My comment this morning is not related to this article although this was valuable. I’m somewhat upset after waking up this morning and finding out that President Trump addressed a group in Grand Island Nebraska and during his so-called campaign rally, he suggested that Iran take out LA and San Diego as they were not valuable cities. This absolutely got to my core. I am so upset. I cannot believe an American president would speak this way to a group of people. The president represents every citizen in America and to think he’s involved in a war with a Ron right now and says they have been obliterated of all of their weapons and yet he’s telling them to go ahead and take out two valuable cities in our country. Who talks like this? This sounds like a person that is very dangerous and deranged. I cannot believe that people are not upset this morning whether you’re a republican or a democrat this absolutely is no way for an American president to speak to people, and I can’t understand why people are not calling him out this morning.
The comments he makes get worse every day. He is the most unprofessional president we have ever had. I’m trying to understand what other countries think about America when our own president speaks like this about the very people he’s trusted to take care of and look out for their well-being. Obviously, I’m upset this morning. I’ll get off my soapbox and maybe you can provide some insight to us today …thank you.
And just as appalling was the applause he got from his audience after saying that. What is wrong with so many of our fellow citizens that they would give approval of such an awful remark?
Agreed. I do wonder, though, how much Trump is scraping from the bottom of his voter base in his rallies these days. If you're still crazy enough to believe his actions are for the betterment of the country, you are significantly lost and I don't think you'll ever get to reality with the rest of us. Not an excuse, but I do think theses are the worst of the worst.
Thank you, Cynthia! I have to admit that the appalling comment you mentioned ("he suggested that Iran take out LA and San Diego as they were not valuable cities") was one that I missed. It is now obvious that this wretched man must be removed, if not by the 25th Amendment (not likely), then by a BLUE WAVE in November. Thanks, again! 👍🙇♂️
The words I think of when I think of Trump aren't fit to print here. Safe to save he's immoral, he's dumb (with a B!), and he's unfit.
This morning I heard Thom Tillis hawking his book about sycophants (mirror?). He put the blame on Noem and Hegseth, for example, but HE supported both. Any FOOL could see that neither of these people was fit to serve as a Cabinet Secretary. He blamed "bad" advice/advisors on the current situation with immigration, war, and the economy - The President is getting bad advice. Has he MET Donald Trump? Trump doesn't listen to ANYONE who doesn't echo what he already thinks.
Glad he's leaving the Senate. I hope that he's wrong and MAGA loses the Senate along with the House.
I felt a similar outrage about the letter he enclosed when he sent $90 to seniors. A complete and total lie and disparaging name calling for democrats. And we paid to have the lie sent out and to be called names. WTH.
You got a check??? I did not - curious who is getting them. I would send it back because I think it's ridiculous and a bribe, but I haven't been given that opportunity!
https://youtu.be/QmkD4M0FVTo?si=E7J6soCxkn-qjplV I received my $90 directly to my bank account yesterday. Medicare. Congress has had this money for years. Long before DT was elected. As usual, he is trying to take credit. Idiot.
I didn’t get one, either. If I did, I’d send it to Al-Sayed! I don’t agree with him on everything, but I still think he’s a great candidate who will open an important dialogue.
It is hard to decipher what is more troubling, a president who continually spews hate and revenge, saying things like the LA and San Diego comment, calling a senatorial candidate “ Tranny Annie” because of her support for children and gender, “ shove it up there ass” in reference to the Republican need to win the mid terms, touting himself as the man who knows more about anything than anyone else, what is to me equally or more troubling are the people who cheer and support this cruel and disgraceful administration…our country is so angry, so divided, healing will be a long process
It should read Iran, not Ron. I was so upset I couldn’t type so I used the microphone and apparently it didn’t pick it up and I didn’t catch it before I submitted it.
This has always been his attitude: he only bothers to pretend to serve those who worship him; and has never hidden his hatred for any who voice criticism or opposition , or support our laws and Constitution, or report truthfully on his corruption and incompetence, or are darker the "ecru" on the ICE/Gestapo/Kavanaugh Guilt-determining Color Swatch or are female, or serve in our military, or are Capitol Police...
