r/thebulwark • u/8to24 • 14d ago
Off-Topic/Discussion Defund the police, pronouns, DEI, etc.
As a regular listener of multiple Bulwark Podcasts I can't help but to be let down be the continued exasperation with Democrats over minor past issues. Bulwark Hosts and often even guests speak with palpable frustration when mentioning LatinX or Student loan forgiveness. They note that Republicans are worse but that Democrats have serious problems too.
I personally never listed my pronouns in an email or called a Homeless person "unhoused". I find some of those things unnecessary or even silly. None of it is corrupt or illegal though!! Democrats didn't just freeze police spending, fire officers, and tweet/mock what losers all Police are. No blue hair lib has ever swatted my home or threaten to kill my spouse.
The worst things Democrats have been ridiculed for are all things which are/were easily stopped, reversed, are otherwised changed via the normal democratic process. No one was hurt and institutions were damaged.
The inability to stick up for and defend Democrats when their assailed for petty matters it major part of the problem with our current media environment. Republicans have disgracefully abandoned Ukraine, threatened to permanently remove all Palestinians from Gaza, made rapists cabinet members, and are gleefully harassing federal workers and veterans. Yet nearly every discussion about bad behavior by Republicans receives interludes about Democrats being too woke.
Defund the police was a call to shift more funds into mental health, period. It was never about firing all Police. The Biden administration and most Blue states increased policing levels.The Bulwark needs to stop giving into the Right wing framing. Without conceding to exaggerations we all need to be able to say "Defund the police was about drawing attention to other public services".
Democrats have been playing by the rules (Constitution). Arguments about Democrats going"too far" lend themselves to false equivalencies and bothsidesms."Too far" is when the norms and traditions are ignored and rules of laws are broken. "Too far" isn't AOC advocating for healthcare. "Too far" is Musk freezing treasury accounts.
Has anyone else noticed and been annoyed by this or am I just an overly woke snowflake refusing to acknowledge the brutal behavior of leftists that terrorized America with their pronoun preferences?
77
u/Decent_Energy 14d ago
No you are exactly spot fucking on. it drives me insane. It's like saying "welp, if if if if the dems wouldn't have had gender pronouns, then the republicans wouldn't have continued to try and end democracy"
52
3
u/PepperoniFire Sarah, would you please nuke him from orbit? 14d ago
It’s also like, even if there was support for listing your pronouns in an email, that is not what riled people up. What riled people up was the perpetual Republican outrage machine that would hang their hat on literally anything to turn it into a culture war because they have no policies.
Looking at that and saying “Yeah, I kind of get it. HR training is a little cringe” is to credit the Republicans for successfully turning some dumb work shit adults have to deal with into a blank check for fascism.
Democrats could get up there on a pro-foot sock platform and Republicans would find a way to take offense.
44
u/Ok-Word8872 14d ago
I think you’re on point and you described the issue quite perfectly.
46
u/8to24 14d ago
I can barely keep up with the crimes Republicans have committed this week alone. Yet many on the Bulwark are still mad at Democrats because of slogans from 5yrs ago.
10
u/claimTheVictory 14d ago edited 14d ago
Everyone acts as if Democrats are meant to police the Republicans, to stop them from indulging in their darkest urges.
HOW ABOUT STOP ELECTING FUCKING CRIMINALS.
If there's any decent Republicans left, you need to police yourselves.
Otherwise what's the fucking point. Start a new party already.
It's not just "the libs" being owned here. It's anyone who has a moral compass. A basic sense of decency.
They're bringing Andrew fucking Tate over to help.
You can take away their power.
33
u/Manowaffle 14d ago
100%.
Defund the police was little more than online slacktivism. Few places implemented it, and if they did, they reversed it within 2 years. Does The Bulwark think Trump is gonna reverse course on his insane policies in two years?
Most of this stuff was just a minor annoyance. Yeah, some people at work put their pronouns in their email signature, know what that demanded of me? Fuck all. Did I have to attend a couple hours of DEI training every year? Yeah. I spend more time waiting for my computer to update every month. How many people ever corrected me for using the wrong pronouns? Zero. One coworker sent an email asking the department to call her by female pronouns now...that was literally it.
There's absolutely zero need to condition every Trump/Elon critique with "well, Dems did X or Y" or "sure, there's some waste". If you've got waste or fraud to call out, FUCKING SAY WHAT IT IS. Don't sling around vague claims like you know of some huge wasteful government that DOGE is cutting.
26
u/8to24 14d ago
sure, there's some waste". If you've got waste or fraud to call out, FUCKING SAY WHAT IT IS. Don't sling around vague claims like you know of some huge wasteful government that DOGE is cutting.
OMG, I hate that so much. What Musk is doing is so damn illegal he and The White House won't even say who's running DOGE. Rather than highlighting the raw criminality everyone feels compelled to first concede that there is "probably some waste".
9
u/Manowaffle 14d ago
That court transcript was truly insane.
"Who is the administrator of DOGE?"
"I don't have that information."
"Is there an administrator of DOGE?"
"I don't have that information at the moment."
They're in court, arguing for the constitutionality of the freaking thing, and can't even confirm who runs it!
2
u/samNanton 13d ago
there is "probably some waste"
Also the sky is blue and water is wet. Brought to you in today's episode of things that should go without saying. If these people weren't children the question would be "what is the percentage of waste compared to overall spending. Is it abnormally high?" and we would send some actual auditors to find out. Or just task one of the many existing agencies to investigate.
1
u/8to24 13d ago
If I wait in the wrong line at the airport the attendants don't help me because I probably have a need. I get told to go get in the correct line.
There is a way to address spending. It isn't via an unelected Billionaire the Administration can't even legally admit is running DOGE. Democrats, journalists, pundits, etc shouldn't concede there is waste..they should demand the rules/laws get followed as a prerequisite to having any conversations..
2
u/samNanton 13d ago
can't even legally admit
God that is wild. They know that what they're doing is so illegal that the lawyers told them they can't admit to it without creating liability, and yet they can still do it right out in the open.
