supermajorities in part thanks to the 2011 maps Democrats drew slanted in their favor and believe Democrats will again gerrymander districts with the next set.

The maps are being drawn by the party in control as we speak, Rezin said.

Trying to undermine Democrats plans for designing the 2021-2031 maps is the Republican Partys best chance for getting to control the process, by triggering the 50/50 name-out-of-a hat, last-chance option.

The high-stakes nature of the political gamesmanship and potential long-term consequences for races down the road has led various outside organizations to call for Illinois to remove any responsibility from legislators to draw their own maps, and instead leave that to a commission of independent residents.

Gov. J.B. Pritzker, at an unrelated news conference earlier Tuesday, signaled, in response to reporters repeated questions, that its too late for that option.

The legislature is working on the map for the next 10 years, Pritzker said.

As a candidate, Pritkzer responded to a 2018 survey by the political online forum Capitol Fax by saying that he would veto any map that is in any way drafted or created by legislators, political party leaders and/or their staffs or allies.

We should amend the constitution to create an independent commission to draw legislative maps, but in the meantime, I would urge Democrats and Republicans to agree to an independent commission to handle creating a new legislative map, Pritzker wrote. That designated body should reflect the gender, racial, and geographic diversity of the state and look to preserve the Voting Rights Act decisions to ensure racial and language minorities are fully represented in the electoral process.

On Tuesday, Pritzker recommitted to vetoing an unfair map while praising the last, 2011 version designed by members of his party.

As Ive said, I will veto an unfair map. Ive also said that in order for us to have an independent commission, we needed to have a constitutional amendment, something that would actually change the way the process operates today in the constitution. That did not happen. So now, as we reach the end of this session, I look to the legislature for their proposal for a redistricting map. Ill be looking to it for its fairness, Pritzker said. The map that was put together for the last 10 years started out with a very strong leaning toward fairness,

Pritzker also accused Republican legislators of not engaging in the current redistricting process, which has included dozens of legislative hearings in which members of the public have testified about their aspirations for future districts.

For the first time, the state also has a portal that allows individuals and organizations to digitally submit their own ideal maps.

I hope that Republicans will choose to work with Democrats on the map. Right now, it looks like theyre just saying no, theyre not really engaging and all theyre doing is fighting in these redistricting hearings, Pritzker said.

Republican Butler rebuffed the accusation, saying that hes been part of many of the hearings.

Even so, Butler said he has unanswered questions: Whether ACS data will be used, and what the process for citizen involvement will be once the maps are unveiled.

For the governor to say that were not coming to the table is ludicrous, Butler said.

The state learned Monday that it will lose one seat in Congress, leaving the state with a 17-member delegation to the U.S. House.

Expectations are that Democrats will design the new boundaries in a manner that leaves one of the states five Republican members of Congress without a district in which they could viably compete.

Illinois was one of only three states to lose residents in the past decade.

Still, Pritzker signaled that the early census results made public this week arent bad, considering the carnival barkers and critics who have bemoaned Illinois losing throngs of residents due to their frustration with Illinois political and tax climate.

There are many carnival barkers and people who have run down this state for years who have said, talked about, weve lost hundreds of thousands of people over the last 10 years. As it turns out its about 7,500 people, he said.

Pritzker said the states efforts to provide residents with health care, opportunities for job creation through new businesses, and scholarships and grants to attract and retain students are among the reasons residents are moving to and staying in Illinois.

Follow Amanda Vinicky on Twitter:@AmandaVinicky

Read more from the original source:
Democrats Committed to Remap in May, But Uncommitted on Data to Draw From - WTTW News

I called James Carville hoping to get his thoughts on President Joe Bidens first 100 days in office.

He obliged then, one question in, brushed aside the exercise to talk instead about why the Democrats might be poised to squander their political advantage against a damaged GOP.

His failure to cooperate may have been for the best since the first 100 days ritual can sometimes lead to dull, dutiful analysis. What Carville offered up instead was a blunt critique of his own party even after a successful 2020 election cycle a sequel of sorts to his fulminations during last years Democratic primaries. The longtime Democratic strategist is mostly pleased with Biden, but its where much of the party seems to be going that has him worried.

Wokeness is a problem, he told me, and we all know it. According to Carville, Democrats are in power for now, but they also only narrowly defeated Donald Trump, a world-historical buffoon, and they lost congressional seats and failed to pick up state legislatures. The reason is simple: Theyve got a messaging problem.

A lightly edited transcript of our conversation follows.

What do you make of Bidens first 100 days?

Honestly, if were just talking about Biden, its very difficult to find something to complain about. And to me his biggest attribute is that hes not into faculty lounge politics.

Faculty lounge politics?