FOUR WEEKS until midterms: make a plan to vote, and don't be afraid to ask OTHERS to vote, as well. Americans outnumber Republicans 2:1, so LET'S TAKE BACK OUR NATION and return to being Constitutional and respecting laws that apply to EVERYONE (even the very richest and most powerful pedophiles in and with connection to the 2/3 of the remaining White House).
I am one of those Independents who can’t stand Trump but I am also leery of some Democratic positions. The Democratic Party is the vehicle we must use to rid ourselves of MAGA.
I appreciate your comment about the Dems being "the vehicle we must use to rid ourselves of MAGA". I'm a registered, lifelong Democrat, and while I'm excited about many of their programs, I'm clear-eyed about their weaknesses as well. One thing I know for sure: I will stay on my state and federal representatives to deliver on their promises.
We just criticize Democrats extremely carelessly. Not only do we not back up our criticism with solid arguments, we indulge (and for SO long already) in just claiming vague stuff the way you do here, without even THINKING of being precise in our criticism.
Cynicism on the left is one of the main reasons why we ended up here in the first place.
So with that... what are those "weaknesses" more precisely?
Sheesh, slow your roll! I don't think saying that the Dems have weaknesses is extreme criticizing! Believe me, I know what extreme criticizing is as I've been doing it regarding Trump and the Republican party for a steady 12 years. Also, I'm not about to add to a quick acknowledgenent reply with details of what I mean by weaknesses. Every person, animal, organization, etc. on earth, in this dimension and time has weaknesses. We do not live in perfection.
See, you're doing it again: you blindly repeat that "Dems have weaknesses," you even add that you are "clear-eyed" about that, and then... give NO concrete example of such a weakness, let alone arguments to prove that this would be true. Even after someone asks you to give at least one example.
Why not?
Why just spread more cynicism and blind Dem-bashing? You really think that's needed, especially today?
As long as the majority of Democrats in Congress are controlled by corporate special interests and AIPAC funding, we the people will never have the basic social safety nets that citizens of every other modern democracy on the planet enjoy, and we will continue to be involved in conflicts in the Middle East. People like Chuck Schumer and Hakim Jeffries either are unwilling, or do not know how, to stand up to bullies and continually let themselves get steamrolled; operating as if they were Charlie Brown expecting Lucy to finally let him kick that damn football. You don't negotiate with monsters and criminals, like Jeffreys did. The Democrats need a lot of change inside their ranks if we are going to have a Congress that actually serves the people who elected them. I think it's a fair criticism and it's the reason I support people like Al-Sayed.
I think your cap is a bit too tight on your head. I don't owe you any explanation of what I consider weaknesses in the Democratic Party and this isn't a great place for debate. Regardless, I'm sure you'd spin out of control if I did mention the few issues I have. I happen to vote Dem every time, straight up and down the ticket, and I’ve been doing so for 51 years. Unless they turn into complete idiots like the Republican party, I will always vote this way. I'd consider Independent candidates, too, if I thought they were liberal enough and their values seemed to match mine. End of story.
You'll have to choose: either you want a democracy and then you "owe" it to society as a whole to back up any claim, because without that, democracy cannot survive (especially in discussion forums like these)... or you want to blindly identify with whatever belief you have and take disagreements personally and then flee. The result of that all-too-common practice today is clear: the installation of neofascism.
There is a large group on the left that doesn't vote for the Democratic candidate, because it isn't the candidate they liked the most. That is a significant weakness. We have weaknesses in messaging. We sometimes lack the courage to stand up for groups when they are unfairly marginalized by the right. We sometimes lack the courage to stand up TO groups that are demanding unreasonable concessions to earn their vote. Etc. Fortunately, we don't have the most significant weakness: we don't have a leader of our party that has completely dissolved our morals, ideologies, and ability to make American lives better. That should make everyone in the middle and left very proud.
In a primary, sometimes your candidate wins and sometimes they lose. We have to accept that and continually put in efforts to bring people closer to our ideals. Just remember, plenty of others doing the same thing.
I actually got the phrase about the Democratic Party being “the vehicle” from Sarah Longwell of The Bulwark. I am listening to her book How to Eat an Elephant. I recommend it.
