OK, so what can the Democrats do in return? How can they adjust public perception and create a rallying point?
Of your two options here:
- Sanctuary states (and pipelines to them) for trans people
- Overturning restrictive voting rights laws
I’d opt for #1. They’re both massively important, but if we pour resources into battlegrounds such as Texas and Florida that we don’t currently control, the GOP can pour resources there, too – and they have home field advantage. Whereas if we focus on making the states we already control safe for trans folks – and while we’re at it, anyone LGBTQ or seeking abortion – we can make it happen while the GOP can do little but stand back and fume.
Does it help us win nationally? Only if more people in purple states see what we’re doing and prefer it to what the GOP offers.
I would say they run on issues the public cares about and the Republicans are weak on. Gun control and abortion rights seem strongest.
At the same time, use their platform to introduce legislation that protects the vulnerable people, and do so while explaining why the laws are important. Talk about the real human cost to laws that take away a person’s choices and dignity.
The Republicans shape a narrative through being vague. Counter it by being specific.
…I mean, it really depends on whether or not you think the Democrats are capable of doing more than one thing at a time. It’s a war on multiple fronts. They can do other things to help them win nationally. They can do other things to win voters in purple states.
But they can’t just ignore this. Somebody has to step up to the plate.
If you mean things like say California refusing to turn over an individual wanted for the crime of soliciting, receiving, or providing gender affirming care (or abortion services) in Texas, a constitutional amendment is necessary to overcome the federal fugitive from justice clause (currently implemented by federal law at 18 U.S.C. § 3182).
When California passed its trans sanctuary law they were careful to only offer sanctuary for actions occurring in the sanctuary state (California).
The traditional concept of a sanctuary city is distinguished as there is no right of asylum; the modern concept of a sanctuary city (with respect to immigration) is distinguished because of the positive duty to extradite.
~Max
All I meant (following up on an idea from @Banquet_Bear) was that states such as California and Illinois could basically hang out a sign saying “Trans People and Their Families Welcome Here.” So people with trans kids who live in places like Texas where they can be charged with crimes for helping their kids deal with life can consider moving before that happens.
They’re already doing that. That doesn’t count as far as @Banquet_Bear is concerned for… reasons.
BB claims that the Democrats don’t have a plan, but I pointed out to him that they do, and you can see their plan in action in places where they have the power to enact it. That’s not good enough for him because then he wouldn’t have anything to shriek about.
“Have you tried being refugees?” isn’t that great a plan.
Its not a great plan but its the best we can do at the moment.
We get it that Tennessee and elsewhere are enacting dreadful legislation that is utterly unacceptable and needs to be shut down today. But without a significant representative base in that state and no realistic shot at getting such a base, what should they be doing?
Its 1942, Germans are slaughtering Jews wholesale, yet all Eisenhower is doing is dicking around North Africa. Why haven’t they liberated the camps? There is no plan!
Oh for pete’s sake, this isn’t even my idea! Someone proposed two non-exclusive ideas, and all I did was say which one I thought would have more impact (or be more tenable) right away.
That said, is there a reason why blue states shouldn’t strongly appeal to trans people to move there if their home states are trending fascist?
“We won’t kill you if you live here,” is probably appeal enough on its own. The issue is, that doesn’t actually help anyone except the relatively small percentage of affected people who can afford to abandon the place they live, their job, and any friends or families they have locally, and move to the state with the most expensive cost of living in the country. “Stay in Tennessee and hope it doesn’t get too much worse,” or “Move to California and be homeless,” isn’t a great option. If that’s the best we can do, we’re already failing.
It’s not a plan at all. It’s literally nothing. Less than nothing, once the Republicans have enough political clout to start passing these laws at the Federal level.
Which is a big part of the frustration that’s driven this thread the last few days. Posters keep saying, “There’s totally a plan, we just need to get into power to execute it.” But the problem is, there doesn’t appear to be any plan to get into power in the first place. It’s like the Underpants Gnomes running a political party. Step 1, run for office. Step 2, ??? Step 3, Implement our agenda. Don’t tell me about the plan for step 3 until you can explain the plan for step 2.
So I’ll say it again. What should the mainstream Dems be doing that they aren’t but that the progressive Dems would be doing?
Mostly what I’m hearing is complaints that we weren’t doing step 3, completely ignoring that step 1 is at all necessary.
“Stop what your doing and do something different” isn’t a plan either.
I’m not sure, but it seems to rely a lot on magical thinking and historical revisionism.
Nope. “Stop what you’re doing,” implies you’re actually doing something. Responding to an incipient genocide with, “If you don’t like it, leave,” isn’t doing something. It’s doing nothing.
Sorry that I’m not as sanguine as you are about me losing my civil rights in my home country. I get that it’s not a big deal to you, but it’s sort of important to me.
Well, this election cycle we’re still in the midst of step 1, which is to determine the Democratic candidate for each general race and prepare for step 2. For most of the primary races, the Democratic candidates haven’t declared their intention to run yet. The primary races must finish before step 1 is complete. Preparations for step 2 are ongoing and include things like voter analytics, networking, and fundraising.
Step 2 is to support the Democratic candidate’s general campaign and win the election. I provided a high level overview upthread. It begins immediately following step 1 in the case of an incumbent who runs unopposed, or after a candidate wins the Democratic primary otherwise. For many important races, that means Step 2 won’t even start until next May or so.
Step 3, implementing an agenda, must wait until late January of 2025 at the earliest. (January 2027 if the Democrats lose the Senate or fail to win the House, and January 2029 if Democrats lose the presidency.)
~Max
Thanks, Max. That’s a super-useful post that answers a great many really tough questions.
Do you think that such disingenuous tactics that you are currently using are actually useful? When do you think that lying like you are doing serves a positive purpose?
Tell me, what is your plan? Your savior Bernie was rejected by the Democratic voters in the primary, so he didn’t get to beat Trump in the election as you absolutely know would have happened.
So, are you just going to continue to whine that the Democrats rejected him, or are you actually going to do something to protect your rights?
What is your plan other than adopting disingenuous tactics and doing your best to alienate anyone who would stand up for you?
Now, to be fair, I will continue to stand up for your rights, no matter how much of an ass you are, but not everyone will. Many will see your tantrums and give up on your cause, many would simply say, “Not my problem, good luck with that” after being berated by someone for not being able to singlehandedly solve all the world’s problems.
So, while I got you back, no matter how reprehensible you are, you are making it harder by alienating anyone I would try to recruit to the cause with your hatred and vitriol. I don’t know why you choose to act like that, but it’s not doing you, or anyone, any favors.
Well, it didn’t shut you up, so I guess not.
Oh, god, please don’t try to advocate publicly for my rights. They’re already in enough trouble without you fucking up things worse.
Ah, that’s your plan. Shut up anyone that disagrees with you. Where’ve I heard that before?
At least you have a plan. It won’t get what you want, but at least you can take comfort in your own smugness as your rights are stripped away from you.
Sure, you who is screaming hate and lies all over the place is really helping. But, even though you are an incredible asshole, that still doesn’t make me switch to vote for those who would see you and yours dead.
But I can’t guarantee that there aren’t a whole lot out there that will, when they hear your invective. I don’t get what you think this accomplishes.
I don’t know. Where have you heard it before? I imagine that being told to shut up is a nearly daily experience for you, so I’m going to need some help narrowing things down.
What lie?
If I had a nickel for every straight person who lectured me about civility in standing up for my rights, I’d have enough money for the Democratic party to actually care about what happens to me.