Stidmatt

While thinking about some absolutely horrible events which have happened in my life… without going in too much detail… I have come to a realization. Psychological abuse is abuse. Psychological abuse needs to be treated with the same level of care as physical abuse. Human brains are malleable and with enough time and the right psychological tools, it is very possible to psychologically damage someone gradually in a way so they do not fully understand what is happening. With enough trauma and a large collection of bad events in a short amount of time, it is absolutely possible to take someone who is absolutely mentally healthy and make it difficult for them to make healthy choices in their life.

This is no different from taking a totally able bodied person and shoving them down a cliff, forcing them into a wheelchair and long sessions of physical therapy.

Just as how someone who is shoved off a cliff and survives will need physical therapy, people who are shoved off of a proverbial cliff of emotional damage will absolutely need to have the same level of therapy, but based on helping them reach a higher level of mental and emotional stability. There is no difference.

When someone is put under severe emotional distress for a long enough period of time, it can make it hard for them to make wise decisions. On the outside they might appear to be perfectly healthy, having a stable job, having friends, and appear healthy in other ways, but when you get to know the person at a deeper level you will realize that they are metaphorically bleeding. It can take time to fully realize what is happening and that they might not be capable of realizing themselves what has happened to them, even if the people they are closest to can see it.

This emotional distress can be from a death in their family or any range of distressing events which can harm an individual. What types of events will trigger each person to a point of being unable to make the best choices will be different from person to person. It is incredibly complicated and has to do with that person’s experience in the past and what will drive someone emotionally to the point where they are unable to function at the level they did in the past.

When someone has a traumatic event which distorts their perspective, they can respond in a wide variety of ways. They might push away family, they might start abusing drugs, or a wide range of behaviors which differs from person to person. Sometimes people will make healthy decisions, such as lean into their family and seek human connections, which is obviously the right decision, but sometimes people will make unhealthy decisions which involved disconnection.

In my life, and my personal experience and observations of those people who I love most, I have found that when someone has an emotionally distressing time, it is important for their family to be their for them and with them. The type of support that individual might need to get back to a point of mental, emotional, and spiritual health (all of which are just as important as physical health) will differ person to person depending on the situation, but I have seen in my life that the biggest strength is when people have a strong community which can help that person rebuild their path of spiritual fulfillment, and I have learned in my life that strong communities which support their members who have harm are the strongest and most resilient communities I have ever had.

Part of being a victim of an abusive relationship (relationship could be any connection between any two or more people) is that that person might not realize that what they are in is abusive while they are in it. If they did, they usually would leave. While I do believe that people do need to be the person to ultimately leave abusive situations, that person’s family has an important role to play in helping that person see who truly loves them and help them move towards self-actualization.

I am being deliberately vague about abuse for a reason. Abuse can come in many different forms. It can be denying that person the tools they need for growth. It can be planting ideas in their head which lead them to make bad decisions. It could be hazing, it could be driving family members apart when they have done nothing to harm each other. All of this in my experience qualifies as abuse, and in my life, I have found the most successful times this has happened has not been where someone would walk in randomly on a happy friendship and say “so and so is a terrible human” but is more successful when the person plants ideas into that person’s mind which slowly erode their self-confidence, perception of their self-worth, and ability to keep a clear perspective of what is happening in their life. This is the most seditious and evil form of abuse of them all because it takes time to realize what is really happening, and it tears families apart. The abuse is most successful when that individual is already under significant stress from some other factor in their life, and it can become really difficult to articulate what is really going on. But when someone reports that someone is being abused, they need to be supported and not have their love ignored. The family of the abused needs to ensure that the situation is thoroughly investigated and that if the family member is correct that abuse is happening, they need to respond to the situation to end the abuse.

Part of what makes many forms of abuse so difficult to unravel is that the people who undergo such abuse often do not fully realize what has happened to them either. This is well documented in the literature. Abused people will often become frazzled, and this makes it hard for them to accurately report about what is truly happening.