Name the Democratic party positions you are uncomfortable with, it is not hard to be specific, it is too easy to just say you are “leery of some Democratic positions.”
Just another reason why we need more than just 2 viable parties. For that to work we need to get rid of the Electoral College. The Democrats have always created a platform at their conventions. The Republicans in the Trump era didn’t bother with a platform. It was literally “whatever Trump wants.” This week in Illinois RepublicanJim Durkin, former House Minority Leader in the state legislature, endorsed Democratic governor JB Pritzger over his Republican opponent Darren Bailey. It’s an encouraging sign that support for Trump is fading and affecting elections at all levels.
Independent until the two-party system is improved. I don't align well with either party, but I don't fault them for that - we need to find a better way to distinguish different groups in a coalition so that moderate Republicans can feel comfortable working/voting with moderate dems. That's not meant to be a slight against Progressives - I just think it's a shame that the entire party is viewed from the same lens, when it's a WIDE range of viewpoints.
Well said. Perfect example is the coalition of countries that got together to stop Hitler. Like you said we need countries on are side, something Hegsbreath doesn’t understand.
Yes. There was once a time when there were liberal and progressive Republicans and conservative Democrats. The result was a much more dynamic process of building ad-hoc coalitions to address particular things. Right now we need a coalition to preserve democracy.
Adam, you're so right when you say "none of those differences are as big as the threat in front of us"... you're either for democracy and the rule of law, or you're not ... I welcome anyone for the first one!
Yes, we absolutely need an "uncomfortably big coalition".
Next, we need to get comfortable with disagreements and learn to engage in real, respectful debates rather than running away as soon as someone disagrees with us.
Recently a fellow progressive told me, when we disagreed about an actually pretty minor thing, "I choose not to engage on this topic any further". That was before she gave ANY argument backing up her claim.
This is not okay. For far too long, progressives have forgotten how to HONOR healthy disagreements and engage with them. That is on us. No MAGA cult ever forced us to do so. It's also on us to urgently drop this intellectual laziness and get real again, especially now that democracy itself depends on it!
Exactly! And ALL of us, since none of us possess The Truth.
If we stop engaging in debates about politics at home, at work, at church etc, we contribute to a collective dumbing down of society as a whole, which cannot but lead to political and other disasters.
Democracy vitally needs disagreements AND constant debating of those disagreements.
Not a culture that instead values emotional reactivity...
Exactly! All too often today, the media claim that the US is so "divided", but that seems to mostly refer to the fact that there are a lot of disagreements.
Disagreements are GOOD, in a democracy - including inside one party (even more so when there are only two parties).
Real "division" only arises when we refuse to back up our claims with arguments and evidence or adopt a "post-truth" attitude where everyone has the "right" to believe whatever they want, no questions asked.
Example: apparently Jennifer Dyke already blocked me (making it impossible for me to see and therefore reply to other people replying to my posts in the same thread), ONLY because I asked for arguments backing up her claims (as a fellow Democrat, moreover).
That literally divides us, and can never lead to anything good.
I totally agree we need respectful debates. This morning I read about 2 men in Ohio in a dog park whose disagreement about our president ended in gunfire and now potentially prison for an 80 year old man. The 3rd man trying to break up the fight said he doubted that it actually changed either of their opinions. We have to do better and have meaningful conversations about our thoughts and ideas.
Great column. We surely need a large and wide ranging coalition of people who want to ensure that democracy reigns here. A coalition of any and all who believe in our constitution and the rule of law. A coalition of people who remember what is what like when their immigrant families came here and struggled for a better way of life. A coalition of people who believe that our allies are valuable and essential to preserving a just peace. A coalition of people who believe that stealing, violating ethics standards and self dealing in office goes against the oath of office one took for the privilege of holding public office. These basic tenets are neither right nor left . I’ve said before that this country has a big tent open to many different people and opinions . There is a place for anyone and everyone of good will.
I would encourage everyone to find a bridging organization and learn how to talk across the aisle (or even within your aisle). I moderate workshops for Braver Angels and I see the magic that happens when we lean into the discomfort and learn to disagree better. Let’s make a bigger tent where all perspectives are welcomed and disagreement leads to better solutions, not more contempt.