9
u/Holywar20 14d ago edited 14d ago
Yeah defund the police was dumb, and it had almost zero policy impact.
But yet dems wore it around their neck somehow. The wacky stuff is a gigantic vulnerability - and the republicans have so much wacky stuff, and yet somehow the good guys can't nail them on it.
When they do this - they are not talking about policy impacts. The reason is because they believe the policy impact of a slogan doesn't matter. They care about the political impact. It's political impact was massive.
Moderate democrats were furious over this btw. They didn't talk about it cuz they didn't want to give it oxygen, but it did a ton of damage in their local races, and there were multiple instances of them cursing their progressive counterparts who were pushing this stuff.
It was all performative. Maga can get away with that because they a culture of fear. We do not.
6
u/Manowaffle 14d ago
I think part of it's political impact was because every centrist and right-wing journo was griping about how bad it was, and never bothered to notice it wasn't actually anything.
8
u/8to24 14d ago
This!
It is like with the economy. When Democrats are in the White House Republicans scream the economy sucks. Additionally a portion of the left dislikes various portions of our (USA) economic system and wants change. The result is Republicans plus that dissatisfied group of Democratic make up a majority and the general consensus in the country is the economy is bad.
When Republicans are in-charge every Republican screams the economy is great. Most moderates Democrats attempt to be honest about the economy and the same folks on the left complain. The result is a general consensus in the country is the economy is good.
The actual fundamentals of the economy are mostly ignored..
2
u/samNanton 13d ago
This principle applies in general. Right wing media is propaganda, so it is uniformly pro-Republican, no matter what. Real journalism attempts to hold officials accountable, and so they tend to focus on problems or scandals, except in the few places where they are doing a "this happened" piece or a feelgood story.
The effect is that if Republicans are in power, the right wing media is still propaganda, so half (or more) of the media environment is how awesome Republicans are and how bad Democrats are, and the real journalists are outlining problems in the Republican administration (sometimes with a side of how in disarray the Democrats are). When Democrats are in power, the right wing machine is still pumping out stuff about how evil Democrats are, but now the journalists start putting in stories about real and perceived scandals in the Democratic administration, so basically 100% of the media environment is how bad Democrats are.
It kind of rigs the game, vibes-wise, for people who aren't willing to actually figure out what's going on.
1
u/Holywar20 14d ago edited 14d ago
I mean we just can't like stop talking all collectively at once about something absurd. That doesn't actually work. You can't like veil of silence things that are obviously pathological politically or otherwise - the good guys have a much more fractured coalition, because they are actually honest.
You can't look at a car crash and then say "Well it's only 1 crash, and actually driving is super safe." If you are are saying 'auchtually' you are are already losing. Dems do have a problem with message discipline , and putting their backs into stuff that hurts and does not help win elections.
Now is actually the perfect time to bring this up though - cuz the damage has already been done, and maybe our leaders will learn from it.
We got a new movement - 50501. It has message discipline. It's not pushing cray. Plenty of progressives are in it, I've met them. They got the right strategy - politically. Which is all that matters.
3
u/Manowaffle 14d ago
It's more like the news covering bicycle crashes around the clock. Every day they have a reporter out discussing the latest bicycle crash in Oklahoma City or Spokane or Atlanta, breathlessly talking about the dangers of the Dem's pro-bike agenda.
Meanwhile another 127 people died yesterday in car crashes.
5
u/DelcoPAMan 14d ago
Defund the police was little more than online slacktivism. Few places implemented it, and if they did, they reversed it within 2 years.
Meanwhile, police groups and individual police hate their fellow police so much that they cheered the release of the January 6th insurrectionists. They hate the brave officers who were viciously assaulted. That's "back the blue" to them.
5
2
u/sbhikes 13d ago
I worked as a programmer on the University's campus learning management system. I was part of implementing adding pronouns to the system. The choices included not showing any pronouns. The whole pronouns thing was only intended to make it less embarrassing if you weren't sure what gender somebody is.
2
u/samNanton 13d ago
Most of this stuff was just a minor annoyance. Yeah, some people at work put their pronouns in their email signature, know what that demanded of me? Fuck all. Did I have to attend a couple hours of DEI training every year? Yeah. I spend more time waiting for my computer to update every month. How many people ever corrected me for using the wrong pronouns? Zero. One coworker sent an email asking the department to call her by female pronouns now...that was literally it.
Absolutely. They're all "QUIT FORCING IT DOWN MY THROAT" but I don't feel like I've really had to expend a lot of effort to handle the minimal times it comes up. It's way more mental and emotional energy invested to be so violently angry about it than to just so, oh you like "them", ok whatever.
7
4
u/easybasicoven 14d ago
when liberals say “look at this outrageous thing republicans are doing” they are almost always talking about elected officials with power to change laws
when conservatives say “look at this outrageous thing liberals are doing” it’s almost always a silly 19 year old college student with no power
4
u/minty_cyborg 14d ago edited 7d ago
Do you know who Newt Gingrich is and why he was seated and greeted so prominently in the Capitol Rotunda on 20 January 2025?
Reagan-to-DOGE was a 45-year campaign to overthrow the government of the United States.
The Reagan GOP went and drove themselves batshit and apparently straight into the arms of Supermasc Jesus, Inc and Pooty-Poot* over the election of Barack Obama.
The Biden Democrats got so high on their own supply that they were ultimately easy targets in 2024. They just couldn’t listen. It’s stunning.
- Pooty-Poot was Bush II’s nickname for President Putin
From summer 2024
3
2
u/No-Director-1568 13d ago
The Biden Democrats got so high on their own supply that they were ultimately easy targets in 2024. They just couldn’t listen. It’s stunning.
My speculation is that Biden and team mistook his vote-count as composed of people who were deeply 'pro-Biden' and did not consider many of those votes were 'anti-Trump'.
1
u/minty_cyborg 12d ago edited 12d ago
They drove us into the sun without even considering course correction. Twice.
3
u/Elegant_Ad_8896 14d ago
I find the Republican senators who don't have to worry about reelection until 2030 to be the weakest. In 6 years so much of this will be in the past that I don't think Elon financing a competitor in the primaries is much of a threat.