When someone is undergoing such abuse, the first time someone rings the alarm that something evil is afoot, the easier it is to replenish the situation. When someone rings the bell and it is ignored, the abuse is enabled. The enabling of abuse will make it increase in severity and frequency until the person who is being abused feels isolated and alone.

This is why I believe that communities should strive towards a policy of we support victims. This doesn’t necessarily mean that everything someone says is accepted without question. While it is obviously important to listen to every word, the more severe the abuse, the more likely it is that the abuser will not remember the events accurately when first being recounted, and they probably have not put all the pieces together yet on what is really going on. That is part of the healing process. One method which works is to just engage in dialogue with that person, have them spell out what happens, and if they say something which doesn’t sound right, and is fairly obviously contrary to what is really going on, the person who is clearly being abused deserves to be brought into a situation as quickly as possible which allows them to fully analyze their own situation. People in abusive situations can sometimes suffer memory problems as well, such as misattribution, suggestability, and bias. When those three memory problems occur, it can get very complicated to deal with such situations, and if memory problems are present, the loving act is not necessarily to believe every word at its face value but to listen to every word and build a clear picture of what is happening, not just from the words they are saying but through observation of what is happening in their life. One should start of course with an assumption that what they are saying is true of course, to do otherwise is a form of abuse itself, but when dealing with multi-factored long term abusive situations, things can get very complicated very quickly, and when the person’s recollection and what was observed do not match, it becomes difficult to fully analyze. It becomes even more difficult to understand what you are dealing with when the abuse was in a private space.

The complicated nature of such interactions is why I believe the best way to respond is very simple actually, and this is to offer support. Support can come in a wide variety of ways, going out to dinner, board game nights, dance parties, appointments with trained religious figures or psychologists, and long deep conversations. After someone has been in an abusive situation, the most important thing is to provide them a safe space as soon as possible. Safety obviously includes physical safety, but it also includes emotional, spiritual, and mental safety. A safe space is one where abuse is not tolerated, where people are able to have deep conversations which widen their mind and help with their path to self-actualization, and provides a base of comfort and support which acts as a foundation to their lives. A safe space does not mean one will never be challenged, in fact it generally means quite the option, because the safest spaces I have experience is where growth is fostered. The only way to grow sometimes is to be in a position where you have to think about how your position in the world interacts with others. It’s hard to describe fully, its something that is experienced. It is a place of real love. There is incredible power in being an emotionally healthy environment, which includes the obvious being kind and tolerant to each other, but also having a very clear no tolerance policy towards any form of hate. Such spaces can be hard to find, and hard to maintain over the long term, but when they are found they provide a bastion of growth which allows people to finally reach a state of mental clarity and peace. This is support.

I believe that We Support Victims is a statement which is hard to distort, clear in its meaning, and automatically includes people of all genders, ethnicities, sexual orientations, and every other aspect of their lives. It is an active verb, which is not passive in any way, shape, or form. It is a promise that when someone enters our sacred space and they are damaged, we will provide support for them so that they will be able to grow in all ways. We will help them reach a state of mental clarity so they can process the abuse they have undergone. As their mental health improves it will definitely feel to them to go up and down over time, but those points where they feel like their mental health is declining will generally be because they finally realized another layer of abuse which they had not been able to fully penetrate before. Just as one cannot learn calculus without understanding algebra, understanding complex emotional situations will require an individual to often get through several layers of emotional distress before they might come to a layer which is very raw. At this point, individuals can appear volatile in their processing, but this is a good thing because it is an absolutely vital step in fully understanding what we have undergone. When you find someone who has gone through a layer of abuse and they realize an aspect of their life is harmed, it is natural and good to become angry. A truly supportive network will provide that person a safe space to vent, rage, and yell (assuming they are not hurting anything or anyone) and be there to listen and talk through the trauma. This is true friendship. This is what I have in my two primary communities and it is the most beautiful thing in my life. The community will be there to welcome that person back and give them a space to process and have good healthy experiences which will allow them to heal. As that person feels better about themselves and have more direction in their life, they will uncover more layers until they finally come to terms with what actually happened, and they will finally be able to make amends where needed and they will heal significantly faster than they would have if they had been forced to go through the motions of emotion they will inevitably undergo by themselves.