Thank you Adam for this post, and for illuminating the need Dr. El-Sayid talks about, in building a broader coalition. I also appreciate Dr El-Sayid’s reference to the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Although Dr. El-Sayid mis-attributed a specific quote to Dr. King, the legacy of Dr. King was all about inclusion. In 1960, there were people in the civil rights movement who disagreed with his commitment to nonviolence. When challenged, Dr King said, “There can be unity when there isn’t uniformity.” His point was that people could differ over how to pursue change while still unite in the struggle for it.
Thanks, Adam, for this post. As a left-leaning independent, I am not always comfortable with Dem proposals, but we are facing a choice between democracy and dictatorship. That is not a choice. So, squabble about policy later, but right now it is essential the Democratic tent includes everyone who is taking a stand against the authoritarianism currently supported by what remains of the GOP. I grew up in a Goldwater-right Republican family, but by 1980 I voted for John Anderson, and I have been unimpressed by the two parties ever since. But that has not kept me ftom voting - ever - and has made me research the people for whom I have voted. It's only been since 2016 that I have voted only for Dems, since I've concluded anyone choosing to run as a Republican is demonstrating spectacularly bad judgment. This election and 2028 are too important to the continuance of our republic to vote for a Republican candidate in any race. I truly hope that a new Republican party devoid of the influence of trump (more importantly devoid of the Project 2025 cabal) emerges in the next few years so that we actually have options. But that's not the case this year.
You wrote "It's only been since 2016 that I have voted only for Dems". That logically entails that in 2010, you still voted for at least some Republicans, no?
Ah....I may have voted for a Rep in a local race. I don't remember. But since trump's first term, I have not found a GOP candidate in any race I could support because running as a GOP candidate means they accept trump - and that makes their judgment flawed.
In any organization there is a tendency to install purity tests. But this reduces the power of the group. While Dems fight among themselves with good faith they forget about fighting their opponent who are stealing the power of the government, and stealing money from citizens, using bad faith.
One of Trump's many weaknesses is his demand for personal loyalty and his disloyalty to his own supporters. His "my way or the highway" pushes people out of the tent. This weakness opens the door to the big tent strategy Adam advises. The Big Tent is the solution to reinstalling the rule of law, adherence to the Constitution, in this nation.
In the 2024 election Trump received votes from 30% of the total American adult population. Harris and the Democratic Pary received a little less than 30%. The "winner" of the 2024 election, with 40%, was "Did Not Vote".
Trump is shrinking his Trump Party by his self destructive words and stupid wrong decisions. He has turned out to be a poor representative of the oligarchs who pull his strings.
The wise course for the Democratic Party is to welcome his disaffected former supporters. And invite and embrace the Independents and the 40% non-voters. Build a very Big Tent! That is what Majority Rule is all about.
Don’t forget that Pete Buttigieg went on Fox a lot to try to reach that audience. Syed is not the first one to do it. Pete needs to be acknowledged for that too.
There’s a phenomenon called the narcissism of small differences that addresses how like- minded groups can fragment over less important differences in values, preferences, opinions, issues etc.
Take as an example religious sects fighting over relatively minor differences in interpretations of scripture.
In a sense it’s losing sight of the forest for the trees. We need to be cognizant of this and strive to not let it divide us.
My comment this morning is not related to this article although this was valuable. I’m somewhat upset after waking up this morning and finding out that President Trump addressed a group in Grand Island Nebraska and during his so-called campaign rally, he suggested that Iran take out LA and San Diego as they were not valuable cities. This absolutely got to my core. I am so upset. I cannot believe an American president would speak this way to a group of people. The president represents every citizen in America and to think he’s involved in a war with a Ron right now and says they have been obliterated of all of their weapons and yet he’s telling them to go ahead and take out two valuable cities in our country. Who talks like this? This sounds like a person that is very dangerous and deranged. I cannot believe that people are not upset this morning whether you’re a republican or a democrat this absolutely is no way for an American president to speak to people, and I can’t understand why people are not calling him out this morning.
