The original topper to this column is now note two, because on Monday we witnessed yet another horrific school shooting. Sadly, once again, it won’t change anything politically.
Most Republicans simply don’t care how many kids die so long as they don’t anger gun rights advocates (think that’s a partisan statement? Check out the Christmas picture Rep Andy Ogles, in whose district the shooting took place, thought was a good idea — and doubled down on after 6 of his constituents were slaughtered).
As I discussed in a February column, the only thing that’s going to change this equation is if Democrats can really gain the upper hand on particular gun policies — and if a few Republicans actually lose elections because of their opposition to gun control. Unless and until that happens, the politics are going to work against tighter gun laws — regardless of whether a large majority supports individual gun control proposals. What Republicans know is that gun rights advocates vote on the issue, whereas the majority of Americans who support tighter gun laws do not. That’s the equation gun control proponents must change if they’re going to have greater success.
One way to start? If Republicans want to insist on a parental bills of rights and protecting school kids from “harms” (like learning about the existence of trans people or racism in America), then Democrats ought to focus on the ultimate right for parents: the one to send their kids to school and know they’ll come home alive at the end of the day. It will expose the emptiness of Republican rhetoric on schools, in addition to beginning to go on offense on guns — something that really hasn’t happened in 30 years…
Politics seems stuck in neutral. The last few months have featured a whole heck of a lot of nothing — though you wouldn’t necessarily know it from news coverage. After all, the 24/7 news cycle goes on no matter what.
But we’re getting comprehensive coverage of early maneuvering in the 2024 GOP primary, long before anyone should care. And those politicians who are adroit at generating headlines — what’s known on Capitol Hill as “show horses” — continue to capture airtime with outlandish statements and behavior (Yes, that means you Marjorie Taylor Greene). Last week we even got a news cycle about Senate Democrats’ love of jello.
Meanwhile the fundamental issues driving the news cycle haven’t changed much, if at all. Congress has achieved virtually nothing — and after Thursday, will be on recess until April 17th (In Capitol Hill language, a district work period, aka a two week spring break).
Both sides seem to have decided that split control of Congress means there is no point to legislating. The House is focused on passing conservative dream legislation —messaging bills designed to excite their base that have absolutely 0 chance of becoming law. Meanwhile the Senate confirms nominees, with little hint of a real legislative agenda.
Headlines tend to come from the ridiculous “investigations” being run by some of the most extreme right wing House members. In the Senate, the top story has probably been the absences of multiple senators due to health problems.
The paramount (or at least most urgent) issue confronting legislators is the need to raise the debt ceiling, and negotiations are virtually non-existent at the moment. At some point in the spring, something absolutely has to happen on this front, but beyond that, it seems as though the only things that will definitely get done this year are some sort of funding deal to keep the government open — though I suspect there will be a government shutdown before then so Kevin McCarthy can show his hardliners that he’s fighting — and the farm bill that pretty much has to pass. Even on the latter, Republican desires to cut food stamps portend a massive brawl before anything gets done (yes, food stamps are part of the farm bill, which is a way to ensure rural and urban support for both food stamps and farm subsidies).
This state of affairs is notable, because it’s more evidence that divided government, which once produced significant legislation — think of the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts, the seminal 1986 tax reform bill, the Americans with Disabilities Act, enacting the S-CHIP (children’s health insurance) program, etc — is no longer capable of addressing national problems. The parties are just that polarized.
As the Washington Post’s Paul Kane wrote about earlier this month, it’s far from clear that Congress could even come together to legislate in the face of a major economic or national security emergency.
Much of the blame belongs with McCarthy, who seems more beholden to his fringiest caucus members than any House or Senate leader in my lifetime. It might be a good strategy for maintaining his grip on the speakership, but not for doing anything with it.
Now, I think there are some smaller areas where legislation might be possible — banning TikTok (more on that later), maybe some sort of marijuana banking legislation — but only on things that aren’t really valence issues that divide the parties…
Along those lines a brief update on the state of 2024, much as I find it absurd that we pay so much attention to elections a year and a half out when absolutely nothing happening now will tell us anything about the eventual outcome.
Joe Biden remains a strong favorite, for all of the historical reasons I’ve written about in the past, but also because the Republican Party remains incapable of understanding that bellicose culture war politics don’t work when you’re the minority party on most of the issues. Ron DeSantis is having a rough news cycle (maybe we should stop anointing politicians without first focusing on whether they have the political skill to handle the white hot spotlight of a presidential race?). But his approach embodies everything wrong with the GOP from a strategic standpoint.
He’s planning to sign extreme legislation on guns and abortion that will play well with the right wing base…and hurt him in a general election. Even the issues where polling indicates a majority might be with him (on some trans issues), it’s far from clear that anyone who didn’t vote for Donald Trump in 2020 would vote for him because he’s pushing these things.
Republicans just don’t seem capable of grasping (or maybe it’s willing to grasp) that in so much as cultural issues shape how people vote in swing states, they benefit Democrats (see the midterm results in the crucial troika of Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin). A base strategy is great — if your base is the majority. If not, then it just portends loss after loss.
Now this brings me to the big caveat — and the biggest threat to Biden’s reelection prospects. Despite the shakiness of segments of the banking sector, the Fed raised interest rates again last week. If they keep ratcheting them up and create a recession, it’s a real danger for Biden. Election year economic problems have hurt the incumbent party in the past (1980, 1992, 2008, among others).
