By Jim Geraghty
Wednesday, November 04, 2020
At this hour, we don’t know how the presidential race
will shake out, but we know that this will not be the sweeping rebuke of
President Trump that Democrats wanted, and, in many cases, confidently
expected. That other
morning newsletter, from Politico, writes this morning:
TUESDAY WAS AN ABJECT DISASTER for
Democrats in Washington. To imagine the amount of soul searching and explaining
the party will have to do after Tuesday is absolutely dizzying. The infighting
will be bloody — as it should be. We fielded text after text from Hill
Democrats Tuesday night and early Wednesday morning with existential questions
about their leadership and the direction of their party.
Look, the GOP has its own share of problems. But when
Republicans have a lousy year — like 2006, or 2008, or 2018 — they generally
see it coming. Almost every time the Republicans have a good year, Democrats
get blindsided.
Maybe Democrats should stop assuming that they have
African Americans and Latinos locked up, and stop reflexively labeling all
opposition to any aspect of their agenda racist. Maybe they should recognize
that Americans of all races, creeds, and colors own small businesses or dream
of doing so one day and don’t see capitalism as an inherently cruel and unjust
system. As I discuss in today’s Morning
Jolt, maybe Democrats should realize “socialism” is not a winning message
among Cuban Americans, Venezuelan Americans, Nicaraguan Americans, and
Colombian Americans.
Maybe Democrats should look at the deranged accusations
against Brett Kavanaugh, and the claims that Amy Coney Barrett is some sort of
Handmaid’s Tale religious extremist, and realize that to at least half the
country, they look unhinged. Democrats are never going to be the pro-life
party, but maybe they can treat pro-lifers with respect and inch back towards
Bill Clinton’s “safe, legal, and rare” philosophy.
Maybe Democrats should speak up in defense of law-abiding
gun owners every now and then.
Maybe when people riot, Democrats should call it a riot.
Maybe when a city has been poorly run for a long time, Democrats should say so
and demand better results.
Maybe when a judicial nominee uses the term “sexual
preference,” Democrats should just gently say that term is used less often now,
and not cite it, ipso facto, as evidence of a verbal hate crime.
Maybe Democrats should see the coronavirus pandemic as
more than a simple morality tale about good and wise Democratic governors and
bad and foolish Republican ones.
Maybe Democrats should always acknowledge that there’s a
difference between legal immigration and illegal immigration, and that whatever
bad decisions U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement makes, the country must
enforce its immigration laws.
Maybe when a GOP president orders a strike that kills an
Iranian general responsible for a slew of terrorist attacks, Democratic leaders shouldn’t
denounce it as a “provocative and disproportionate action.” Maybe when a
Republican president gets Israel and some of its Muslim neighbors to establish
diplomatic relations, Democrats ought to give a genuine “attaboy!” instead of shrugging
that
he only deserves “a little” credit. You’re not going to lose any votes for
applauding your opponent’s genuine accomplishment.
Maybe Nancy Pelosi isn’t the best leader to have in the
House, and maybe Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez isn’t the best person to be the
party’s rising star, and maybe Chuck Schumer is not all that great as a Senate
minority leader. Maybe Democrats would be better off with a little more
spotlight on figures such as Amy Klobuchar and Andrew Yang and John Delaney.
They weren’t amazing presidential candidates, but they weren’t instantly
antagonistic to everything associated with the opposition.
Maybe the craziest thought of all is that perhaps
Democratic officeholders and candidates should interact with people who
disagree with them, listen to their arguments and how they see the world, and
see if they’ve had some wrong preconceived notions about the . . . er, deplorability of their political
opponents.
No comments:
Post a Comment