You ever get the sense that people in faculty lounges in fancy colleges use a different language than ordinary people? They come up with a word like Latinx that no one else uses. Or they use a phrase like communities of color. I dont know anyone who speaks like that. I dont know anyone who lives in a community of color. I know lots of white and Black and brown people and they all live in ... neighborhoods.

Theres nothing inherently wrong with these phrases. But this is not how people talk. This is not how voters talk. And doing it anyway is a signal that youre talking one language and the people you want to vote for you are speaking another language. This stuff is harmless in one sense, but in another sense its not.

Is the problem the language or the fact that there are lots of voters who just dont want to hear about race and racial injustice?

We have to talk about race. We should talk about racial injustice. What Im saying is, we need to do it without using jargon-y language thats unrecognizable to most people including most Black people, by the way because it signals that youre trying to talk around them. This too cool for school shit doesnt work, and we have to stop it.

There may be a group within the Democratic Party that likes this, but it aint the majority. And beyond that, if Democrats want power, they have to win in a country where 18 percent of the population controls 52 percent of the Senate seats. Thats a fact. Thats not changing. Thats what this whole damn thing is about.

Sounds like you got a problem with wokeness, James.

Wokeness is a problem and everyone knows it. Its hard to talk to anybody today and I talk to lots of people in the Democratic Party who doesnt say this. But they dont want to say it out loud.

Why not?

Because theyll get clobbered or canceled. And look, part of the problem is that lots of Democrats will say that we have to listen to everybody and we have to include every perspective, or that we dont have to run a ruthless messaging campaign. Well, you kinda do. It really matters.

I always tell people that weve got to stop speaking Hebrew and start speaking Yiddish. We have to speak the way regular people speak, the way voters speak. It aint complicated. Thats how you connect and persuade. And we have to stop allowing ourselves to be defined from the outside.

What does that mean?

Take someone like Democratic Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Shes obviously very bright. She knows how to draw a headline. In my opinion, some of her political aspirations are impractical and probably not going to happen. But thats probably the worst thing that you can say about her.

Now take someone like Marjorie Taylor Greene, the new Republican congresswoman from Georgia. Shes absolutely loonier than a tune. We all know it. And yet, for some reason, the Democrats pay a bigger political price for AOC than Republicans pay for Greene. Thats the problem in a nutshell. And its ridiculous because AOC and Greene are not comparable in any way.

I hear versions of this argument about language and perception all the time, James. Its an old problem. Whats the solution?

Thats why Im doing this interview. Lots of smart people are going to read it, and hopefully they can figure out that which I cant. But if youre asking me, I think its because large parts of the country view us as an urban, coastal, arrogant party, and a lot gets passed through that filter. Thats a real thing. I dont give a damn what anyone thinks about it its a real phenomenon, and its damaging to the party brand.

Part of the issue is that Republicans are going to paint the Dems as cop-hating, fetus-destroying Stalinists no matter what they say or do. So, yeah, I agree that Democrats should be smart and not say dumb, alienating things, but Im also not sure how much control they have over how theyre perceived by half the country, especially when that half lives in an alternate media reality.

Right, but we cant say, Republicans are going to call us socialists no matter what, so lets just run as out-and-out socialists. Thats not the smartest thing to do. And maybe tweeting that we should abolish the police isnt the smartest thing to do because almost fucking no one wants to do that.

Heres the deal: No matter how you look at the map, the only way Democrats can hold power is to build on their coalition, and that will have to include more rural white voters from across the country. Democrats are never going to win a majority of these voters. Thats the reality. But the difference between getting beat 80 to 20 and 72 to 28 is all the difference in the world.

So they just have to lose by less thats all.

So what do you want the Democrats to do differently besides not having people peddle politically toxic ideas like abolishing the police? How do they change the conversation so that Republicans arent defining them by their least popular expressions?

Youre a strategist, James. I want to know what youd advise them to do. You dont have any complaints about Biden because hes getting stuff done. Hes putting money in peoples pockets. But the Democratic Party is a big coalition and youre always going to have people promoting unpopular ideas, right? Whereas the Republican Party is more homogenous, and that lends itself to a tighter, more controlled message.

Tell me this: How is it we have all this talk about Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Matt Gaetz (R-FL) and we dont talk about Dennis Hastert, the longest-serving Republican speaker of the House in Congress? If Hastert was a Democrat who we knew had a history of molesting kids and was actually sent to prison in 2016, hed still be on Fox News every fucking night. The Republicans would never shut the hell up about it.