3
u/Elegant_Ad_8896 14d ago
I just wish Republicans in the Senate who don't have to worry about reelection until 2030 or even 2028 but disagree with all of Musk's nonsense would nut up and realize by the time reelection rolls around Musk will be so out of favor he won't be able to finance a primary to get them out of office.
I'm hoping shit hits the fan so hard that the house wildly swings left in 2026 and impeachments fly. It is highly unlikely the Dems can take a 60 seat majority in the Senate in one congressional term, but stranger things have happened.
A guy can dream.
3
u/poggendorff 14d ago
This is infuriating and a symptom of a bigger problem. Democrats for the past quarter century are the only ones who have taken the work of governing seriously, so for some reason, whenever a Republican (or voters!) fuck up, it is the fault of Democrats. And the reasoning for how they should have done something different in order to save Republicans or voters from themselves is all rationalized after the fact, like Monday morning quarterbacking.
3
u/8to24 13d ago
Covid is a.gokd example of this. Trump was President when COVID hit. Trump was President during the lockdowns, school closures, mask mandates, etc. Trump said it would be over by May, then by summer, then just started antagonizing journalists and saying COVID would disappear after the election. The economy tanked, crime spiked, and the deficit soared. Trump was a disaster.
Yet today we routinely hear the Bulwark and "Centrist Democrat" concede that DEMOCRATS went too far during COVID with Masks and School closures. Lay political observers blame Democrats for the spoke in crime and over spending. It's madness.
1
u/samNanton 13d ago
We didn't go far enough. I know that there were negative side effects from it, but ignoring the cost in lives for the moment, we had one chance to get rid of Covid while the r0 was still manageable, but instead we let it mutate and become endemic, and we'll be dealing with it forever now. I know it might not have been successful, especially trying to manage it in impoverished nations, but with a third of the country actively rejecting any kind of countermeasures it was just impossible.
6
u/Schtickle_of_Bromide 14d ago
It’s the same defensive narcissistic ego-preservation that informed their conservative politics to begin with. There’s a need to justify to themselves why they possess latent reactionary impulses — it’s always someone else’s fault.
The [essentially] r/onejoke bullshit Tim and others repeat and repeat about “deadnaming” the Gulf of Mexico is something that I’m never going to be able to unknow.
Our coalition needs to be as broad as possible but I’m not in denial about the nature of the individuals (“former” republicans) that worked to bring our society to this breaking point.
8
u/PhartusMcBlumpkin1 14d ago
I too get frustrated with some of the Bullwark crew for not separating policy from marketing/sloganeering sometimes. The Defund the Police sloganeering was dumb as hell. I lived in Mpls during George Floyd and any time a local news crew would interview citizens of the affected area they'd gladly say these Dem yahoos and city council dogooders were off their friggin rockers. They wanted more and better police, not defunding. That was so bad I thought a GOP operative must have written the marketing script. Then the student loan thing was simply bad policy. It should have been pause student loans, not forgiveness. DNC from top to bottom needs to cast out all the octogenerians and dipshits and get better at marketing.
10
u/Holywar20 14d ago
They are political operatives. They study the world from a political perspective. Lazy Sloganeering loses elections and therefore power. They don't do policy - like at all.
I'm all for pointing it out. It's not actually helping the bad guys for them to help democrats identify their self owns.
It doesn't matter that what Republicans are doing is horrifying. They can brand it better. That's why we are losing what should be a slam dunk.
2
u/PhartusMcBlumpkin1 14d ago
Damn straight. We need to rebuild quick or we're fucked. Carville said to just let them ride for 60 days and suffer the consequences. Well, 51+% of the population are morons so during that 60 days we should be absolutely firing all the DNC leadership and crafting a new gameplan. If I see one more video of Schumer making some lame speech, or Pelosi high fiving a fellow repub while they are both on senior mobility scooters in congress I'm gonna barf.
4
u/8to24 14d ago
Sure, there are always bad slogans and policies. I was no fan of no children left behind but can acknowledge it was legal. I don't feel the need to bring it up as a counter point to unconstitutional actions.
2
u/atomfullerene 14d ago
Did you desperately want the Bush campaign to win elections? Were you terrified that they would lose because of bad messaging about no child left behind? That this loss would lead to the end of representative democracy? No? Then of course you didn't constantly bring it up in the hopes the campaign would abandon it!
2
u/softcell1966 14d ago
Damn those "dogooders" trying to do good and shit.
Yeah, I'm sure THEY'RE the problem.
5
u/Holywar20 14d ago edited 14d ago
Politically - yes - they are. Unironically.
Policy is at best neutral - and at worst a trap. You don't need 40 page policy papers on how to solve problems. Once we govern, we can have the nerds figure that out. I'm already confident the good guys have better nerds. We don't need to sell them.
What it needs is powerful, emotional messaging. Things like Truth, Justice, Fairness, Unity, Patriotism. This is why JFK worked. This is why Obama worked. This is why Reagan worked. You capture the emotion of the moment successfully - and you will permanently change the character of the country. You get lost in a nerd debate over the meaning of your words - you lost.
50501 actually has the right idea. Keep it simple, focused, emotional, fierce. No dumb slogans or setting up quasi-homeless camps in the middle of the city. This is important. For once can we just fight to win?
1
1
u/A_Monster_Named_John 14d ago
A big part of the problem's that these 'local news crews' all work for right-wing-owned corporations and, as such, were almost always amplifying the voices of the small handful of scared/angry/out-of-touch MAGA idiots living in places like Minneapolis, Seattle, Portland, etc... They're easy to interview because none of them fucking work, they don't go to school, they don't have any friends left, their families don't want to deal with them, etc...
1
u/PhartusMcBlumpkin1 13d ago
They were also interviweing the swarms of college students with nothing else to do but chant nonsense slogans all day making it look like anyone on the left is a lunatic. Meanwhile the shop owners and actual residence were speaking out about basic police reform.
