Van Jones: “If progressives have a politics that says all White people are racist, all men are toxic, and all billionaires are evil, it’s kinda hard to keep them on your side. If you’re chasing people out of the party, you can’t be mad when they leave.” pic.twitter.com/WchdC0u5wx
— Taya (@travelingflying) February 23, 2026
Jones added "and maybe if we had a different politics, dignity for everybody everybody is respected and we need you, more pople might stay."
Actually, though, the Democratic Party does have the kind of politics embodied in Jones. It is a politics of self-flaggelation. Last July, James Carville described his own party as "Constipated. Leaderless. Confused..... The Democratic Party is in shambles." Similarly, Rahm Emanuel a year ago maintained "politics is adddition, not subtraction, and we've been doing subtraction really well." he claims "both the political and economic establishment.... and we're all part of it, I'm part of it- we have failed the American people."
Not that the Republican Party has failed the American people- us, too! And Van Jones appears to be concerened that Democrats are chasing white people, men, and billionaires out of the party, which would repesent significantly more than half of voters.
Nonetheless, if there is a better way of chasing voters generally from your political party, there may be no better way than by saying "we have failed the American people" or "we stink, too."
The criticism of Emanuel and Jones- and the other Democratic politicians who have said something similar- is particularly ironic. They both see their Party as subtracting people and they are, in an odd sort of way, correct- just not in the manner they believe (Jones, probably) or not as they care to admit (Emanuel, probably).
Because a funny thing- somewhat controversial but insufficiently so- happened three years ago this month, when the Democratic Party placed South Carolina first on the party's presidential nominating calendar. It was catapulted to the head of the table, granting the state status which New Hampshire had previously possessed. Two months earlier, President Biden had written the Rules and Bylaws Committe, maintaing
For decades, Black voters in particular have been the backbone of the Democratic Party but have been pushed to the back of the early primary process. We rely on these voters in elections but have not recognized their importance in our nominating calendar. It is time to stop taking these voters for granted, and time to give them a louder and earlier voice in the process.
Prior to 2024, South Carolina had been sixth on the party's presidential primary/caucus schedule and as the state immediately preceding Super Tuesday, had more than once proven pivotal. However, as was noted shortly before the 2/24 primary in the state
The campaign's not just signaling. It's broadcasting to Black voters that they are the priority, and they're why the Party chose South Carolina to lead the nominating contest.
Toutin a "six-figure" ad blitz in South Carolina, Demoratic Party officials noted it's the party's earliest ever spending during a presidential contest on outreach to Black voters.
"When you think about he heart and the backbone of the Democratic Party,if there are any folks who deserve to go from the back of the bus to driving the damn bus, it's the Black folks here in South Carolina," Jaime Harrison, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said last week at a historically Black college in Sumter.
South Carolina was not given the interests of diversity. Not only are there many black voters in the Democratic primary in the state, they are a clear majority. If the Party wanted to reward a state which has a large number of black voters but which is more racially representative of the nation, it could have chosen Maryland, Illinois, or perhaps a couple of others. If it wanted to give a nod to a swing state, it could have chosen to be first New Hampshire (as it had been), Nevada, Wisonsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, or perhaps Colorado, Minnesota, or New Mexico, which typically vote Democratic but not by rock-solid margins.
Instead, the Party selected South Carolina for reasons of racial preference and, as usual in presidential and statewide elections there, got their rear-ends kicked, as it expected.
Perhaps that's wise,or at least not grossly unwise, because black voters have been particularly supportive of the Democratic Party. Yet, choosing a state precisely because its (primary) voters are predominantly black should be abhorrent to a prominent Democrat who complains that his Party "says all White people are racist." Nor is it consistent with advocating that Democrats concentrate on "addition."
Similarly, in 2020, neither Jones, or Emanuel (nor Carville) was heard offering criticism or even skepticism, maybe a word of caution, of the Black Lives Matter protests or the movement it symbolzied. That would have demonstrated leadership, boldness, or prescience.
But there was no criticism then, nor was there more than a tiny bit when the Democratic Party decided race would trumpet all considerations. Now, people are questioning the Party while being either ignorant or dishonest about it, and they're doing it without offering specifics. It all rings hollow.
No comments:
Post a Comment