This is what supporting victims is like. It is a long term process of connection which involves many hours of bonding and love. When it is done the bonds between the people in the community are strengthened, people are healthier at the end of the day, and they are truly happier than they were before. This allows more spiritual growth, and is what people truly crave. It is the path to self-actualization. the path to self-actualization is not easy, and it can take many turns on the way, but when it is complete there is a deep understanding between those individuals that they will be loved, they will be able to grow, and that the community they have built together will survive the future. It will invite love and repel abuse. It will develop a core community of individuals who believe strongly in their central tenants, whatever those may be, and those individuals will become a rock on which the community is founded. They will draw the circle wide, and more people will come in. As love radiates outward and everyone becomes a better person, the community will thrive and grow. They will continuously improve over time, and be a nexus of love and compassion in their wider area which translates into social justice in the public sphere.

The only way I know to build this is through support, and why I strive to Support Victims.

When I use the word family I am not only talking about those people who are related to blood. I am also referring to an individuals support network of their closest friends, faith communities, or other communities which provide emotional health.

Right now is a very exciting time in American history. We are currently in the third Democratic Trifecta over the last 40 years, we just saw congress pass the largest stimulus the United States has seen over the last 70 years, and we have several very exciting bills which have passed the House which need to go through the Senate.

This is where we are hitting a road block because the filibuster of course is still in effect, and everything the Democrats want to pass has a 100% guarantee of being filibustered by Mitch McConnell as long as the filibuster remains.

The filibuster right now is the biggest issue in the United States. It doesn’t matter what issue you care about… racial justice, voting rights, gender equality, LGBT rights, environmental justice, gun laws, economic issues of any type, judicial appointments… it doesn’t matter. The only way to get meaningful long lasting reform which will survive even if Democrats lose the Presidency is to make sure that we can pass legislation through the Senate. This is why the filibuster is the biggest issue in American politics, and it is going to remain the biggest issue in American politics until either the Democrats control 60 seats in the Senate or we eliminate it completely.

Scenario 1: We do not blow up the filibuster

This means we are going to enter speculation time. If we do not pass the filibuster we will not get any more laws passed this session, and probably for the foreseeable future. This is all but guaranteed.

This is going to impact elections severely. Republican controlled state legislatures are currently working on passing voter suppression in many states, but most importantly in Georgia. If these laws pass and stand, Democrats are definitely going to lose a Senate seat in Georgia, and Democrats will lose the Senate seat in Arizona. This is because these states will continue to pass voter disenfranchisement laws through their Republican trifectas, and our existing voting rights laws do not fully protect against modern voter discrimination.

If Democrats fail to pick up a seat in either Wisconsin or Pennsylvania with that guarantee (assuming we don’t kill the filibuster and HR1 fails) then we will have a Republican Senate. This is as guaranteed as anything I can project.

A favorable 2022 Senate map for the Democrats looks like this:

Scenario 2: We blow up the filibuster

The other path forward involves Democrats choosing the nuclear option. If we eliminate the filibuster we can pressure Sinema and Manchin to vote for HR1. They talk a lot of shit (pardon my technical terms) but at the end of the day they do vote with the Democratic Party more often then not. They do not want  to go down in history as the Democrats who voted against the largest expansion of voting rights in over half a century. That is not going to happen. If we do the nuclear option on the filibuster then HR1 is going to be the law of the land. This is a fact.