The comments he makes get worse every day. He is the most unprofessional president we have ever had. I’m trying to understand what other countries think about America when our own president speaks like this about the very people he’s trusted to take care of and look out for their well-being. Obviously, I’m upset this morning. I’ll get off my soapbox and maybe you can provide some insight to us today …thank you.
And just as appalling was the applause he got from his audience after saying that. What is wrong with so many of our fellow citizens that they would give approval of such an awful remark?
Agreed. I do wonder, though, how much Trump is scraping from the bottom of his voter base in his rallies these days. If you're still crazy enough to believe his actions are for the betterment of the country, you are significantly lost and I don't think you'll ever get to reality with the rest of us. Not an excuse, but I do think theses are the worst of the worst.
Thank you, Cynthia! I have to admit that the appalling comment you mentioned ("he suggested that Iran take out LA and San Diego as they were not valuable cities") was one that I missed. It is now obvious that this wretched man must be removed, if not by the 25th Amendment (not likely), then by a BLUE WAVE in November. Thanks, again! 👍🙇♂️
The words I think of when I think of Trump aren't fit to print here. Safe to save he's immoral, he's dumb (with a B!), and he's unfit.
This morning I heard Thom Tillis hawking his book about sycophants (mirror?). He put the blame on Noem and Hegseth, for example, but HE supported both. Any FOOL could see that neither of these people was fit to serve as a Cabinet Secretary. He blamed "bad" advice/advisors on the current situation with immigration, war, and the economy - The President is getting bad advice. Has he MET Donald Trump? Trump doesn't listen to ANYONE who doesn't echo what he already thinks.
Glad he's leaving the Senate. I hope that he's wrong and MAGA loses the Senate along with the House.
I felt a similar outrage about the letter he enclosed when he sent $90 to seniors. A complete and total lie and disparaging name calling for democrats. And we paid to have the lie sent out and to be called names. WTH.
You got a check??? I did not - curious who is getting them. I would send it back because I think it's ridiculous and a bribe, but I haven't been given that opportunity!
I'd give it to a Democratic candidate's campaign fund...
Exactly!!!
https://youtu.be/QmkD4M0FVTo?si=E7J6soCxkn-qjplV I received my $90 directly to my bank account yesterday. Medicare. Congress has had this money for years. Long before DT was elected. As usual, he is trying to take credit. Idiot.
I didn’t get one, either. If I did, I’d send it to Al-Sayed! I don’t agree with him on everything, but I still think he’s a great candidate who will open an important dialogue.
https://youtu.be/QmkD4M0FVTo?si=E7J6soCxkn-qjplV
It isn’t easy having a traitor for president.
It is hard to decipher what is more troubling, a president who continually spews hate and revenge, saying things like the LA and San Diego comment, calling a senatorial candidate “ Tranny Annie” because of her support for children and gender, “ shove it up there ass” in reference to the Republican need to win the mid terms, touting himself as the man who knows more about anything than anyone else, what is to me equally or more troubling are the people who cheer and support this cruel and disgraceful administration…our country is so angry, so divided, healing will be a long process
It should read Iran, not Ron. I was so upset I couldn’t type so I used the microphone and apparently it didn’t pick it up and I didn’t catch it before I submitted it.
And then they were the people in Trump’s audience who cheered when he said takeout Los Angeles and takeout San Diego. They are worse than he is.
This has always been his attitude: he only bothers to pretend to serve those who worship him; and has never hidden his hatred for any who voice criticism or opposition , or support our laws and Constitution, or report truthfully on his corruption and incompetence, or are darker the "ecru" on the ICE/Gestapo/Kavanaugh Guilt-determining Color Swatch or are female, or serve in our military, or are Capitol Police...
FOUR WEEKS until midterms: make a plan to vote, and don't be afraid to ask OTHERS to vote, as well. Americans outnumber Republicans 2:1, so LET'S TAKE BACK OUR NATION and return to being Constitutional and respecting laws that apply to EVERYONE (even the very richest and most powerful pedophiles in and with connection to the 2/3 of the remaining White House).
I am one of those Independents who can’t stand Trump but I am also leery of some Democratic positions. The Democratic Party is the vehicle we must use to rid ourselves of MAGA.
