3 Dissents and 4 Constructive Solutions

'I dissent' is a key part of an ongoing messaging against the Trump Court and Trump's Absence of Values. I nearly wrote "Trump Values', but that would give 'values' a bad connotation. Use it whenever and wherever one is comfortable. I reinforce what other people and groups are doing to keep our democracy. ‘Trump counts out America’ is one of my new catchphrases–After the Trump Court ruling, we could have said “Trump Court Counts out Democracy” . I have waited too long for national leaders to come up with an alternative to MAGA, which brings me to another dissent.

‘I dissent’ is my position on the promotion of VP Harris. Our VP has yet to demonstrate her leadership skills and substantive expertise, from economy to immigration to Ukraine. She had 3 1/2 years as VP and previous experience as a Senator and AG. However, her strengths seem limited to articulating social issues. The Queen (“King”) wears no clothes. Her uneven appearances are evidence of not growing with the job.  Social issues won’t win the day–The Bob Leonard quote below, notwithstanding. Concentration only on social issues, given today’s reality, in America, will turn over democracy to Project 2025. Anti-Biden people talk about his legacy if he stays on the ballot and Trump wins. What is the legacy when we lose the US House and Senate and statehouses with poor national and state efforts because we limit our communications to social issues? Don’t neglect social issues-perhaps a VP Harris found her sweet political spot. I am saying don’t neglect the economy, rural America, or immigration. I have written on my informal focus groups with anti-Trump R’s, Independents and libertarians. Their concerns are not secret. Winning them over means more than social issues.

I respect but disagree with the focus of Bob Leonard in his substack: "Switching will give us a candidate who can hammer away at Trump's corruption, bigotry, misogyny, racism, fascism, nepotism, ignorance, idiocy, and mental decline (which Biden lacks the capacity or willingness to do), a candidate better able to sound the alarm about the plight of reproductive rights and the danger of the current Supreme Court."

The Democrats won't succeed if they focus only on social issues; they need to address more immediate concerns. Harris has yet to prove her leadership. I have yet to read of Harris’s accomplishments or examples of powerful speaking on economic issues, immigration, and international issues. She has had over three years of practicing with speeches, content and delivery. I see no improvement. 

I dissent with the current team and national strategy. Picking Harris or anyone else will lose if they keep the same team responsible for political missteps in debate preparation, poor messaging over 3+ years, and constant failure to predict and respond to Trump. Trump was prepared and focused on his messaging (despite its falsehoods) and his team was strategic. Look at how quickly national Republicans spoke in unison after the verdict, contrasted with the silence of anti-MAGA voices. During the debate, it seemed the preparation team was playing checkers to Trump's chess.

On strategy. Harris doesn't have to be President, not now. For the good of the country (as is often said about Biden), Harris should be approached with two options: stay on the ticket as VP, be a spokesperson on social issues and improve her focus on immediate issues., or be replaced by another woman or person of color. Biden's replacement could also be another woman or POC, reducing the need for a specific VP candidate. If the goal of the “never Biden” side is to make a change to defeat Trump, that standard should apply to a Biden replacement. Harris falls short.

To only focus on whether Biden should say or go, It's easy to make a binary choice. However, progressives and Democrats have not shown the ability to plan for the next steps, predict Republican actions, or plan for contingencies. Replacing Biden with Harris without a change in strategy and messaging would be a mistake.

Convention comments. With these criticisms in mind, I am not confident that an open convention would be successful at coalescing people. In the past days since the debate, there have been opportunities to unify around issues, messaging, and need to support down-ballot issues, or specifically respond to the Trump Court, or Project 2025. If D’s did not have a plan for a national response to the Trump court on immunity or the accelerating extreme views of Project 2025 (calling for a second revolution), I do not trust this same team of D and progressive leaders to organize a convention.

.The issue is to win in November.  However, writers after they comment on Biden,  need to promote down-ballot issues and candidates. Both Biden must go and Biden forever sides continue this omission. Biden's team could also help out.  Biden's team needs to add or change staff who are better chess players. Biden's team should have already considered this possibility of Biden being unable to run for whatever reason, or that Biden would continue to exhibit problems and have plans in place to prevent and respond and stay on the ballot .. The debate has dramatized and  accelerated the absent contingency plans. 

Take for example, the issue of VP Harris being unable to be replaced. That is one option. If Biden steps aside, there are multiple options, including:   elevating her; keeping her as VP (and securing commitment from Biden's replacement to do so); offer a new slate, with commitment to have a woman and POC on the slate; or others.

There is always the option of an open convention,  which would be great for the media, but not for the country. My first legislative race went to a convention. In my case, people united in a three candidate convention. If it goes to convention, I do not see any planning for unification, use of the convention to educate the public on the Trump Court, and other matters. 

I will leave with constructive solutions. 

1. Promote groups that are doing good stuff in red, purple and blue states; offer to help groups focusing on swing states. Tell people what you do. This week I learned of Field Team 6. I know it may sound like a Sci-Fi series, but it is doing stuff.

2. Plariagize examples of pass successful organizing, like on reproductive votes in Red States.

3. Build on successful efforts with LGBT in all color states. I recall vibrant collaborative work in Iowa culminating in same sex marriage ruling and passage of discriminaion protections. In red Iowa, working with business, faith communities, rural Iowa and independents. The LGBT advocacy efforts are role models.  

4. Work on down ballot candidates and initiatives.