If we pass HR1 then next year the Federal government will have all the tools it needs to enforce vote by mail in every congressional election in every state. The modern voter disenfranchisement which is being pushed forward right now in Georgia among other states is going to be in violation of Federal Law which is currently pending in the Senate, pending nothing less than the nuclear option.

If we blow up the filibuster, African Americans will be able to vote in Georgia and North Carolina. Hispanic Americans will be able to vote in Arizona. Missouri has Cori Bush who has the ability to motivate voters to vote in Missouri, bringing Missouri into play. With mail in voting in Pennsylvania, the large African American voting bloc in Greater Philadelphia will have increased turnout. Florida has some of the most severe voter discrimination laws in the country which are in violation of HR1. North Carolina has similar laws which have prevented eligible voters from voting for no other reason but to prevent Democratic wins in that state.

A 2022 Senate map with HR1 on the books looks like this with a pro-Republican bias:

HR1 is the difference between Republicans almost certainly taking the Senate in 2022 and the Senate being a competitive map.

The only way to pass HR1 is to destroy the filibuster.

The only way to accomplish anything else in this congressional session is to abolish the filibuster.

If you believe that the Republicans will keep the filibuster in 2025 if they have a trifecta and 50 seats, than you are naive.

If we do not pass HR1, Arizona is going to pass voter disenfranchisement laws. Kristen Sinema is going to lose her seat. Joe Manchin is going to face the wrath of practically every other Democrat in congress and if he ever truly cared about anything he said about being pro-choice, and he will come on board. He has a pattern of taking the limelight as much as he can when whenever he can, but at the end of the day, he is a Democrat, and he will vote with his party.

That is 50 votes plus the Vice President. That is all we need to pass the nuclear option.

The year was 1815, and my great-great-great-great-great grandfather Pierre Henry landed in his new home in Prussia. He was one soldier in the French Army which was part of Napoleon’s failed Russia campaign, and he was one of thousands of soldiers who did not make it back to France. He did not die as a result of the war, he died in 1848. He married Susanna Juliana Hoffman and had at least one son, Melidor Henry. Melidor would go on to have at least one son Eugen, who would have three children. Eugen’s son Karl died in 1949, and Karl’s daughter Ursula was my great-grandmother who I remember.

Pierre was born in France, and his father was Louis Marie Henry, born in 1762 in Versailles. He lived through the French Revolution. He died in 1828.

I do not know the names of Pierre’s sibilngs, but I’m certain he had some. Somewhere in France I am certain I still have some cousins because my great-great grandfather was still in contact with at least one cousin in France in the early 20th century. If you are one of them, please contact me.

OK, family history aside I want to make it abundantly clear that what I am discussing is a personal topic to me, as much as any event which happened over 200 years ago can be. While my writings based off of the Soviet Union are based on discussions with people who saw their mentors being dragged away by the secret police, this article is about my personal family history.

The story begins with the end of the Carolingian/Capetian Dynasty. This corrupt dynasty was overthrown in 1792 by a revolution. Many people were killed by the guillotine and the First Republic was founded in 1792. 7 years after its formation Napoleon Bonaparte came to power and ended any form of democracy in France. During the French First Republic there was first the National Convention which lasted for 3 full years upon the death of King Louis XVI. 3 years later power was stripped from the Legislative Body into the Directoire which lasted for 4 years. The Directoire was a counsel of 5 members who governed France. It was a time of economic stagnation and ending the Reign of Terror. In 1799 Napoleon Bonaparte took advantage of the weaknesses which were present and became the dictator of France.

There is little which needs to be explained about Napoleon. He was essentially a monarch, and he established the First French Empire. His rule ended in 1814 and then there was a Restoration of the Bourbon monarchy after Napoleon’s death. It was a constitutional monarchy, but unlike the United Kingdom or Canada, Louis XVIII was the supreme head of state who had real power which he used. Only the richest one percent of the French had the right to vote during the July Monarchy.