I appreciate your comment about the Dems being "the vehicle we must use to rid ourselves of MAGA". I'm a registered, lifelong Democrat, and while I'm excited about many of their programs, I'm clear-eyed about their weaknesses as well. One thing I know for sure: I will stay on my state and federal representatives to deliver on their promises.
But what are those alleged "weaknesses"?
Imho we on the left have become WAY too cynical.
We just criticize Democrats extremely carelessly. Not only do we not back up our criticism with solid arguments, we indulge (and for SO long already) in just claiming vague stuff the way you do here, without even THINKING of being precise in our criticism.
Cynicism on the left is one of the main reasons why we ended up here in the first place.
So with that... what are those "weaknesses" more precisely?
Sheesh, slow your roll! I don't think saying that the Dems have weaknesses is extreme criticizing! Believe me, I know what extreme criticizing is as I've been doing it regarding Trump and the Republican party for a steady 12 years. Also, I'm not about to add to a quick acknowledgenent reply with details of what I mean by weaknesses. Every person, animal, organization, etc. on earth, in this dimension and time has weaknesses. We do not live in perfection.
See, you're doing it again: you blindly repeat that "Dems have weaknesses," you even add that you are "clear-eyed" about that, and then... give NO concrete example of such a weakness, let alone arguments to prove that this would be true. Even after someone asks you to give at least one example.
Why not?
Why just spread more cynicism and blind Dem-bashing? You really think that's needed, especially today?
As long as the majority of Democrats in Congress are controlled by corporate special interests and AIPAC funding, we the people will never have the basic social safety nets that citizens of every other modern democracy on the planet enjoy, and we will continue to be involved in conflicts in the Middle East. People like Chuck Schumer and Hakim Jeffries either are unwilling, or do not know how, to stand up to bullies and continually let themselves get steamrolled; operating as if they were Charlie Brown expecting Lucy to finally let him kick that damn football. You don't negotiate with monsters and criminals, like Jeffreys did. The Democrats need a lot of change inside their ranks if we are going to have a Congress that actually serves the people who elected them. I think it's a fair criticism and it's the reason I support people like Al-Sayed.
I think your cap is a bit too tight on your head. I don't owe you any explanation of what I consider weaknesses in the Democratic Party and this isn't a great place for debate. Regardless, I'm sure you'd spin out of control if I did mention the few issues I have. I happen to vote Dem every time, straight up and down the ticket, and I’ve been doing so for 51 years. Unless they turn into complete idiots like the Republican party, I will always vote this way. I'd consider Independent candidates, too, if I thought they were liberal enough and their values seemed to match mine. End of story.
You'll have to choose: either you want a democracy and then you "owe" it to society as a whole to back up any claim, because without that, democracy cannot survive (especially in discussion forums like these)... or you want to blindly identify with whatever belief you have and take disagreements personally and then flee. The result of that all-too-common practice today is clear: the installation of neofascism.
There is a large group on the left that doesn't vote for the Democratic candidate, because it isn't the candidate they liked the most. That is a significant weakness. We have weaknesses in messaging. We sometimes lack the courage to stand up for groups when they are unfairly marginalized by the right. We sometimes lack the courage to stand up TO groups that are demanding unreasonable concessions to earn their vote. Etc. Fortunately, we don't have the most significant weakness: we don't have a leader of our party that has completely dissolved our morals, ideologies, and ability to make American lives better. That should make everyone in the middle and left very proud.
In a primary, sometimes your candidate wins and sometimes they lose. We have to accept that and continually put in efforts to bring people closer to our ideals. Just remember, plenty of others doing the same thing.
I actually got the phrase about the Democratic Party being “the vehicle” from Sarah Longwell of The Bulwark. I am listening to her book How to Eat an Elephant. I recommend it.
Name the Democratic party positions you are uncomfortable with, it is not hard to be specific, it is too easy to just say you are “leery of some Democratic positions.”
So many registered Democrats (and Independents) have become intellectually lazy. Dem-bashing seems to have become their favorite daily exercise.
It's KILLING democracy itself.
In the meantime, more than 100 historians have proven that the Biden administration was actually one of the most productive of all US presidencies.
But who still cares about facts... ?
