GOSH, IF ONLY THERE WERE A WAY TO TEST THE PREMISE THAT THE L.A. PROTESTS ARE AN "80-20 ISSUE" FAVORING REPUBLICANS

It will not surprise you to learn that Republicans are working the refs, trying to spin President Trump's response to the Los Angeles immigration protests as a smashing success for the White House. It will also not surprise you that many Democrats -- as usual -- are refusing to take their own side in an argument.

Politico Playbook tells us:

Whatever your take on Donald Trump’s decision to send in the National Guard — plus, as of last night, 700 Marines — to help quell anti-ICE protests in Los Angeles, the view from those close to the president is clear: This is a huge political opportunity, they believe, and Trump has seized it with both hands.

“We couldn’t script this any better,” one gleeful person close to the White House tells my Playbook colleague Dasha Burns. “Democrats are again on the ‘20’ side of an 80-20 issue. ... It’s the same thing that won [Trump] the election.”

In the eyes of the White House, Trump already had a clear mandate from voters for the mass deportation effort that was driving those ICE raids in LA. And aides believe the chaotic scenes that followed — masked protesters pelting police with rocks, setting fire to cars and waving Mexican flags on abandoned freeways — will only bolster public support for Trump’s hard-line approach. Indeed, every time a Dem speaks out against the president’s actions in LA, the White House is happier still.

And guess who’s the ultimate foil? Enter California Gov. Gavin Newsom. “Newsom is playing the part,” the same gleeful person tells Dasha. An administration official separately made the same point, highlighting the “jarring contrast” between Trump’s approach and the “Dem posture on immigration,” and claiming that the party is “fine with [protesters] burning the city down.”

I assume that the "gleeful person" is either Steve Bannon or Newt Gingrich, but the identity of this anonymous interviewee doesn't matter -- someone from the GOP is out there providing solidly pro-GOP spin, and there's no Democrat to offer a counterargument. I know you'll say that Politico is a right-wing rag and of course it would publish pro-GOP spin, but I've read Politico enough to know that an equally cocksure argument from the other side would have made its way into this piece if any Democrat could have manged to provide one. But of course no Democrat did. (The piece offers "balance" by pointing out that Newsom has, in fact, condemned violence, and that his target audience is California voters and 2028 Democratic primary voters.)

What infuriates me is the unchallenged assertion that this is an "80-20 issue" favoring Republicans, because we already know it isn't.

YouGov has been polling this, and while the public appears to disapprove of the protests, the numbers are underwhelming:

A small plurality opposes the protests. But does that mean Trump's approach to immigration has 80% approval? Hell no:

Does it mean Americans want Trump to seize control? Absolutely not:

And does the public see the protests as riots? Nope:

A CBS poll taken last week, just before the protests began making headlines, finds general support for deportations, but a lot of nuance. Here's a key result:

In the CBS poll, 54% of respondents said they supported the deportation program, but only 42% said that it's making Americans safer (30% said it's making us less safe), and 39% said it's making the economy weaker (32% said it's making the economy stronger). And this is a key finding:

Nothing Trump is doing -- on immigration or any other subject -- is favored by 80% of the public. And much of it is highly unpopular.

Does any Democrat say this? Newsom's anti-Trump pushback has been impressive.

But then there's this:

And these messages were posted by a liberal history professor and a long-time Republican who's anti-Trump:

Why? Why do this? When Trump allies speak, their messaging is 100% pro-Trump. Why can't Trump critics be advocates for their own side? Why must they echo right-wing critiques of the protest movement? Given the way most Americans consume news these days, I'm guessing that it might not register on many voters that the protestors are waving Mexican flags (and that they should see this as a moral outrage) until they start hearing about the flags from both sides. (Compare this to the war on "woke" language: I'm sure most voters have now heard the word "Latinx" far more often from cenrist Democratic language police than they have from actual "woke" Democrats.)

I'll say it again: If your critique of Democrats/liberals/progressives echoes right-wing critiques, shut up. You're just an extra megaphone for the right, which doesn't need any help getting its messages out.

And with all the fretting about Democrats' inability to win over young male podcast listeners, I have to ask: Don't you think those guys might see some of these protesters as badass?

Yeah, this guy too -- maybe this guy especially:

Hand-wringing Trump critics think America won't vote for a candidate who's linked to controversial protests, and they cling to this belief even though America just elected the guy who did January 6.

And if you think Republicans can get away with this and Democrats can't, remember what Rebecca Traister wrote a few months ago:

In 2020, millions protested racist police violence, sparking a reckoning in which people lost jobs for racist infractions from their past and present. A few Democratic lawmakers did join calls to “defund the police,” and more signaled that they understood the need for criminal-justice reform. Democrats not only won back the White House, but they did so by turning Arizona and Georgia blue and in the process securing two crucial Georgia Senate seats.

It didn't matter how many burning dumpsters in Portland were put on an infinite loop on Fox News every night -- Biden won, and he won by getting more votes than either candidate got in 2024. So please stop the tone policing and stick up for your own side.