Biden, Harris, and what democracy demands
Brief thoughts on this moment in politics
It’s been a wild few weeks in global politics: a surprise victory for a Left coalition in France, holding off the surging far-right in snap elections. A dramatic win for Labour in the UK. An assassination attempt targeting Trump here in the not-so United States. And finally: Biden stepping down from his re-election campaign, and endorsing Kamala Harris.
So I want to take a break from (ir)regularly scheduled programming to share some thoughts about how I’m making sense of this moment:
Biden did the right thing in stepping down. It’s a great example of leadership, putting country before ego. I wish he had not run for re-election in the first place, or stepped down months ago, and I wish the Democratic Party hadn’t insulted the electorate by naming an octogenarian as standard-bearer against the most dangerous politician of my lifetime… but at least we finally have a chance.
Endorsing Harris is the wrong move. I get the politics… and I wish he hadn’t done it. Primarily because it feels like missing one of the most important lessons of the 2016 primaries: no one likes a coronation. It was the biggest failure of the 2024 primary: there wasn’t one. And now it’s a repeat, moneyed elites telling us who our candidate is going to be. Even if she’s the right candidate—a big if—the process doesn’t feel good. It’s fundamentally undemocratic, and that’s a bad look.
Defeating the far-right is imperative. It’s difficult to overstate this point: Donald Trump is a danger to democracy. His first tenure was disastrous for basic protections: for the climate, for women and LGBT+ people, for foreign policy, for COVID response, for migrants. And everything he’s done since leaving office ratchets up the potential for violence: encouraging the January 6th insurrection, stoking lies, and calling upon our darker angels.
To defeat the far-right… move Left! This was one clear takeaway from the French snap-elections: to stave off the far-right needs a broad progressive coalition; centrism is a dead-end. Yes we need to unite a broad coalition (this was also the lesson in Poland)… but that coalition HAS to turn out the base. The most active and engaged opposition to authoritarianism in America is among progressive and radical activists who are overwhelmingly Gen Z and Millennials.
It’s time to flip the script: let the Boomers follow Gen Z. Democratic party elites and talking heads have consistently argued that we need to tack to the center to pull a broad coalition of Democratic voters and so-called “independents.” I think that’s exactly wrong. I think there is very little risk that we will lose votes if we put forward a more progressive candidate: are moderate Boomer liberals going to vote for Trump? Are they going to stay home? Older people are the most reliable voting bloc out there, consistently voting in higher percentages than any other age demographic. Youth, women, and people of color, on the other hand, are the most reliable voting bloc for Democrats: an astonishing 98% of black women voted for Clinton in 2016. And without a compelling candidate, many will stay home. It’s long past time to stop taking the base for granted: give us a candidate worth voting for… and let older generations follow our lead.
To get elected, you have to motivate the base
Here’s the problem: what it takes to lead our country in this moment of global crisis, and what it takes to get elected are two different things.
An effective president needs three things:
A compelling vision
The competence/ability to govern (strategy, political savvy and relational skills)
The support of a broad coalition to advance their agenda… both inside the Beltway and out in the streets
To get elected in our plutocratic two-party system, on the other hand, a winning candidate needs three different things:
The support of the party base
The support of major donors
Broad appeal to the electorate
I think you can actually win with only two out of three, as long as you have the party base: Trump has only the first two, and thanks to an aggressive anti-democratic push to limit voter turnout, he actually won in 2016 despite losing the popular vote. And if you get the base and the electorate, donors will fall in line because they don’t want to be left on the outside looking in (this was Obama’s strategy). Clinton lost in 2016 because she never had the base; too many people stayed home.
Biden won in 2020 largely thanks to an exceptionally high turnout among youth and voters of color: we showed up for him because we rightly assessed the threat Trump posed… AND we wanted him to be responsive to our concerns. His lack of action on Palestine (among other issues important to progressives) was a slap in the face: the young, multiracial, progressive base is overwhelmingly against Biden’s Israel policy (as but one example where there is a huge gap between the base and party elites… something you no longer see in Trump’s takeover of the Republican party). He dropped out because he recognized that he wouldn’t be able to pull a repeat: he can’t take our votes for granted (this is true for Black voters in particular).