They also don't have to be specific. No one owes you that.
What Democratic positions more precisely?
Read The Hartman Report this morning
What does it say? And why do you believe that it is true?
Alice I had enough with his comments I mute his voice every time he is being interviewed 🧐😥
Just another reason why we need more than just 2 viable parties. For that to work we need to get rid of the Electoral College. The Democrats have always created a platform at their conventions. The Republicans in the Trump era didn’t bother with a platform. It was literally “whatever Trump wants.” This week in Illinois RepublicanJim Durkin, former House Minority Leader in the state legislature, endorsed Democratic governor JB Pritzger over his Republican opponent Darren Bailey. It’s an encouraging sign that support for Trump is fading and affecting elections at all levels.
Independent until the two-party system is improved. I don't align well with either party, but I don't fault them for that - we need to find a better way to distinguish different groups in a coalition so that moderate Republicans can feel comfortable working/voting with moderate dems. That's not meant to be a slight against Progressives - I just think it's a shame that the entire party is viewed from the same lens, when it's a WIDE range of viewpoints.
Well said. Perfect example is the coalition of countries that got together to stop Hitler. Like you said we need countries on are side, something Hegsbreath doesn’t understand.
Yes. There was once a time when there were liberal and progressive Republicans and conservative Democrats. The result was a much more dynamic process of building ad-hoc coalitions to address particular things. Right now we need a coalition to preserve democracy.
Adam, you're so right when you say "none of those differences are as big as the threat in front of us"... you're either for democracy and the rule of law, or you're not ... I welcome anyone for the first one!
As a progressive, I cannot agree more!
Yes, we absolutely need an "uncomfortably big coalition".
Next, we need to get comfortable with disagreements and learn to engage in real, respectful debates rather than running away as soon as someone disagrees with us.
Recently a fellow progressive told me, when we disagreed about an actually pretty minor thing, "I choose not to engage on this topic any further". That was before she gave ANY argument backing up her claim.
This is not okay. For far too long, progressives have forgotten how to HONOR healthy disagreements and engage with them. That is on us. No MAGA cult ever forced us to do so. It's also on us to urgently drop this intellectual laziness and get real again, especially now that democracy itself depends on it!
Actually listening to our disagreements means we might learn something new.
Exactly! And ALL of us, since none of us possess The Truth.
If we stop engaging in debates about politics at home, at work, at church etc, we contribute to a collective dumbing down of society as a whole, which cannot but lead to political and other disasters.
Democracy vitally needs disagreements AND constant debating of those disagreements.
Not a culture that instead values emotional reactivity...
Like knife sharpening--we need to hone our thoughts and POVs against a rough edge to get the best results.
Exactly! All too often today, the media claim that the US is so "divided", but that seems to mostly refer to the fact that there are a lot of disagreements.
Disagreements are GOOD, in a democracy - including inside one party (even more so when there are only two parties).
Real "division" only arises when we refuse to back up our claims with arguments and evidence or adopt a "post-truth" attitude where everyone has the "right" to believe whatever they want, no questions asked.
Example: apparently Jennifer Dyke already blocked me (making it impossible for me to see and therefore reply to other people replying to my posts in the same thread), ONLY because I asked for arguments backing up her claims (as a fellow Democrat, moreover).
That literally divides us, and can never lead to anything good.
I totally agree we need respectful debates. This morning I read about 2 men in Ohio in a dog park whose disagreement about our president ended in gunfire and now potentially prison for an 80 year old man. The 3rd man trying to break up the fight said he doubted that it actually changed either of their opinions. We have to do better and have meaningful conversations about our thoughts and ideas.
Great column. We surely need a large and wide ranging coalition of people who want to ensure that democracy reigns here. A coalition of any and all who believe in our constitution and the rule of law. A coalition of people who remember what is what like when their immigrant families came here and struggled for a better way of life. A coalition of people who believe that our allies are valuable and essential to preserving a just peace. A coalition of people who believe that stealing, violating ethics standards and self dealing in office goes against the oath of office one took for the privilege of holding public office. These basic tenets are neither right nor left . I’ve said before that this country has a big tent open to many different people and opinions . There is a place for anyone and everyone of good will.