So when Jim Jordan was pulling all these stunts with Anthony Fauci [Fauci was speaking at a congressional hearing about ending coronavirus precautions], why didnt someone jump in and say, Let me tell you something, Jim, if Fauci knew what you knew, if he knew that a doctor was molesting young people, he wouldve gone to the medical board yesterday. So you can go ahead and shut the fuck up. [Ed. note: Jordan denies knowing about the allegations of abuse when he was an assistant coach at Ohio State University.] I love that Congresswoman Maxine Waters told Jordan to shut your mouth, but thats what I really wish a Democrat would say, and I wish theyd keep saying it over and over again.

Can I step back for a second and give you an example of the broader problem?

Sure.

Look at Florida. You now have Democrats saying Florida is a lost cause. Really? In 2018 in Florida, giving felons the right to vote got 64 percent. In 2020, a $15 minimum wage, which we have no chance of passing [federally], got 67 percent. Has anyone in the Democratic Party said maybe theres nothing wrong with the state of Florida? Maybe the problem is the kind of campaigns were running?

If you gave me an environment in which the majority of voters wanted to expand the franchise to felons and raise the minimum wage, I should be able to win that. Its certainly not a political environment Im destined to lose in. But in Miami-Dade, all they talked about was defunding the police and Kamala Harris being the most liberal senator in the US Senate. And if you look all across the Rio Grande Valley, we lost all kinds of solidly blue voters. And the faculty lounge bullshit is a big part of it.

If youre a Democrat, you could look at the state of play and say, Were winning. We won the White House. We won Congress. We have power. It aint perfect, but it aint a disaster either.

We won the White House against a world-historical buffoon. And we came within 42,000 votes of losing. We lost congressional seats. We didnt pick up state legislatures. So lets not have an argument about whether or not were off-key in our messaging. We are. And were off because theres too much jargon and theres too much esoterica and it turns people off.

Not to beat a dead horse, but Democrats and Republicans are dealing with very different constituencies. Democrats have a big tent, they have to win different kinds of voters and that means making different kinds of appeals. Republicans can get away with shit that Democrats cannot.

Yeah, thats a problem. We can only do what we can do. People always say to me, Why dont Democrats just lie like Republicans? Because if they did, our voters wouldnt stand for it. But Im not saying we need to lie like they do. Im saying, why not go after Gaetz and Jordan and link them to Hastert and the Republican Party over and over and over again? We have to take these small opportunities to define ourselves and the other side every damn time. And we dont do it. We just dont do it.

Republicans arent just more comfortable lying, theyre more comfortable with slogans and sound bites, and thats partly why theyre more effective at defining themselves and the Democrats.

Let me give you my favorite example of metropolitan, overeducated arrogance. Take the climate problem. Do you realize that climate is the only major social or political movement that I can think of that refuses to use emotion? Wheres the identifiable song? Wheres the bumper sticker? Wheres the slogan? Wheres the flag? Wheres the logo?

We dont have it because with faculty politics what you do is appeal to reason. You dont need the sloganeering and sound bites. Thats for simple people. All you need are those timetables and temperature charts, and from that, everyone will just get it.

Thats not how the world works; thats not how people work. And Republicans are way more disciplined about taking a thing and branding it. Elites will roll their eyes at that, but Id ask, Hows that working out for you? Most people agree with us on health care and minimum wage and Roe v. Wade and even on the climate.

So why cant we leverage that?

What would you have Biden do to counter some of these messaging problems?

Id have him pick up a phone. Id have someone in the White House pick up the phone. And when someone in the party starts this jargon shit, Id call them and say, Were only a vote away. Our approval rating is 60 percent. We got a chance to pick up seats in 2022, and if you did this, it would be very helpful to us.

Are you sure those calls arent happening already?

Maybe they are, but they need to be more effective. And we need more of them.

Theres a philosophy on the left right now, which says the Democrats should pass everything they possibly can, no matter the costs, and trust that the voters will reward them on the back end.

Where do you land on that?

First of all, the Democratic Party cant be more liberal than Sen. Joe Manchin. Thats the fact. We dont have the votes. But Ill say this, two of the most consequential political events in recent memory happened on the same day in January: the insurrection at the US Capitol and the Democrats winning those two seats in Georgia. Cant overstate that.

But the Democrats cant fuck it up. They have to make the Republicans own that insurrection every day. They have to pound it. They have to call bookers on cable news shows. They have to get people to write op-eds. There will be all kinds of investigations and stories dripping out for god knows how long, and the Democrats should spend every day tying all of it to the Republican Party. They cant sit back and wait for it to happen.

Hell, just imagine if it was a bunch of nonwhite people who stormed the Capitol. Imagine how Republicans would exploit that and make every news cycle about how the Dems are responsible for it. Every political debate would be about that. The Republicans would bludgeon the Democrats with it forever.

So whatever you think Republicans would do to us in that scenario, thats exactly what the hell we need to do them.

See original here:
James Carville thinks the Democratic Party has a wokeness problem - Vox.com