There's a lot of talk now about how Democrats need to draw some lines around support for sorta fringe positions of aligned interest groups. Josh Marshall and mistermix weigh in a bit.
I think the overall point is the old chestnut "If you're explaining, you're losing." Really obscure positions like transition surgery for prisoners on the tax payers dime is one of those positions. Ideally, we would have aligned interest groups set reasonable expectations for candidates. The 2020 primary was not like that.
There are two caveats I would add:
1) Marshall mentions how same sex marriage could very well have cost Democrats the 2004 election. There's some evidence it cost them Ohio and thus the presidency. However, what happened with same sex marriage is that it became marriage equality. There is a need to step up and protect vulnerable populations. The best way to do that is to frame the argument in universal language. Surgery for trans prisoners ain't that. "Be nice to people and let them alone" is something normie voters can get behind - whether it's creepy abortion politics or Nancy Mace's bill to bully our first trans Representative.
2) The issue is only a little bit of that one clip of Harris affirming her support for the surgery. Most people are not interested in nuance. This is where her being both a woman, a Black woman and from California all worked against her. She "codes" coastal liberal, which is why she spoke about her Glock and a lethal military.
As we've discovered, "messaging" is the problem, but it's not because we lacked a magic combination of words. We lacked an avatar of working class angst. The fact that Harris came from a middle class family and Trump the scion of great wealth does not matter.
No comments:
Post a Comment