Yes, as you might expect, this is a post about last week's elections, and the almost predictable Chicken Little response from the MSM about the future of the Democratic Party, the same sadly inaccurate response it always makes when Democrats lose any election. The one about crafting a better message, reaching across the aisle more, and, above all, working harder at chasing "suburban" (translation: white) voters because they're the only ones that matter, because they just so gosh darn swingy. Spreading this message for a living would surely be a sweet, low-stress gig, if you overlook the part about selling your soul and sending the future of your country down the river.
But, once again, I digress. Let's go back in time a little bit, say, back to the election last year that put Democrats in charge of the federal government, however tenuously.
I felt easy in my mind about the presidential race, not only because I was convinced that the majority of Americans were fed up with Donald Trump, but because Joe Biden had been smart enough to put Kamala Harris on the ticket. He didn't fall into the trap most white male Democrats fall into of thinking that his party needed lots of while maleness to neutralize the white maleness that is the Republican reason for existing. Rather, he looked at his party and saw it for what it has in fact been for decades: a coalition of races, genders, occupations, faiths, and orientations generally. He picked a running mate that reflected that reality perhaps better than anyone else could. And, wonder of wonders, it worked.
At the risk of electronically patting myself on the back, I knew that it would. This is why I felt a sigh of relief when Biden selected Harris.
And it is precisely why, when I learned that Terry McAuliffe had once again won the Democratic nomination to be governor of Virginia, I had a very different reaction. Something along the lines of "uh-oh."
McAuliffe first rose to prominence in politics as a prolific fundraiser for the Clintons, and then parlayed that success into a term as Virginia's governor from 2014 to 2017, a credential he used to great effect in being nominated a second time, with the backing of the Democratic establishment in the state. Virginia's election laws prevented him from serving consecutive terms, but not from running again. You can read more about the primary here.
In short, McAuliffe is fundamentally a money bundler for the establishment. He was able to make that work for him in part because, when he ran for the first time, Clinton Democrats were still firmly in charge of the party and its selection of candidates. But it is a much different story in a post-Barack Obama, post-Trump Democratic Party. Proof of that fact is that, this time, in the Democratic primary, McAuliffe faced no fewer than three African-American candidates, including the incumbent lieutenant governor. None of those three candidates could cement a hold on the voters, and McAuliffe won.
So the fall races for the three top executive jobs in Virginia featured the following: two white men running for governor and attorney general (with a Democratic incumbent), and two women of color running for lieutenant governor. Result: Two white male Republicans were elected, along with a female African-American Republican in the third race. (And good luck to Winsome Sears: as an African-American Trump supporter, she is certainly an anomaly, but one that bodes well for the future of African-American candidates in the Old Dominion State.)
And that's precisely the point.
African-American voters saw their loyalty to the Democratic Party unrewarded by the results of the primary elections, and stayed home. And, even in spite of that, McAuliffe, as well as Mark Herring, the current attorney general, lost by razor-thin margins, as did Hala Ayala, the lieutenant gubernatorial candidate, who might very well have won with more voter support, given Sears' identification with Trump. And, with respect to overall turnout by Virginia voters, this was the result.
And then, let's not forget this. I am 100% convinced that this played a key role in depressing African-American turnout, and I am shocked beyond words that I am almost the only person mentioning this on the Internet or anywhere else. That more media outlets haven't addressed this point is journalistic malpractice.
And then, there was McAuliffe's political malpractice, which manifested itself on several levels, and did not stop at failing to properly promote progressive accomplishments in Virginia. He failed to make any meaningful outreach to African-American voters, especially young ones, until his standing in the polls began to slip, thus reinforcing the view that Democrats only show up for voters of color when they're absolutely desperate. He let his Republican opponent, Glenn Youngkin, get away with his I-can’t-tell-you-about-my-abortion-position-until-after-the-election, which offered a road to impugning Youngkin's character and bringing up Trump without bringing up Trump. And he told parents of school-age children to go to hell when it comes to their education concerns. I'm as far away as you can be from being a book-burner, but public education would not exist without the support of parents, who do have a right to ask questions about what their children are being taught. In typing this litany, it's almost impossible to believe that McAuliffe managed to get elected the first time; he seems to have the political instincts of a pet rock.