The Restoration was succeeded by yet another monarchy (the July Monarchy) which lasted until 1848. 60 years after the French Revolution had been the abolition of Kings, only 10 years were not under a sole monarch.

1848 was a revolutionary year for Western Europe and France was no exception. The Second Republic lasted a full 3 years until President Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte declared himself Emperor. He remained the emperor until 1870. The Second Republic had universal suffrage, but this was practically meaningless because the laws had to originate with Emperor Napoleon III.

Napoleon III was the last Emperor of France. During his time he continuously saw his power diminish, but he remained the monarch with real power through his entire reign. He was dethroned not by a popular revolution but the end of the Franco-Prussian War. The Paris Commune controlled Paris for a full two months before the French Army under the Government of National Defense suppressed the Commune and took full control. Cabinet Dufaure I was the first meaningful democratic government of France under a constitution which would last for more than 5 years. The Third Republic continued to rule France as a Unitary Parliamentary Republic until Hitler invaded France in 1940.

The big question remains… how did the Third French Republic come to be? Essentially it appeared in a similar way that the United Kingdom evolved from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy over the 18th and 19th centuries. It was the assertion of power over the country by the mostly powerless Parliament after the Emperor had been captured by the Prussians. After Napoleon’s capture the Parliament declared itself to be the legitimate government of France and instead of having another megalomaniac come to power and declare himself emperor, the structure was stronger than previous governments in French history.

France did not become a Republic overnight from sending the bourgeois to the guillotines. France became a Republic very gradually over 81 years. France did not become a true democracy simply from a bloody revolution by the people. It reached its first stable form after the parliament declared itself to be more than just a meaningless institution but to be the legitimate government of France because of the lack of an Emperor. France did not become a true Republic overnight with the beheading of the aristocracy. If you actually look at French history it didn’t become a true Republic until 1870, and that was the conclusion of 20 years of reforms under Napoleon III. That form of government became stable, and did not require the execution without trial of tens of thousands of people.

That is how France became a democracy.

Over my life, especially since I came to political awareness during the Bush administration, I have often thought about whether it would be worth leaving the United States. The United States has a lot of issues, until 2014 people like me had no guarantee of health insurance, college education is very expensive in this country, and racism is very much alive which can be seen all over American culture. With that being said… is there another country I would choose to live in? Is there anywhere else in the world I would rather live?

Prince Harry and Megan made a stunning interview with Oprah today about racism in the royal family, and all of the problems they have. While I love visiting Canada, they are still a monarchy, and I like how my head of state is elected by the people (even though I want to destroy the Electoral College).

I also do not wish to live in a country with a parliamentary or semi-presidential system. In a split election like happened in Germany in 1933 Parliamentary systems can be horribly unstable. It is very easy to pass such legislation in such systems which is a double edged sword.

I want to live in a country with a high freedom of the press, and low corruption.

If you filter all of the countries in the world which have a low corruption score (greater than 70), a high Freedom of the Press, have a presidential system, a high democracy score (greater than 7 using the Economist Intelligence Unit) and no monarchy, only two countries are left on the list:

The United States and Uruguay.

When determining a difference between the two, we have similar corruption perceptions index scores, similar press freedom scores, and America is significantly better on the Ease of Doing Business Index. The United States is significantly richer than Uruguay. America’s Democracy Score is slightly below that of Uruguay.

The United States can be reformed. I have seen it myself. Washington State now has a public option for health insurance, there is a major bill moving its way through Congress now which will expand voting rights, and America is drifting to the left on social issues very quickly. President Biden announced his support for HR1 today, COVID cases are diminishing rapidly, the vaccine is being distributed and most Americans should be vaccinated by June.

Donald Trump was a terrible president who killed many people, but despite his numerous attacks on our democracy, we still had a transfer of power, and America is moving forward.

America has one of the highest Ease of Doing Business indexes in the world. America has a high standard of living, and things are improving in our country.