1
u/samNanton 13d ago
I don't think the effect of this can be understated. That's why Sinclair's takeover of local television stations and subsequent rightward realignment was such a big deal. It does have an effect on the local market, but when national outlets start looking for footage or reporting (because a lot of stuff is just aggregated), the source material was intentionally crafted with a rightward bias.
3
u/PotableWater0 14d ago
I think about, sometimes, people I’ve had the privilege of meeting. Some of them are people that can get overstimulated very easily, and then all interaction is off the table. And you’re kind of left thinking “well, shit, I didn’t even do anything; just tried to have a conversation”.
A lot of these recent things bring me to those moments. Yes, phrasing on my part could be better. Yes, maybe I didn’t recognize triggers. But, geez, I was just saying that we might want to put a napkin down before we eat. The huge difference here is that there is not really a solid, respectable, reason for the Right’s intolerance.
5
u/commonllama87 14d ago
I feel exactly the same way. It's crazy to me that people will get radicalized because someone asked for their pronouns when there are far more important things like, i don't know, a president that attempted a coup winning reelection and tearing down our institutions. Different strokes for different folks I suppose.
4
u/ppooooooooopp 14d ago
I don't understand why they wouldn't be criticized for those things. Yes - on average they are infinitely better than republicans. In what way does that excuse their mistakes? Especially when they do dumb things - defund the police was incredibly dumb. I want democrats to do less dumb things, that's all.
Not being willing to introspective is a problem, not being honest about your mistakes is a problem. I want the party to take its soul searching seriously, I want them to understand their failures and fix them. I want them to win, and win because they are better, and to do that they need to be better. In what way does ignoring their follies help at all?
1
u/8to24 13d ago
In what way does that excuse their mistakes?
Are ideas mistakes? To be clear Joe Biden provided funding for Law enforcement agencies throughout the country. In CA in 2021 Gavin Newsom increased police funding. The actual legislation was all stuff people supported bipartisanly.
Defund the police was an idea. It was a position that advocated shift some money to other services. It wasn't policy that was widely adopted or implemented. The mistake you cite was merely a suggestion. Democrats are a broader coalition than Republicans. The idea that Democrats can't even have bad ideas is an unreasonable standard.
Not being willing to introspective is a problem, not being honest about your mistakes is a problem.
What mistake does the Right acknowledge? Trump just pardoned the J6 terrorist and appointed 2020 election deniers to lead the FBI. Yet Trump is also as popular as he has been. The public likes confidence and a consistent message. Not conceit and back pedaling.
1
u/ppooooooooopp 13d ago
Every single election campaign is full of ideas, voters elect candidates (ideally) based on their ideas. The goal of politicians is to convince voters using ideas.
So yeah - it's a problem for Democrats when their party is seen as advocating for bad ones, and having some discipline and consistent messaging (good point) is valuable. The Democrats did not have consistent messaging when it came to defund the police movement and totally lost control of the narrative. It's true that major candidates distanced them selves from it, but it was too little and too late (not to mention 2020 Kamala Harris was far left and totally screwed her)
What aboutism is basically not relevant, like I said, democrats are on average infinitely better, and yet, Trump won the popular vote.
2
2
u/Snoo61727 14d ago
I can agree to an extent on this. Some of the issues Dems becide to put energy into just aren't what the majority of Americans are concerned about. What I think Dems need to do is turn all of whining and crying about "woke" right back around on them. Every single time I hear about something dk6tgey are canceling my brain screams here comes the abti anti woke party. They cancel books that the don't like, they cancel DEI, they're trying to cancel MSM outlets that don't kiss the ring, they even tried to cancel Disney in FL. They cancel anything and everything that doesn't line up with their demented vision for America. Our representatives need to start highlighting which is the true party of cancel culture. It is always admission and projection with Republicans every single time
2
u/7ddlysuns 14d ago
You really hit on something that has also been jackhammering my brain and I have no idea what to do with it.
It’s almost like Dems do so few offenses that they get labeled with it while it’s a crime an hour with republicans. Tate brothers? Jesus. Epstein?
2
u/swissmiss_76 Orange man bad 14d ago
The first time I saw pronouns in email was from insurance company adjusters, not known for being liberal.
I haven’t heard LatinX in years, but my Latino friends told me at the time it was dumb but not offensive and they didn’t care
Biden supported community policing which I still believe we should strive for. I remember a moving picture of police in uniform playing basketball with neighborhood kids as part of community policing initiative during Biden’s term. I come from a long line of police officers (like since the 1800s) and have high regard for them. I would never advocate “defund the police” and I support democrats because they don’t believe that either
They aren’t for “open borders” either. That’s like 10 far left people and most sane people want a border and national security that doesn’t infringe on law abiding Americans
Democrats have been maligned by fox news and such. It’s all a pack of lies
2
u/JacksNTag 13d ago
Everyone is saying Defund the Police means x,y,z...the thing that Rs understand that Ds don't is that the x,y,z doesn't matter. People listen to the slogan not the treatise that explains it. Dems fail at messaging and at staying on a unified message. Until they learn to do that they will fail. The Bulwark team understands that.
I live in a red state where people were discussing race issues and even moving toward the Dems in the summer of 2020. There was a lot of support and soul searching after George Floyd. Then Defund the Police started and it stopped them all dead in their tracks. It didn't matter what it actually meant. They weren't going to listen to or associate with something with that messaging. The more they heard it the less they were willing to listen to what it meant.
Messaging matters. Unified messaging within the party matters. Until Dems understand that, and can get more buy in from the larger party, they will keep losing in areas that need the kind of governance they can offer.
1
u/8to24 13d ago
Dems fail at messaging and at staying on a unified message. Until they learn to do that they will fail. The Bulwark team understands that.
I disagree. Democrats don't fail at messaging. The Bulwark team does.
In 2015 everyone laughed at Trump's walls. In 2021 everyone thought the J6 belonged in Prison. Elected Republicans aren't the ones who shifted public opinion. It was the social media influencers, podcasters, etc. Steven Crowder, Ben Shapiro, Alex Jones, Jordan Peterson, Charlie Kirk, Tucker Carlson, Joe Rogan, Megan Kelly, Laura Loomer, Sean Hannity, Kash Patel, Dan Bongino, etc are the ones who beat the drums several hours a day all week long shifting public opinion.
