New York Times columnist David Leonhardt has that most voters perceive the Democratic Party’s stance on immigration as”more is good, less is racist.” Of course, not all Democrats actually think that, but it's a fair encapsulation of the impression that they give voters. This impression arises because Democrats do express sentiments along those lines quite often and quite forcefully. The left also occasionally criticize other members of the left who even toe-touch the idea that open borders are a lousy idea.
When it became apparent to Democrats that lax border enforcement became a political liability for them, they deviated. Given all this, it's not unfair for voters to have formed the impression that Democrats’ immigration stance was more is good, less is racist. So Democrats changed their stance and their messaging.
Lately there's been a lot of discussion about Democrats and messaging over trans issues. The most effective ad of the political campaign was on the issue: Kamala Harris is for they/them, Donald Trump is for you.
“You’re a Bigot” Isn’t a way to Answer Voter Concerns
Congressmen Tom Suozzi and Seth Moulton laid out some ideas for answering this line of attack. Their core suggestion could be summarized as, "Let’s actually answer the line of attack." When this was misunderstood, they clarified further: "Let us not avoid answering this line of attack." For this they were further attacked. Moulton got order of magnitude more blowback than Suozzi , because as I laid out in my interview with the Moulton, members of Congress from Massachusetts typically do not face electorates that require them to appeal to Republicans or potential Republican voters, whereas New York Democrats often do. (I Congressplain Congress to the Congressman starting at 13:41 below)
If voters perceive the Democrats’ stance on immigration as “more is good, and less is racist,” they similarly perceive the party’s stance on transgender issues as “any expansion of trans expression is always good, and any restriction is inherently transphobic.”
Congressman Seth Moulton was saying “maybe we just need to talk about it in a different way, or any way at all.” However, many within the party—and in its media allies—interpreted Moulton, Suozzi, Colin Allred, and others as trying to placate bigots by addressing the issue alltogether.
Their Votes are 100% Pro-Trans People
In 2023, Representatives Seth Moulton, Tom Suozzi, Colin Allred, and all other House Democrats voted against a bill that sought to ban transgender girls from participating in girls' sports. Moulton affirmed that he would oppose such legislation again and anticipated that his Democratic colleagues would do the same.
It is not the role of the federal government and sports bodies to have to make the decisions about games being played on the local level. Such matters should not be dictated by Washington bureaucrats—a point one might expect your average Republican to agree with. At the same time, ignoring the valid concerns of parents and competitors or relying on inaccurate talking points, such as claiming there is "no evidence" of competitive advantage, is equally problematic. Yet according to MSNBC’s Jen Psaki and others who criticized Moulton’s comments, even acknowledging the concerns of most voters seems unacceptable.
See, Donald Trump and the Republicans have managed to amplify their bad faith attacks to the point that people do have concerns, as misguided and misinformed those concerns may be, and this is a good time for Democrats to self-reflect about what went wrong and what to do better moving forward.
Sometimes it seems that every conclusion that a voter arrives at, if it doesn’t align with the Democratic platform, must be a consequence of misinformation. By the way, I don't think it's necessarily a disingenuous concern. I'm not attributing any qualities of undue sincerity to Donald Trump, but I know that lots and lots of parents genuinely have at heart the best interests of girls sports, and worries about changes in the participation pool are often based on actual facts.
Transgender people absolutely deserve government policies that protect them in the workplace, in housing, and from physical harm or harassment of any kind. It’s unfortunate that Democrats couldn’t focus their political capital on securing these critical protections. In fact, those goals have been set back, with Democrats losing the presidency and seats in the Senate.
During the campaign, Democrats often spoke to voters in ways that failed to convey genuine understanding. The however “misguided and misinformed those concerns may be” parenthetical seemed ever-present, and voters heard it loud and clear.
Democrats should acknowledge that there are many downsides to stupid, broad, sweeping government edicts. They should note the many upsides to allowing trans kids to pursue extracurricular activities. At the same time, they should also recognize that when fairness safety and scholarships are at stake, it is legitimate to be concerned. A good politician might say, “We are all trying to figure this out in the least cruel way possible. ” Then that good politician will add, “But I do hear you and I hear your concerns.” Good politicians instinctively know to say this. They want to say it. But as the lesson of Rep. Moulton demonstrates many within the party are intent on penalizing those who do.
Share this post