Democracy 2024: # 14

Let us see where I can begin. This week has been pretty distressing for me from a political standpoint. There are three topics where I could easily give lengthy rants but that would take up too much time  and too much space. So, I will just relatively briefly touch on one, as it is a more of a local story than a national story and then try to not get too wordy about the other two stories of the week I will cover.

I do not live in the City of Chicago and cannot vote there, but I have been in the metropolitan area all of my life and have followed Chicago politics as long as I can remember. In fact, I think the first memory of a campaign or election I have was the historic 1983 Chicago Mayoral election when I was a small child. Just a few years or so after that I decided I was a Republican, and long before that, the Windy City had been dominated by Democrats, so I have never had any disillusion about the GOP doing much in the city. Of course, the past seven years has also had me very disillusioned with the Republican Party. This past Tuesday, a very progressive left-wing Democrat defeated a much more moderate Democrat (though someone who 20 or so years ago was considered a true progressive) and I was very disappointed by this result. I had forgotten what it felt like to really care about the outcome of an election after the past few cycles. 

It would be easy for me to write many many paragraphs about what happened and why. To say the least though, I was somewhat surprised. I expected a different outcome in this runoff after the results of the first round. It has to be briefly mentioned that the winner was able to somehow portray the losing candidate as a "Republican" to many voters. This was of course unfair in my mind, but over the past several years, the losing candidate did sort of bring much of this upon himself. When all was said and done, the vast majority African-American voters, even those who had supported a far more conservative black candidate in the first round, voted for a black Democrat over a white Democrat, even as the eliminated candidate had endorsed the white candidate, who was in fact more moderate on some issues than the eliminated black candidate. Last year in Los Angeles, a black Democrat who finished second in a first round defeated a white Democrat in a runoff. Not long ago, in New York City, which unlike the other two major cities had a true partisan primary (along with ranked choice voting), a black Democrat finished in front of a white Democrat. In this case though, the black candidate was considered the more moderate of the two.

There is something going on with African-American voters when deciding between Democrats (a black Republican would almost certainly do very poorly with black voters against a white Democrat), voting based on race and race alone. That is not a good thing. There were may other factors at play though in Chicago that I will not get into at this time. To say the least though, I am very concerned about what will happen to the great City of Chicago in the short-run, I very much hope my fears are misplaced and I will be wrong. Liberal Democrats who are celebrating the result in Chicago will have to continue to have to defend themselves with the claim that they want to "abolish the police." Such a warning went unheeded in left-wing Chicago but might be an albatross in other elections. Republicans or for that matter those who are not seen as "anti-Republican" enough have to understand that even sharing some Donald Trump voters or saying that they are personally opposed to abortion though they would fight to keep pro-choice policies in place, is akin to being a MAGA extremist according to the left. This is all part of the result of our hyper-partisan politics in the era of Trump.

Speaking of the 45th President, he was officially taken into custody on Tuesday and learned of the charges against him in New York County (aka Manhattan.) As I have been previewing for weeks now, this is an historic occasion, amplified by the fact that the defendant is also the Presidential front-runner currently of a major party. The news of this past week may do little to help him in the general election but only seem likely to help him win a Republican nomination. Trump acolytes insist that partisan Democrats are out to "get Trump" and destroy him so he might never be President again. I wonder more if they are out to help Trump get the Republican nomination because they know he is capable of destroying his chances all on his own and taking the party down with him.

I said it was wise to wait to hear all the charges before jumping to conclusions. After doing so, I am very underwhelmed by the charges. Let us put aside the fact that many other investigations and potential criminal prosecutions are pending against Trump and seem like far stronger cases with far more significant consequences to America. Now, that we see the charges, this really does look like a week case that Alvin Bragg is bringing for political reasons .A post arraignment press conference from Bragg showed he was not willing to really shed any light on the doubts about the case. People seemed to be claiming that the case might involve crimes that had little to do with Stormy Daniels (real name Stephanie Clifford) and hush money to her or anybody else. No, they really did not however.

To be clear, I do not doubt that Trump did the things he was said in the indictment to have done. I also do not doubt that they are probably technically illegal. It goes without saying I think he deserves to be locked up for a host of reasons, but it is unfair and un-American to stretch to go after someone on some sort of technicality for a case that would otherwise not be brought if not for the political aspect of it. As I have said before, Mr. "Lock Her Up" has nobody to blame but himself,but I want to see America be better than Donald Trump  and honesty compels me to say that this is a week case and I only hope that it does not harm the more legitimate efforts to hold him to account for the things he has done.

He was charges with 34 felonies. That sounds pretty bad but it seems like these are more misdemeanor offenses that had the statute of limitations expire, so now the prosecutor is calling them felonies. Even more significantly in  my mind, if these are truly crimes, I think they should have been federal crimes, because Trump at the time he would have committed them was an active candidate for federal office. The Biden Justice Department, led by Merrick Garland, had certainly looked into all of this and determined not to charge Trump. The recent former District Attorney in Manhattan also took a pass. It looked like Bragg had done the same as well before a recent civil judgment in New York went against the Trump Organization and he suddenly felt emboldened to try to lock the big guy up. That is not how justice is supposed to work, even if we all know deep down inside that the person is a criminal. There is a chance that this all may be dismissed by a judge on technical legal grounds before a trial. The trial if it occurs will not be until next year though. For all we know, Trump may already have been in many other courtrooms before stepping back into a a New York City one. If he does, he will have to contend with a jury made up of overwhelmingly Democrat Manhattanites, No wonder, he may try to get the case moved to Staten Island. Hoping that a jury reaches a partisan conclusion and not one based on the evidence and the facts is un-American. It is something Trump would advocate apply to others, but he is wrong on that and it is wrong to do it to him as well.