But fundamentally, nothing in the first quarter of the year has changed the basic outlook of anything…
This Atlantic story on pro wrestling and politics jumped out at me because of something that happened during those weird early pandemic months when the world shut down.
When everything stopped, I started to watch random 1980s wrestling on YouTube and other similar sites. It was a combination of a way to fill time that had previously gone to sports watching and socializing, and a bit of a comfort food. While I haven’t watched wrestling since high school, as a kid I watched pretty religiously.
Watching those same shows as an adult prompted lots of realizations — from things that went over my head as a kid, but were designed to be amusing to adults, to much more appreciation for the mic work of heels (bad guys) designed to infuriate viewers (as a kid, I simply hated them, without appreciating their craft).
But I also realized something else: a bevy of conservative values were embedded in that entertaining, ostensively non-partisan, non-ideological product. From the announcer who also worked for arch-conservative Sen. Jesse Helms (R-N.C.), to deeply misogynistic and homophobic tropes and language used to deride female managers or male wrestlers, to the basic idea of patriotic faces (good guys) vs. anti-American heels — many of whom supported nefarious regimes, from Iran to the Soviet Union to, later, Saddam Hussein’s Iraq — pro-wrestling was awash with conservative values. In the latter case, legendary wrestler Sgt. Slaughter even had to refuse promoters’ request that he burn an American flag to generate outrage from viewers.
Now, of course, pro-wrestling also included sex, raunch, and violence that many Christians conservatives frowned upon. But in a lot of ways, the product embodied the same conservative populism (wealthy characters were notorious heels) embraced by a guy who was a part of some wrestling shows in this era and later: Donald Trump.
Like John Hendrickson, I’ve been struck by how Trump used the showmanship of pro-wrestling to great effect politically. And I don’t think it’s a coincidence. I suspect we’ll see significant scholarly research on this topic in the years to come, because the target audience for wrestling, especially in that era — white men — are the most conservative demographic in society, and I suspect wrestling played a role in that conservatism.
I also think the pro-wrestling showmanship that Hendrickson refers to (cutting promos designed to generate hate or adulation) is similar to the talk radio style and the talk radioization of politics that I discuss in my book…
The left really needs to learn something about political strategy.
A recent Slate column by Alexander Sammon blamed new White House Chief of Staff Jeff Zients, and increased roles for Anita Dunn and Steve Ricchetti for President Biden tackling to the center.
Sammon asks, “Is this all a canny show of political triangulation for 2024,” before declaring that it “would be hard to believe.” His reason? Because Biden tacked left on climate and student loan debt in the run up to the midterm elections and it worked. Sammon concludes that moving to the center, “would be unlearning the lessons of his own political success.”
But there are all sorts of problems with this assessment.
First, the key to political success for Biden isn’t tacking left. It’s knowing when and on which issues to tack left and when and on which issues to tack right.
If one understands Biden’s moves through that paradigm, it’s clear that what he’s doing is just canny political strategy, especially for a president confronting divided government. The issues where Biden has tacked right — crime and energy politics — are ones that could hurt the Democrats in 2024. Violent crime is a major issue in a lot of cities, one that receives a ton of local news time, and gas prices are still relatively high. Anyone doubting the potential of crime to damage Biden and Democrats only needs to look at the midterm results in New York to see they’re wrong.
So Biden tacked right on those issues to appeal to centrist voters who want to see politicians doing something about crime and gas prices. As I noted a couple of weeks ago, approving the Willow Project might also help Democrats in Alaska, which may now be more competitive due to changing politics and a ranked choice voting system.
The issues cited by Sammon — student loans and taking action to fund clean energy and try to address climate change — by contrast, are cases where Biden can move leftward to energize the Democratic base without losing much of the center.
This carefully calibrated strategy of going left on some issues and right on others signals a president applying political savvy to the issues of the day, not being led around by staff. This is especially true when one considers that both Dunn and Ricchetti are long time confidants of the president, not newcomers.
I suspect that over the summer, Biden will continue this strategy — by picking fights with Republicans on draconian spending cuts that would damage crucial social welfare programs like food stamps and Medicaid. Why? Because painting the GOP as the heartless party who wants to take things away from Americans has always worked for Democrats. As mentioned above, my hunch is Biden will hold his ground, leading to a government shutdown, all in the name of protecting Democratic priorities. To some it may appear like Biden siding with the left, but it will be exactly the same strategy as he’s using now.
Realistically, triangulation is a smart way to get reelected. Biden needs to be able to say to swing voters, look I bucked the left when it was the right thing to do, and I took on the right when their demands called for it. I am the champion of the people, not captive to anyone.
Tacking to the center on some issues is also a byproduct of divided government, which allows Republicans to force voters on issues (using the Congressional Review Act). They’re trying to box Biden and Democrats in, and he’s having none of it.
But far from some sort of permanent lurch rightward, Biden is going issue by issue, and landing where the majority of Americans are. Shortly, I’d expect a strong veto threat on an attempt to undo his student loan relief program — which will demonstrate the selectivity of Biden’s move to the center.
A bunch of quick hitting notes on TikTok, Donald Trump, a big opportunity for Democrats on abortion politics, and good journalism for paid subscribers below. Please consider a paid subscription — it’s only $36 for a year and the more paid subscribers I get, the more time I can devote to researching and writing columns. It will also allow me to add new content and wrinkles, including a podcast.
A sample: “The thing that becomes clearer with each passing day is that this is what a huge chunk of Republican voters want. Trump’s incoherent, incandescent rage matches theirs.”
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to The World According to Brian to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.