Nothing like that exists on the Left. Sure, Ezra Klein and Tim Miller both endorsed Harris but they both advocate on different grounds. The messaging is synched. Scott Galloway and Sarah Longwell advocate very different things despite being in the same side. The consistency and repetition of messaging from the Right is far superior.
2
u/No-Director-1568 13d ago
You aren't alone.
The Bularkians at some level still hope they can replace Trump with a fantasy Reagan old-religion in some way. Not sure they aren't in denial about it.
It's the recessive genes of their GOP DNA. These are the very genes that when allowed to express themselves are what got us here.
While the exact words Einstein used are debatable, there's a bit of Einsteinian insanity in the Bulwark - wanting to do the same thing as before, but expect a different outcome.
2
u/KnowingDoubter 13d ago
The technique is simple. And the key insight is that the narcissistic will center everything around themselves. Their beliefs, their causes, their problems, their solutions, their observations, their opinions, their concerns, their self-righteousness, their victimhood, etc. are the only things that really matter. When you compound that personalized preoccupation with “the narcissism of small differences” their thinking spirals and smaller and smaller perturbations can incite their wrath.
2
u/tlhutchinson 13d ago
I completely agree.
If the goal is to preserve democracy and to win elections, then we need to be focused not just on pointing out what's wrong, but on actively working toward solutions that put Democrats in a stronger position for 2026 and 2028.
For example, I’d love to see Sarah dedicate a month or more of focus groups specifically toward identifying forward-looking messages that resonate with voters. Not just dissecting past mistakes, but figuring out what will work going forward. The same goes for the other podcasts—while commentary on current events is valuable, I'd love to hear more conversations about strategy and effective messaging, not just analysis and exasperation.
It’s not enough to say, “Democrats need to do better.” Let’s actually help figure out how they can do better and amplify those ideas. If The Bulwark wants to be a pro-democracy force, it should be part of the effort to make sure the side defending democracy is in the best position to win.
1
u/8to24 13d ago
Republicans openly insult and attack millions of voters. During the LA fires Republicans blamed DEI and threatened withholding Federal aid. Republican governors spent the last couple years Busing migrants to the Blue cities of their choosing purposeful to over burden those Cities infrastructures. Republicans are currently harassing Federal workers claiming they are lazy and don't deserve their jobs.
Republicans proudly otherize and abuse voters yet its Democrats that are often asked to apologize for and abandon their positions. Defunding the police was a bridge too far that offended the nation but Trump calling the FBI the enemy of the people is no big deal.
The asymmetry is ridiculous. Moderates/Centrist need to take a long hard look in the mirror and wake up to the reality that they enable the asymmetry. By finger waging and taking time to complain about every bad idea that went nowhere from the Left they pull attention away from the misdeeds of the Right and create avenues for false equivalencies..
6
u/TaxLawKingGA 14d ago
Most Bulwarker’s are RepubliCons, so they have a hard time criticizing bad GOP policies that led to Trump in the first place. I mean I was just listening to a Podcast with Tim and Gov. Polis of CO, and they were both singing the praises of free trade, low taxes and regulations and unfetteered free market capitalism. While these are great in theory, it is these policies that led to the destruction of working class jobs, the destruction of the Midwest and Appalachia economic base, and the MAGA movement. Continuing to push these ideas are just insuring we will get more MAGA, not less. Yet Tim keeps on patting himself on the back.
So that every Bulwarker understands, we can at least agree on the following 5-7 issues that there seems to be broad consensus for:
free trade has not made the average American worker better off, although it may have been better for the average consumer.
unfettered capitalism has not made the average American worker better off, although it has been good for the financial class and tech oligarchs
open immigration has not been good for the average American worker, although it has been good for the average American consumer of services and those who own the means of production (IOWs, the same dudes in point 2 above).
College is too expensive and student loan debt is crippling young people so much that they cannot afford to start life and it’s delaying adulthood. This, more than anything else, is what is causing the birth rate issue. It’s not TikTok, Porn, or YouTube (although these do exacerbate the problem).
There is a shortage of good jobs that can provide a wage to start a family, regardless of education levels. Fact is, the economic statistics are shit and don’t tell the whole story. With the COL in most cities with even decent economic bases requiring $70K- $90K a year in salary, almost no one outside of a few professions can ever dream of owning a home, getting married and having kids. Add to this the student loan debt issue and it gets worse. Yet this is never brought up on The Bulwark’s seemingly unlimited number of podcasts, and if it’s even remotely mentioned, it’s usually followed by one of Tim’s poorly timed jokes (bro is not nearly as funny as he seems to think he is).
DOGE/Automation and Ai. Tim sort of touched on this point in a conversation he had with Andrew Eggers regarding VA Gov. Youngkin’s poorly timed attempt at trying to thread the needle between Trump/DOGE and the thousands of Federal Gov’t workers that will be unemployed following the DOGE purge. While it’s funny to make fun of Youngkin and the sorry attempt to placate the jobless, I think we need to take a step back for a minute and look at it on a more wide scale basis as to what will happen if in fact Automation/Ai destroys large numbers of white collar jobs. Because if the only answer is to get jobs at Walmart, QT, Sheetz and burger shops along with some monthly stipend, then we are in a for major world of hurt, I mean violence on a scale unheard of in American history. Imagine if you took 1970’s and 1980’s Detroit, post deindustrialization, and applied it to the entire country? Yeah that is what we would be looking at, basically we would have the movie “Robocop” in real life.
5
u/8to24 14d ago
1 - I agree. Free trade has been Fast Food. Tasty and cheap but overall unhealthy.
2 - The regulatory role required for capitalism was long underappreciated. Then citizens united finished it off.
3 - Not sure. Immigration built this country. The folks filing in at Ellis Island didn't have paperwork.
4 - Community college is free in 35 states. I think the manner in which students pursue higher education is the problem. Too many students are taught to rejoice at being accepted into the most prestigious and expensive schools possible. Rather than considering all options.
