It’s the thoughts that count, part 2

The problem with American politics (and, to a great extent, politics in many countries around the world today) can be summed up in an old line from Yeats: “… the centre cannot hold.” In California, few people are even trying to make it hold.

For much of the post-World War II era, the United States bounced between center-right and center-left leaders. They each changed a bit, but a broad consensus on economic and defense matters gave us a stability that created a broad middle class, the biggest global alliance system in history, and an economy that was the envy of the world. But inevitably that consensus broke down, and both major parties increasingly heeded their bases as the middle ground fell out from underneath them. 

This has led many on the far edges of both parties to say the real problem the country faced wasn’t the other extreme; it was those awful moderates who stood in the way of the extremes implementing their plans. If you’ve ever been unfortunate enough to read an Ann Coulter book or stumble into an Occupy Oakland encampment, you know what I mean.

But I’m reminded of Paul Krugman’s May 9, 2016 New York Times blog post “The Facts Have a Well-Known Center-Left Bias.” He cited feedback he was getting from fans of Bernie Sanders, “insisting that anything I say must be wrong, because I criticized their hero. And this suggests to me that we may need a clarification of the doctrine that facts have a well-known liberal bias. More specifically, they seem to have a center-left bias: conservatives are big on empirical denial, but so are some of the U.S. left.”

Democrats, who rule California largely unimpeded by Republicans, have a national problem in that they control none of the three branches of the federal government, they’ve been losing male voters, and their brand is “toxic.” Californians are proud of claiming that what happens here goes national; that’s a boastful overstatement, but sometimes California does start political movements (such as the tax revolt of the 1970s). However, if California Democrats want to not only help save their national party but also right their listing ship here in this deep-blue state, then they need to stop intentionally putting themselves on the wrong side of numerous issues.

Tim Anaya, who heads up communications for the Pacific Research Institute, has expressed bemusement at the Democrats’ inclination to be on the wrong side of so many 80–20 issues — that is, issues on which about 70 to 80 percent of the population feels one way. It’s pretty easy to find out what voters think, and see where they reach overwhelming agreement on an issue; yet all too often, state Democrats prefer catering to the 20 percent fringes.

Consider, immigration. As I noted here in January, polling has found massive bipartisan majorities for deporting illegal immigrants who are guilty of violent crimes. That includes not just nearly 90 percent of Republicans but nearly 80 percent of Democrats.

KQED’s political correspondent Marisa Lagos noted in February that Democrats “don’t even want to brag about what they have done. The state prison system has handed over [about] 6,000 undocumented immigrants in the last six years to federal immigration authorities because they had serious or violent offenses. Nobody in Sacramento is standing up and crowing about that.”

Lawyer and political analyst Melissa Caen said, “Maybe it’s the message that needs to change right now if you’re sitting there [thinking] I’m going to be quiet and I’m not going to say, ‘Yeah, we actually do cooperate, and you know it’s a good thing that we do that sometimes. Here’s the place where I think that line should be.’”

Crime is another example. California voters had a rethink on the infamous Proposition 47, which turned some crimes into hand-slap nothings. Last year, they overwhelmingly voted for Proposition 36; more than two-thirds of voters supported the measure, which reclassified some crimes to be eligible for tougher penalties. Newsom and Democratic leaders in Sacramento tried mightily to derail the proposition, then to do an end-run around it to try to confuse voters, but it passed. Even after it passed, the governor made clear he didn’t want to fund it.

If California voters are being ignored by their elected leaders, who are the leaders listening to?

Another example: Assembly Democrats got some unwelcome publicity earlier this year when they tried, tried, and tried some more to exclude 16- and 17-year-olds from a bill increasing penalties for people who solicit minors for sex. According to Politico’s Lindsey Holden, “Democrats want to remove 16- and 17-year-olds in large part because they fear parents upset about interracial or LGBTQ relationships involving older teens could prompt them to weaponize solicitation laws.” Wait, what? “Interracial or LGBTQ relationships” are fine; the bill is about people buying sex, which is a business relationship. The Democrats’ rationale looks more like misdirection or obfuscation.

And the list goes on. Radical agendas in the schools? Got it. Out-of-control public spending? We’ve definitely got that. Even telling department stores how to display toys? Got it.

It takes real determination to be wrong on so many issues for so long.

President Barack Obama was quoted as having said his foreign policy rule was “Don’t do stupid s —.” California Democrats might want to start with that as a baseline strategy. In part 3 of this series, we’ll explore other things they can do to fix themselves.

Also, see part 1.