Episode 2518: 100 Days or 100 Years?
In today’s discussion with David Masciotra about the first hundred days of Trump 2.0 I made the (Freudian) error of referring to it as a “hundred years”. It certainly feels like a hundred years. So how should the Democrats respond to Trump’s avalanche of illiberalism? Masciotra argues they should emulate Ted Kennedy's forceful 1987 rhetoric against Robert Bork, focusing on the existential threats to civil rights and democracy rather than worrying about bread and butter economic issues. Masciotra criticizes the Dems for neglecting their working class base while pursuing moderate suburban voters and running Kamala-style cheerful campaigns. He believes Democrats lack the unified messaging infrastructure that the Republicans have built and suggests they need to balance aggressive opposition with muscular Kennedyesque idealism to effectively counter Trump's assault upon American democracy.
Five Key Takeaways
* Masciotra believes Democrats should adopt Ted Kennedy's direct, aggressive rhetorical approach from his Robert Bork speech to counter Trump's policies.
* He argues Democrats often run positive campaigns while Republicans run fear-based campaigns, which are typically more effective.
* The Democratic Party lacks the unified messaging infrastructure the Republican Party has built over decades.
* Masciotra suggests Democrats are too focused on chasing moderate voters while neglecting their base, unlike Republicans who effectively rally their core supporters.
* He contends that after condemning Trump's actions, Democrats need to offer Kennedy-like idealism that gives people "ripples of hope" and something more positive to work toward.
Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe
Larry Downes on How the Federal Government Failed to Rein in Big Tech in 2022: Expect the Same Inaction in 2023
Peter Wehner: Why 2022 Might Represent the End of the Trump Era and What Might Replace It in 2023
Elissa Epel: More Empathy, More Psychedelics, or More Grapefruit? How to Best Relieve Stress in 2023
Matthew Krogh on Why Watergate Will Never Die: The Moral Lessons of One of Nixon's White House Plumbers
Chris Miller: Why 2022 Was the Year of the Chip and the Three Great Unanswered Questions That Will Bedevil Us in 2023
Peter Coy: Why Inflation Dominated Our 2022 Economy and Why Everything Might Change in 2023
Martin Rees: Why 2022 Was a Triumphant Year for Science and What Needs to Happen in 2023 to Build Upon These Advances
Vivek Wadhwa on Modi, Indian Tech, and Kashmir: What America Gets Wrong About India
Rob Reich and Jeremy Weinstein on Political Regulation and a Moral Education: What Needs to Happen in 2023 to Reign in Big Tech
Jonathan Rauch: Why We Should Be Cautiously Optimistic About the Future of American Democracy, Especially If Joe Biden Doesn't Stand Again For President
Joanne McNeil: What Can We Learn About the AOL Experience of the 1990s to Make Today's Internet More User-Friendly and Civil?
Tony Hiss: No, We Aren't on the Verge of an Environmental Apocalypse: Why 2022 Was a Promising Year For the Planet and What We Need to Do in 2023 to Maintain This Progress
Maciej Kisilowski: How the 2022 Russian Invasion of Ukraine Could Trigger a Nuclear Apocalypse and What We Need to Do in 2023 to Avert This Catastrophe