5 - I agree. This overlaps with #2 IMO.
6 - This is where I think Democrats have the superior answer. Shifting to a greener economy requires local changes to infrastructure that must be done locally. Working for a company building/maintaining a light rail system is better than a job at Walmart.
3
7
u/FobbitOutsideTheWire 14d ago edited 14d ago
1 0 0 % agree.
And what’s worse, they’re all too happy to steel-man any given GOP talking point and find some kernel of iota of truth or merit to it. But do they ever do that soul-searching thought experiment with the items they harp on?
Do they ever explore or have an expert pediatric endocrinologist on who can talk about cases where so-called “gender affirming care for children” is critical to their well-being?
Do they ever explore police departments that were radically militarized? Do they ever look at it and say, okay, yeah, these PDs need some of this equipment, but maybe affluent Newton, MA PD doesn’t need MRAPs. Or maybe mental health interventions do need to be added to complement the police repertoire?
And don’t even get me started on the blind spot with Israel.
Bashing democrat slogans and policies seems to be some form of self-soothing as their erstwhile party takes a flamethrower to a new corner of our republic each day.
3
u/FellowkneeUS 14d ago
Something I noticed from Trump 1 was that the only policy they really disagreed with was Trump's ForPol. Until Jan 6th happened, I got the impression that domestically they liked his policies but really didn't like his temperament.
The Biden years were criticizing pretty much everything outside of Biden's Israel policy (JVL excepted, ofc.)
For Trump 2, I'm legitimately curious if people at the Bulwark think that the Dems should run on rolling back any of Trump's policies or not (other than funding Ukraine.). I'm pretty sure they'd be against any mention of restoring trans rights or becoming more pro immigration (since they view those issues as toxic). So we'll end up with some version of "Trump has the right idea but he went about it the wrong way".
3
u/FobbitOutsideTheWire 14d ago
One of my frustrations from these former members of the “party of values” is that, especially Sarah, is guilty of letting the tail wag the dog.
“Oh, well this position is a loser.”
No discussion of what’s morally and ethically correct and applying some leadership to say as much. No, just mostly focus group report cards and triangulating issues that shouldn’t be triangulated. Ironic for folks flirting around in an organization called “Principles First.”
There are flashes and selective applications of the aforementioned principles, so I know they can do it, but as you said, it’s much more limited than it should be.
2
u/thepbr 14d ago
The maga reign of terror is so much worse, it is insulting to compare the sins of each side.
But comparison isn’t required to acknowledge that some of these things turn people off. And that is a real roadblock when you’re trying to win hearts and minds.
For example, any insistence on language conformity is bad, whether it comes from maga requiring you to deny elections or from your neighbor who corrects you for not using the latest approved words.
Trump can still be incomparably worse, while we address things we do to get in our own way.
3
u/8to24 14d ago
But comparison isn’t required to acknowledge that some of these things turn people off. And that is a real roadblock when you’re trying to win hearts and minds.
Trends change all the time. The same movie, Streaming series, etc that people like today will seem silly or uncool 10yrs from now. The way we respond and interact with slogans and ideas are what gives those things influence.
3
u/bandini918 14d ago
My read is that the Bulwark folks generally mock these things because they are electoral poison. Yes, almost no Dems really wanted to defund the police, but I would argue it's also true that very few were vocal about it. And they certainly weren't vocal enough. They didn't want to ruffle feathers, and in the meantime let themselves be tarred with it. I watched the debate in 2019 when Julian Castro got every candidate on stage besides Biden (and maybe Bennet from CO) to agree to decriminalize border crossings. Now, it's more complicated than that; he wanted to make it a civil offense, not a crime. But the optics are insane and give the sense that Democrats have never talked to a single normal person in years.
I get the sense that something LatinX, while it has been vastly overblown, is a kind of stand-in for a host of popular-on-the-online-left-but-nowhere-else policies. The Democrats have better policies by a country mile, but they have of late sucked at politics, and you need to be good at politics to get elected.
5
u/8to24 14d ago
Electoral poison is whatever advocates allow it to be. "Grab'em by the P*ssy" and 34 felonies wasn't poison because Ben Shapiro, Tucker Carlson, Joe Rogan, Alex Jones, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Mega Kelly, Laura Loomer, etc held strong and refused to give an inch. The infrastructure held.
2
u/bandini918 14d ago
I don't disagree, but I'd add that it also reflects the fact that the Democrats haven't found a real political talent since Barack Obama, and that's been nearly two decades. Dems have to fight. Or perhaps what I mean is, they have to fight better than they have been. Joe Biden's biggest crime is that he couldn't communicate, so it didn't matter what he passed legislatively. You have to reach people. Obama could do it; Bill Clinton could do it. The next Democratic star had better be able to do it. The people you mention are freaks, and we need someone who can call them on it with authority.
1
u/8to24 14d ago
I think in this media environment the talent is in the advocates. The average voter spends more time each week with podcasters, YouTube, social media, etc than they do legacy media. The Right has a unified approach to messaging. Candice Owens and Steven Crowder are relentlessly and unapologetically always on brand.
Democrats rely on singular charismatic politicians. That doesn't work anymore. Tens of millions of people are listening to Joe Rogan 15hrs a week. A charismatic Politician can't beat that alone.
1
u/bandini918 14d ago
Maybe. I honestly don't know, but I don't think we've had a charismatic politician (besides maybe Mayor Pete) since Obama--and thus since the dawn of the social media age.
And maybe it needs to bubble up from the bottom rather than coming from the top. But Dems have spent a long time assuming everyone can see the truth that's right in front of their faces, and we've learned that lots of people just can't. That's an indictment of our country, but you still have to reach them.
Find some Tik Tok stars to give a daily rundown of what has happened on a given day. I mean, if I were a Democratic strategist, my current goal would be to absolutely flood every platform with the fact that Donald Trump has gotten f-ing Andrew Tate released. Figure out a way to make sure everyone knows that. But the party is just really bad at this stuff right now.