I’m concerned about Kamala because so far she only has one of the three: party donors are rallying around her. She’s never had the base… largely because she’s never had a compelling vision. Which means it will be incredibly difficult for her to do the primary thing she needs to do both to get elected and to effectively govern: build a movement. I resonated deeply with Anand Giridharadas’ 10-step plan to defeat Trump… I’m just skeptical that she can deliver.
I hope I’m wrong: this is her chance to earn our votes, and to turn out the base. The prosecutor vs felon matchup narrative does have some potential to resonate with voters (even as I cringe at carceral metaphors), and I also appreciated the potential of Ezra Klein’s argument about building her campaign around safety (not my primary motivator, but I take his point). But perhaps her strongest claim is what she represents: a highly competent Black woman leading our country for many of us is itself deeply compelling… especially in contrast to yet another old white man who's only out for himself. She symbolizes the future we are moving toward; he the past we are trying to leave behind.
When in doubt… build a movement
This remains where my energy is. I don’t have much faith in Kamala Harris as a transformational figure, and even less in the Democratic Party. But I do think it is an absolute imperative to do everything we can to prevent further authoritarian consolidation, and to prevent Donald Trump from taking power again. So while I will not be canvassing for Kamala (unless I see a compelling vision for our future that has so far been absent, and in particular a strong statement on Gaza), I will continue to support those who are working to stop authoritarianism and build a future of belonging. A few people/organizations I’m following here in the U.S. who are paying attention to the big picture:
- has been doing a great job highlighting folks doing good work in electoral politics and focused on this election cycle, often partnering with Anat Shenker-Osorio who was one of the key architects of the organizing effort in 2020 that anticipated the “stop the steal” big lie and ultimately helped weather the Jan 6th storm.
- ’s work with the Anti-Authoritarian playbook (and a new podcast out!)
The Horizons Project (I love this new explainer they put out on how authoritarianism works):
And many frontline organizations that are building power outside the Democratic Party, like:
SURJ (organizing White people)
State-based organizing groups often anchored in BIPOC leadership, like
LUCHA in AZ
We the People in MI
Lancaster Stands Up in PA
It’s a scary time to be alive… there’s no doubt the storm clouds are here, and that the assassination attempt only ratcheted up tension. And: we have an opportunity to weather the storm, to prepare for November 5th and beyond, and to continue building belonging in our lives and communities. Nothing is fated.
Our next gathering for subscribers to this newsletter is this Thursday, July 25th, @ 10am Pacific. Thanks to everyone for bearing with me as I’ve rescheduled to accommodate summer camp schedules and kid drop-offs; I look forward to seeing folks there and creating space to process this moment. If you’d like to join, please consider upgrading your subscription (or if that’s not possible, please let me know and I’m happy to comp you).
In community,
Brian
As a subscriber, I honor and respect that this is your forum. I am not sure whether you want a dialogue or if this Substack is only for people who already agree with you. That would be perfectly fine. Just let me know.
I am in general alignment with the need for systems transformation and have been working on just that for more than forty years at the practical level of local community.
I am trying to wrap my head around your guiding principle - "Belonging: build for the 100%. We believe humanity can create an “us” without a “them” ... and your stated desire to build a more "left" and "progressive" movement whose aim is to defeat the far-right, as an existential and authoritarian threat to democracy.
I viewed the video and the need to fight authoritarianism -- I would argue that we already live in an authoritarian country, where the main threat is oligarchic power and economic inequality brought by both the Left wing and Right wing. I want to point out that it was President Obama who doubled down on the power of the US and global financial systems in the wake of 2008 financial crisis. Now, global banking and financial power is even more entrenched and money has an even greater impact on politics. Now, we are in a system pitting every local region and its economy against a top-down extractive set up.
You could argue that we are now closer to a true Global Oligarchy, a sort of Techno-Feudalism. I would say that the Left has themselves contributed to the current authoritarian system.
It seems like the Left have been uncritical of their support for the development of this system of Corporatism, because they have had other objectives in their quest for using electoral power -- issues around race, LGBQT, and gender.
Right now, it seems to me, we need to build a grassroots movement capable of inspiring inclusion of both left and right around basic community needs. In order to do that, people would have to trust that it did not have any agenda promoting what is now considered Left or Right.