 

Some will say that Trump tried to fool the voters by actions taken in New York as a candidate for President in 2016 and thus New York needs to prosecute him for that even if the Feds do not. For one thing, that sounds like the ridiculous argument Trumpists taken in saying that Twitter withholding information about Hunter Biden  is the reason Joe Biden beat Trump in 2020.  Ultimately, these matters are to be left up to the votes. "Hiding dirt" is hardly unprecedented in Presidential politics, and while it might be immoral, it is not illegal. Did anyone really think Donald Trump was such a wonderful husband and human that his paying off hush money to a porn star would have brought them to vote for Hillary Clinton?

If the voters of New York were the victims of this criminal scheme from Trump and his lackeys to cover up information, it still did not prevent him from losing the state in 2016 by over 20 points .It seems to me like Bragg and his team should have taken a pass on this case. Unless of course, the real agenda is helping Democrats, not by getting a conviction of Trump on a weak case, but by bringing poor, idiotic Republican Primary voters back to his side, just when it looked like they may be searching for the off ramp.

A couple of days later, the main political story seemed to move to Nashville, were the overwhelming Republican Tennessee House of Representatives voted to expel two duly elected Democrat Members. A third Democrat was almost expelled, but survived by one vote. She is an older white woman, while the two were younger black men who were pretty new to the Chamber. Those optics alone look terrible, sparing the white person but kicking out the two African-Americans. Before getting into anything else though, it has to be said that almost all of the the Republicans voted to expel all three of the Democrats, so logically, they cannot be accused of having a racial double standard. A few Republicans made a distinction though and determined that the white female Representative had not misbehaved as badly as the other two did, which is exactly a point she had made in her own defense. After the vote, she said that race was likely the factor in why she was spared and of course came to defense of her ousted colleagues. Again, the optics alone for Republicans on this and how it can be painted along racial lives is just so blaring. It is also not helpful politically, regardless of what one thinks about the Second Amendment, for conservative Republicans to look more focused on punishing protest than addressing gun violence.

This was a huge strategic mistake by Republicans in my view across the board. None of three should have been expelled. The two that were are now national celebrities, raising tons of money for their political coiffers and will almost certainly be back in the very same seats they were kicked out of in a matter of months, if not weeks or less.

 

The backstory is that in the wake of the horrific mass shooting at a Christian school in Nashville, (in which I would assume that most of the adult victims or the parents of the child victims were probably Republican voters) gun control activists came to the State Capitol demanding for the body to ban assault weapons or things of that nature. To say the least, the votes in the legislature are not there to do that (and I personally think that gun control is ineffective, and even if it worked would just be a Band-Aid on a much larger societal failure.)  During proceedings, perhaps during a recess of the debates, these three Democrats led protestors in chants from the well, and a megaphone was involved. 

There is little doubt this was all against House rules, and thus some warning or punishment could have been meted out but outright expulsion took things way too far and sets a very bad precedent. This could now very easily happen to Republican legislators in very blue state chambers. 

To be sure, all should be very cautious after what happened in the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021 in regards to angry protestors trying to disrupt a legislative body. This was a little bit less of an actual attempted insurrection though and just people acting rude and out of turn. The Democrats in question should have known better but they were out trying to make a name for themselves on this issue and because of the Republican reaction, certainly have gotten it The actions were temporarily destructive but not violent.. The Democrats could have been warned, maybe even censured, told that if it happens again, votes to expel them will take place, but this was all a hugely irresponsible overreaction because Republicans are so butt-hurt over the criticism that party got over January 6th and were looking for a "they do it too" moment. The emotions of the moment on all sides after the shooting and the never ending gun control political kabuki theater came to a head and Republicans felt like they had to do something to prove their power in that particular House super-majority and punish the young rebels, who just so happen to be the kind of young African-American politicians who will become huge stars online and on MSNBC. One of the two seems especially gifted rhetorically. It is said these two now former State Representatives were hoping to be voted out for what they did and thus become political martyrs. There is just so much political grandstanding all around in both parties all across the country at all levels of government.

What comes next in Tennessee? Well, there are now two vacant seats in districts that are not going to elect a Republican. Unlike Congress, state House vacancies are usually filled by a vote of the local party or government entity. So, the two who were kicked out are going to get reappointed (if they want to be) in very short order. That will bring them right back to the same chamber they were kicked out of and the same desks they sat at. There will have to be special elections to complete the terms, but I think it is a pretty good bet to say that those two men will will those elections. They will be back in the Tennessee House and will not be able to be kicked out again for whatever they did last week. This is all just a huge show and waste of time and especially a waste of taxpayer money to have to hold special elections just to get back to where everything was at the beginning of the day on April 6th.

 

State governments used to be contrasted favorably to Congress in terms of their abilities to work together and be "laboratories of democracy." Now, things seem to be changing. With hyper-partisanship and gerrymandering perfected in states by both sides, many states are simply dominated by one party or the other. The actions being taken by legislative bodies and some Governors are more strident than anything being proposed in Washington D.C. States are moving to both counter the federal government, where partisan control shifts back and forth and is less certain from one election to another, and local governments in parts of the state where the voters back the other party which is in the minority statewide.

Our American democracy is still the greatest of anyplace in the world, but it really does feel more and more damaged these days.