And, finally, there is what lazy journalists always like to go for: the weight-of-history argument. To repeat it, in case you somehow haven't heard it, since the election of Jimmy Carter, way back in my college days, a new President from one party is promptly followed by new Virginia and New Jersey governors from the other party.
Except that there's a significant difference here. In 1993 and 2009, years after which Democrats replaced Republicans in the White House, Republicans picked up the governor’s mansions in Virginia by nearly 20 points, and in New Jersey by a smaller margin. This time, they lost New Jersey, and won by a squeaker in Virginia. Hard to see how that isn’t a major shift. Moreover, a split like this hasn't happened since Ronald Reagan's presidency. If facts are the foundation of our opinions, doesn't this make Biden the new Reagan?
Ah, but then I shouldn't have said finally. There is the issue of Mr. T, and I don't mean Sylvester Stallone's opponent in "Rocky III." We are now being told, again by the MSM, that Trump is no longer a factor. Youngkin has proved that you can win by being Trump without Trump, and that we can all sigh a deep collective breath.
Ahem.
Youngkin was shielded by Republicans who nominated him through a convention process rather than a primary system. This cut Trump and his cronies out of the action. I guarantee you that this will not work in all 50 states, especially once the not-too-stupid-to-be-corrupt Trumpies figure out how this can be used against them nationwide.
And the Big Lie strategy is still moving forward; it's now being utilized by Phil Murphy's opponent in New Jersey.
And skip the media focus on Virginia and New Jersey for a moment, and take a look at what just happened in what has hitherto been a very red state, but one which Democrats were able to flip and take control of the Senate. In fact, there's a whole slew of Democratic successes in local elections. And socialist successes as well, for those who need a post-Hallow scare (just kidding).
Call me crazy, biased, or a snowflake if you want, but anyone who thinks this shows the Republicans as being out of the political woods is, in my opinion, very much of an optimist. It’ll be interesting to see if Youngkin can keep Trump at bay for four years (spoiler alert: he won’t). As for Youngkin? He may not be able to keep Trump politics out of Virginia for long. If the Republicans end up taking control of the House of Delegates, as now seems likely, whatever "moderate" instincts he may have may not prevail for very long.
In one sense, the implication of last week's elections is less than what you’re hearing. I will, however, concede that, in another sense, it is more. Despite the foregoing thoughts, I will say that there are things for Democrats to take away from recent events.
First, there is the role of moderate-to-conservative Democrats in sabotaging their own party. Predictably, some of those folks have been out and about wringing their hands about the failure to have finalized the so-called bipartisan infrastructure before voters went to the polls. I agree with commentators who have said that doing so may have made no difference at all. But here's a related thought; how about having finalized the infrastructure bill AND Biden's Build Back Better social infrastructure bill? How about Joe Manchin's and Kyrsten Sinema's middle-of-the-road colleagues pressuring them (or buying them out, even) to help get both bills over the finish line? How about working as hard with members of your own party as you love to do with Republicans? As it is, I think that, if we can get both bills over the finish line, it will be a rising tide that lifts the boats of both the President and congressional Democrats of both stripes.
And Democrats need to counter Republican arguments about education, by conceding the role of parents in public education but also speaking out against the violence and racism that Trump supporters have used against school officials. Likewise, they need to counter Republican arguments about inflation and supply chains, by emphasizing the need to get everyone vaccinated, not just in the United States but all around the world as well. That is at the heart of current economic disruptions. And it is the only way to solve it. I am convinced that, if Democrats and their allies in the media go out and make that argument on a regular basis, it will carry the day and people will stop talking about mandates. They'll realize that the true mandate is to get American going by getting vaccinated.
But, other than these things, panic is the worst thing that could happen to Democrats. Panic can be just as deadly (if not worse) than staying the course. That worked for Reagan, why shouldn't it work for Democrats? More importantly, for all of us?
The Democratic Party, its leaders, and its elected officials, need to stop being afraid of power, and to start using it. Right now. If they do that, we'll all be fine. If not, next year, the election outcome will be many more Virginias.
Most of all, they need to stop being nostalgic for a white past. Today's Democratic Party is a party that transcends color and gender. Get over it, and get going.
No comments:
Post a Comment