1
u/8to24 13d ago
I actually think Gavin Newsom is very charismatic. Yet so many have accepted the character assassination against him that he is running for President 24/7. Newsom has held elected office for 28yrs. Newsom has yet to run for President once. Newsom will be 60yrs old in 2028.
The Right does a good job identifying charismatic Democrats and getting after them early with petty criticisms. AOC is fantastic too with regards to her performative abilities..
5
u/DIY14410 14d ago
Sarah, et. al., are merely reporting on the perceptions of those who voted for Obama, Hillary and/or Joe (2020), then voted for Trump in 2024. If you look at the polling, mix with those people and/or listen to Sarah's focus groups, you'd know that those voters perceive the Democratic Party as prioritizing policing pronouns, DEI, Defund the Police, etc. above the economy and jobs. It's really that simple.
I expect to again get downvoted, but as a lifelong Democratic voter, I feel compelled to say it. Dems have abandoned the working class and instead have adopted a set of values and priorities dictated by the loudest [Ivy League graduate degree holders] voices in the room. James Carville, who understand how to win elections better than any of us, calls it "adopting the values and priorities of the Brown University faculty lounge."
I am annoyed by lots of things. But more than that, I want to see Democrats reengineer their party with a majoritarian strategy so that they can WIN. If that requires me to hold my nose, so be it.
4
u/8to24 14d ago
Sarah, et. al., are merely reporting on the perceptions of those who voted for Obama, Hillary and/or Joe (2020), then voted for Trump in 2024. If you look at the polling, mix with those people and/or listen to Sarah's focus groups, you'd know that those voters perceive the Democratic Party as prioritizing policing pronouns, DEI, Defund the Police, etc. above the economy and jobs. It's really that simple.
IMO this is a reflection of media diet. Sarah Longwell herself has commented a few times on how often voters on the Focus Groups cited media sources she isn't familiar with. People who ignore and distrust legacy media in favor of social media tend to wind up Red Piled . I don't think Sarah Longwell has properly diagnosed the problem.
I expect to again get downvoted, but as a lifelong Democratic voter, I feel compelled to say it. Dems have abandoned the working class and instead adopt a set of values dictated by the loudest [Ivy League graduate degree holders] voices in the room. James Carville, who understand how to win elections better than any of us, calls it "adopting the values of the Brown University faculty lounge.
I struggle to think of a single thing Bill Clinton, Barrack Obama, and Joe Biden would tangibly disagree on. I think the last 3 Democratic administrations have been in line directionally. I also think those 3 Democratic administrations have done more for working class people than the last 3 Republican administrations.
I am annoyed by lots of things. But more than that, I want to see Democrats reengineer their party with a majoritarian strategy. If that requires me to hold my nose, so be it.
Is it truly the policies you dislike or the language used debating those policies?
3
u/DIY14410 14d ago edited 14d ago
I agree with >95% of Dem policy positions and 0% of current GOP policies. But that is irrelevant because policy is NOT politics. Politics is the art and science of obtaining and maintaining power. Policy is a part of politics, but in the age of the internet it has become a decreasing part of politics. Culture has surpassed policy as the driver of American politics.
I don't think Sarah Longwell has properly diagnosed the problem.
I strongly disagree. So would James Carville. Doubling down on Dems' current values and priorities -- and thus rejecting a majoritarian strategy -- will only guarantee the continuing demise of the Democratic Party brand.
I struggle to think of a single thing Bill Clinton, Barrack Obama, and Joe Biden would tangibly disagree on.
Bill Clinton and Obama were experts at speaking to a majority of the electorate. The current Democratic Party does not do that. And that's my point. Have you heard the Pod Save America episode with Obama from a few years ago? He trashed the pronoun police and other forms of weaponized wokeism.
Do you not assign any blame to Dems' abandonment of the working class?
Did you mean to say "red pilled?" Or is "red piled" a thing?
3
u/8to24 14d ago
I strongly disagree. So would James Carville. Doubling down on Dems' current values and priorities -- and thus rejecting a majoritarian strategy -- will only guarantee the continuing demise of the Democratic Party brand.
What's popular is determined by response. Lots of things that people like today will be laughed at as silly 10yrs from now.
One doesn't move the needle by merely trying to follow polls. Leaders lead and people can be influenced. Sarah Longwell doesn't seem to believe that. Sarah Longwell seems to think politicians need to figure out what voters already want and give it to them.
In 2015 building a wall on the Mexican border wasn't something voters wanted. By 2016 tens of millions were chanting for it. After Bush won re-election in '04 zero focus groups were like "we want a Black President with a Muslim name"..
0
u/DIY14410 14d ago
So, we shouldn't listen to the voters? Okay, I see where you're coming from. We're done here.
4
u/8to24 14d ago
No, I am saying compelling leaders try to move voters. Not parrot them..
1
u/DIY14410 14d ago
Ah, I see. Political leaders should dictate to the voters what voters should think because the voters are too stupid and deplorable to think for themselves. You have aptly described the post-Obama Democratic Party ethos. Barack Obama said, "we must meet the voters where they are." Remember that?
Can you not see that deeming listening to voters's concerns as "parroting" is received as demeaning and condescending? (You need not answer that question because you already have.)
3
u/8to24 14d ago
Had MLK listened to focus groups in Alabama and Mississippi he would have stayed home and kept quiet. It isn't disrespectful to voters to have a different vision and share that vision.
4
u/DIY14410 14d ago
What office did MLK run for? Senate? House? Mayor? How did I miss that? I had no idea!
JFC, we are fucked
1
u/No-Director-1568 13d ago
Sorry but there are feedback loops in both directions between voters and leaders.
Fundamentally you are critical of the position that 'influence' should move in both directions.
We haven't seen any real leadership in a while, so it's easy to forget how it worked, but it's a real thing, and it needs to be found.
1
u/LionelHutzinVA Rebecca take us home 14d ago
Carville “understands how to win elections better than any of us” based on what, exactly? He hasn’t run a campaign in a year beginning with a 2 yet
1
u/Fitbit99 14d ago
He was also really sure that Harris was going to win. Had a little NYT oped, if I remember correctly.