I would encourage everyone to find a bridging organization and learn how to talk across the aisle (or even within your aisle). I moderate workshops for Braver Angels and I see the magic that happens when we lean into the discomfort and learn to disagree better. Let’s make a bigger tent where all perspectives are welcomed and disagreement leads to better solutions, not more contempt.
Thank you Adam for this post, and for illuminating the need Dr. El-Sayid talks about, in building a broader coalition. I also appreciate Dr El-Sayid’s reference to the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Although Dr. El-Sayid mis-attributed a specific quote to Dr. King, the legacy of Dr. King was all about inclusion. In 1960, there were people in the civil rights movement who disagreed with his commitment to nonviolence. When challenged, Dr King said, “There can be unity when there isn’t uniformity.” His point was that people could differ over how to pursue change while still unite in the struggle for it.
Thanks, Adam, for this post. As a left-leaning independent, I am not always comfortable with Dem proposals, but we are facing a choice between democracy and dictatorship. That is not a choice. So, squabble about policy later, but right now it is essential the Democratic tent includes everyone who is taking a stand against the authoritarianism currently supported by what remains of the GOP. I grew up in a Goldwater-right Republican family, but by 1980 I voted for John Anderson, and I have been unimpressed by the two parties ever since. But that has not kept me ftom voting - ever - and has made me research the people for whom I have voted. It's only been since 2016 that I have voted only for Dems, since I've concluded anyone choosing to run as a Republican is demonstrating spectacularly bad judgment. This election and 2028 are too important to the continuance of our republic to vote for a Republican candidate in any race. I truly hope that a new Republican party devoid of the influence of trump (more importantly devoid of the Project 2025 cabal) emerges in the next few years so that we actually have options. But that's not the case this year.
Uh... so in 2010, you voted for a GOP Congress?
And you did so because you were "unimpressed" by what Obama and Democrats had achieved in the first two years?
If yes, why exactly did you do that?
Uh...no! I voted for Dems that year - how did you "divine" I voted for GOP? I just said I researched candidates to determine who I vote for. Still do.
You wrote "It's only been since 2016 that I have voted only for Dems". That logically entails that in 2010, you still voted for at least some Republicans, no?
Ah....I may have voted for a Rep in a local race. I don't remember. But since trump's first term, I have not found a GOP candidate in any race I could support because running as a GOP candidate means they accept trump - and that makes their judgment flawed.
Oh I see. Yes, makes perfect sense, imho...
Wow! So well stated and well reported! Thank you both Abdul El-Sayed and Adam Kinzinger for sharing this with We the People! Thank you!🇺🇸
Well put, Adam.
Right on!
In any organization there is a tendency to install purity tests. But this reduces the power of the group. While Dems fight among themselves with good faith they forget about fighting their opponent who are stealing the power of the government, and stealing money from citizens, using bad faith.
One of Trump's many weaknesses is his demand for personal loyalty and his disloyalty to his own supporters. His "my way or the highway" pushes people out of the tent. This weakness opens the door to the big tent strategy Adam advises. The Big Tent is the solution to reinstalling the rule of law, adherence to the Constitution, in this nation.
In the 2024 election Trump received votes from 30% of the total American adult population. Harris and the Democratic Pary received a little less than 30%. The "winner" of the 2024 election, with 40%, was "Did Not Vote".
Trump is shrinking his Trump Party by his self destructive words and stupid wrong decisions. He has turned out to be a poor representative of the oligarchs who pull his strings.
The wise course for the Democratic Party is to welcome his disaffected former supporters. And invite and embrace the Independents and the 40% non-voters. Build a very Big Tent! That is what Majority Rule is all about.
Don’t forget that Pete Buttigieg went on Fox a lot to try to reach that audience. Syed is not the first one to do it. Pete needs to be acknowledged for that too.
There’s a phenomenon called the narcissism of small differences that addresses how like- minded groups can fragment over less important differences in values, preferences, opinions, issues etc.
Take as an example religious sects fighting over relatively minor differences in interpretations of scripture.
In a sense it’s losing sight of the forest for the trees. We need to be cognizant of this and strive to not let it divide us.