A group of six Democratic governors pressed Senator Chuck Schumer of New York during a tense call on Wednesday night to be more aggressive in fighting back against President Trump’s nominees and agenda, all but begging the minority leader to persuade Senate Democrats to block whatever they could....These are governors from blue states, as is Kathy Hochul of New York, who was also on the call. But the two other governors -- Laura Kelly of Kansas, who organized the call with Pritzker, and Andy Beshear of Kentucky -- are from red states. Nevertheless, they all had a similar message.
Gov. JB Pritzker of Illinois and Gov. Maura Healey of Massachusetts each told Mr. Schumer that Senate Democrats should not vote for Mr. Trump’s nominees after the administration issued a memo freezing the funding.
Ms. Healey urged Mr. Schumer to slow down Senate votes and create more public opposition than Democrats in the chamber have generated so far....
Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota ... said Democrats needed to be more visible on television presenting an alternate vision of governing — not just complaining about what Mr. Trump is doing. Mr. Walz argued that Democrats must occupy just as much media space as Mr. Trump and Republicans have been doing.
As I've said a couple of times, I think Schumer's response to the funding freeze was good. Here's the clip again:
He was more forthright than the hapless Hakeem Jeffries in the House, who's nearly invisible.
What Governor Healey said seems to echo the action plan recommended by Indivisible when the funding freeze was first announced:
* Committing to oppose all of Trump’s nominees unless OMB reverses their guidance and releases the funds(Now that the freeze has been temporarily suspended and partially walked back by the White House, that list of actions is no longer posted at Indivisible.)
* Denying any GOP requests for Unanimous Consent that would speed up floor proceedings
*Opposing all cloture votes to further stall floor proceedings
* Requesting a Quorum Call at every possible opportunity to force Senators to physically be on the floor for business to proceed
I'm not sure that a Democratic response to Trump has to be maximal in order to be effective. Right now, there's a slim but non-zero chance that there might be enough votes to sink the nominations of Robert Kennedy Jr. and Tulsi Gabbard. If Democrats shut down the Senate, do they inspire Republicans to rally around the worst of the worst?
I think what's most important is that Democrats make noise, all the time, and do it in a way that seems straight from the gut. Watch Tim Walz's reaction to the funding freeze. This isn't jokey Tim Walz telling you how to fix your car or explaining the delights of state fair corndogs. He's righteously angry.
Here's a transcript of the first few moments:
Donald Trump's reckless action cut off funding to law enforcement, farmers, schools, child care, verterans, and health care. While he was out golfing, he threw the country into crisis. This is not bold. It's not leadership. It's stupid, buffoonish, childish, exactly what they did.And he's just getting started. He points out (more than once) that his state pays more to the federal government than it gets back, so Trump is impounding Minnesotans' own money.
Do you see what he's doing here? He's expressing genuine emotions. He's attacking Trump using what he knows about Trump's actions based on his experience as an elected official. He knows what he owes his constituents as a governor. As an ex-congressman, he knows this is unconstitutional -- Congress has the power to appropriate money. He says all this, in plain, direct language that clearly wasn't crafted by a highly paid Beltway consultant.
This shouldn't be hard. Every elected Democrat should be able to do this.
When the freeze was announced, Hakeem Jeffries wasn't out on the Capitol steps making a statement like Walz's or Schumer's. Instead, he called an "emergency" meeting, after which the messaging was still weak:
“I don’t want to speak for the leader,” Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) said afterward, “but it was a broad call for action — and a vigorous one.”“I don’t want to speak for the leader”? Seriously? The moment called for immediate outrage, and instead you had a meeting -- and then came out still worrying about whether you had your messaging perfectly tied up with a neat bow?
“House Democrats are now fully engaged. The bell has rung. I think we see this for the constitutional test that it is, and we’re going to be aggressively pushing back,” echoed Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.).You came out of this emergency meeting and said you're going to be aggressively pushing back? You should have come out fighting. Every time a reporter sticks a microphone in your face, you have an opportunity to give Trump hell. Use every one of those opportunities.
I gave Chuck Schumer credit for a good response to the freeze, but this, from the Times story, is sad:
Gov. Laura Kelly of Kansas ... said their party needed to do a better job with its digital outreach in response to Mr. Trump. She called for Democrats’ online strategy to become “down and dirty.”On the one hand, many Democrats need to be reminded that social media exists and is an important tool for them to use. On the other hand, these precise post quotas aren't the point. The point is to get a genuine, gut-instinct message out there, one that connects to Americans' concerns.
Mr. Schumer responded that Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey was in charge of Senate Democrats’ social media and praised the job he was doing.
Last week, Mr. Booker delivered a PowerPoint presentation to fellow Democrats about how to deliver their message online. In the slides, which were obtained by The New York Times, Mr. Booker offered his colleagues guidance on how often to post on each platform. Instagram: once or twice a day. Facebook: once a day. LinkedIn: three to five times a week. X: two to five times a day. TikTok: one to four times a day.
Democrats didn't offer their side of the story in a compelling way during Joe Biden's four years in the White House. After the November election, they "kept their powder dry" and mostly chose not to denounce Trump's godawful appointees. That was exactly the wrong strategy. As soon as Trump announced that a vaccine conspiracy theorist was his pick for health and human services secretary, Democrats should have raised hell. As soon as a Putin puppet was chosen as director of national intelligence, they should have raised hell. When you say nothing at the moment a dangerous decision is made, you imply that it's acceptable, and that your later opposition is just politics. That's the wrong approach. Get mad -- right away.