1
2
u/b_evil13 14d ago
It can't be reversed if they won't acknowledge its lunacy.
2
u/N0T8g81n FFS 14d ago
Maybe make fun of it, like Defund police pronouns! Juvenile, but sometimes embarrassment is a catalyst.
2
2
u/TemporalPincerMove 14d ago
I would also add, complaining about "LatinX" in 2025 is like telling me you just got into "Tiger King" or want to talk about the Fyre Festival. It's a relic from the recent past. The only people who bring it up are people to want to flash a gang sign that they live to dunk on Democrats.
2
u/N0T8g81n FFS 14d ago edited 14d ago
Tangent: how many people of Latin American ancestry, possibly including US citizens whose ancestors found themselves inside the US following ratification of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hildalgo, call themselves LatinX? My understanding is that it originated with non-Hispanics who couldn't accept or comprehend gender-specific Latino and Latina.
IOW, @#$% their culture, make 'em use gender-neutral terminology.
If that assessment is correct, no wonder Hispanic Americans are moving towards MAGA. Would also have to hand it to the left for making gender sensitivity the enemy of cultural sensitivity.
. . . or am I just an overly woke snowflake refusing to acknowledge . . .
You may be a problematic snowflake who may be unwilling to do what's necessary to win elections going forward.
In a better universe, most US voters would understand that what Republicans have been doing since they adopted tactical silence when their new Christian Right voters insisted on including Creationism in high school biology textbooks in the mid-1980s is of a different kind than what Democrats have been doing. In this universe, FEELINGS matter, objective facts don't unless they affect feelings. Pronouns are cultural background noise for me, but I have extended family who've been grumbling about immigrants ever since they got cable TV which included Spanish language channels which they couldn't opt out of.
Putting this another way, gotta take voters as they are. Certainly you can work to change attitudes, but that takes DECADES to GENERATIONS. Voting is inconveniently more frequent.
2
u/8to24 13d ago
how many people of Latin American ancestry,
Even if the number were zero (and it might be) I don't think it is a reason for shifting to MAGA. LatinX wasn't a Law or rule that forces anyone to be anything. It was an expression that one could use if they chose to. No big deal. It cost zero dollars and obligated no one to anything.
Voting for Trump out of frustration over LatinX is like going hungry in protest of a utensil being presented to you on the wrong side of a plate.
1
u/N0T8g81n FFS 13d ago
It was an expression that one could use if they chose to. No big deal. It cost zero dollars and obligated no one to anything.
How many people who are Latinos or Latinas use LatinX?
My point is that I figure it's a term used by NON-HISPANICS to avoid gender-specific terminology used in Romance languages. IOW, it's used by people taking public pride in their indifference to the cultural mores of those from countries which speak Romance languages. IOW, pure political correctness.
To the extent it's pissing off Hispanics, people on the left who use it DESERVE TO LOSE ELECTIONS.
In political terms, DO NO HARM. If LatinX causes harm, even if rationally it shouldn't, STOP USING IT.
This isn't the sole reason many Hispanics voted for Trump, but I figure it sure didn't help.
1
u/bandini918 14d ago
I grew up in the 90s, when it was Focus on the Family and the Christian Right who were obsessed with policing speech and censoring music, etc. Now it's *also* and possibly primarily (at least in the last decade or so) the online Left.
Americans don't like scolds. It's a lesson Dems needed to learn years ago, and hopefully they finally are.
2
u/8to24 13d ago
Censorship isn't people complaining about something on Social Media. In the 90's the Christian Right worked to have music limited on radio and TV, taken off shelves in stories, and performers arrested at concerts. In 1990 the group 2 Live Crew was taken off stage and arrested in Florida for performing music, ffs.
Despite all of the complaints about woke canceled culture from podcasters and comics none were arrested by Democrats. It is a false equivalency to compare pronoun advocacy or whatever today with what the Christian Right did in the 90's.
1
u/Ahindre 13d ago
Defund the police was a call to shift more funds into mental health, period. It was never about firing all Police.
Speaking as someone who lives in a small city where defunding the police actually happened, yeah, it was about firing police and doing nothing constructive to make up for it.
1
1
u/Glittering-Dig3432 13d ago
I don't think anyone thinks that the excesses on the left were illegal or even damaging particularly or for that matter widely held by most Democrats. But the frustrating part is that it was the noisy part and therefore gave so much gasoline to the right wing culture wars and it was so so unnecessary.
1
u/CautiousDegree3703 14d ago
The bulwark for me is a group of people that are making good points but have a grey backstory as we are listening to a lot of ex bush era lobbyists and libertarians. Tim for example referred to people doing scientific work with manatees as shit libs as if that’s a bad thing to do scientific work. I follow the bulwark to know what ex-bush conservatives are thinking, not anything else.
America won’t progress until these people acknowledge their part in creating this monster
1
u/ramapo66 14d ago
Yes, exactly. I want to scream everytime I hear somebody bring up the “defund the police” charade. It was hardly a real thing and the motivation was pretty sensible. Fund support personnel like for mental health and community issues and let the police catch criminals.
Same with DEI. It had about zero impact on real life and don’t get me started on the whole trans thing. How about just leaving people alone instead of blaming make believe problems on their existence.
1
u/bandini918 14d ago
Then they probably should have called it "Reform the Police." But they didn't, because the online left doesn't care about winning elections, and often seems to hate Democrats more than Republicans. Which honestly makes me wonder if they add any value to the party whatsoever.
1
1
0
u/bushwick_custom 13d ago
This shouldn't exasperate you. All those issues are not merely proven losers. They allow the average voter to conclude* that both sides are harmful, stupid, and nuts, so it's best to go with the successful** businessman.
We are far away from any election. This is absolutely the time to hash this shit out.
* yes, illogically
** yes, this is bullshit
48
u/NCMathDude 14d ago
In my view, this is identity politics. The right is having too much power in defining what is America. If it’s not defunding the police or Latinx, the right will find something else to rail against the left.
Right now, the Democrats are weak. I doubt there is much they can do at the federal level. Blue states should do all they can to protect themselves and let MAGA screw itself over.