We have many challenges we are facing as a country. We must  tackle the challenge of global warming through legislation like Washington Strong. We must ensure that the health care reform Washington State passed last year is expanded on here in my home state and expanded nationwide as soon as possible. We should bring back the WPA, and use easy access public employment as a tool to fight the systemic racism which plagues our country.

I am under no false idea that America is perfect. We have many warts, our country was founded with protecting slavery, and some of the protections for that evil institution, such as the Electoral College still exist today. We must continuously improve our country. We need to make senior care more affordable, and improve access to stable retirement in ways which fights systemic racism.

But there is one thing that the United States is very very very good at… and that is we don’t go backwards over a long period of  time. We have a legal system and cultures which is seemingly impervious to long term degradation. When fascists like Donald Trump have come to power in parliamentary systems around the world their countries have rapidly fell. Despite all of Donald Trump’s attempts to rig our elections to preserve his power, he failed. He was unable to stop the 2020 election, and his failed reenactment of the Reichstagfeuer in January failed miserably. He failed to kill a single member of congress. We still have the PATRIOT ACT and mass surveillance (like almost every country in the world TBH) and someday I expect we will remove that unconstitutional legislation.

Parliamentary systems like Britain are susceptible to degradation, just look at Brexit. The thing about the United States is that even though the Republicans have been trying to undo the Voting Rights Act for literally 50 years and all they could do is make it so congress has to reanalyze which states need pre-clearance. Pre-clearance is completely legal according to the Supreme Court, it just needs to be updated periodically to reflect the current situation in our country, which is not a wholly unreasonable requirement. Despite throwing all their energy to undo the Voting Rights Act they were unable to secure even one Senate seat in Georgia after over a half a century of working to destroy our election system and go back to Jim Crow.

This is at the same time that Brexit is occurring.

When Americans make progress, our progress sticks around. As someone whose great-great grandparents lived through a fascist regime, I highly value that type of politically stability, and this is why I absolutely love the United States, and as a member of a family which has been fighting for Civil Rights in this country since before our country was founded, I continue our sacred tradition because I know that when my family succeeds at making progress in this country, our progress will stick around for centuries to come because of the stability in the American system.

This is why I will never permanently move away from the United States of America and will continue to fight to make this country a more perfect union as much as I possibly can.

The last time a Democratic President was succeeded by another Democrat through an election since the parties realigned was never. It has simply never happened. I’m only going to focus on the last 100 years.

The last time we ran a progressive Democrat after a retiring Democratic President was in 1952 when we ran Adlai Stevenson against Dwight David Eisenhower, the man who literally freed the Jews from Auschwitz. Eisenhower was unbeatable.

In 1968 the would-be nominee Bobby Kennedy was assassinated, and Humphrey suffered from opposition to the Vietnam War.

In 1972 we ran the moderate George McGovern who blamed the stagflation of the 1970s on the Great Society. He was running against both Republicans and Democrats and he was utterly destroyed by a crook during a recession.

In 2000 we ran the Vice President of a very moderate administration which failed to pass most of their proposals. Al Gore was burdened by how the Clinton administration did not embrace Democratic policies. This opened room for Ralph Nader to walk in and claim that both parties are the same. After Wall Street Deregulation, the Defense of Marriage Act, and an escalation of War on Drugs, it is easy to understand why people agreed with his message.

In 2016 we ran a candidate who had a decent platform but spent all of her speaking time alienating the progressive base of the Democratic Party.

If Biden was telling the truth about being an “interim president” then we need to try a different approach. We need someone who does not blame all of America’s woes on Democratic policies. We need someone who wants to decriminalize drugs and supports the Democratic Party platform. We need someone who will then go forward when she is President and actually enact popular Democratic proposals, so she has a chance of winning reelection. If she chooses to not run for reelection, we need to make sure the candidate who we run after her will be unapologetically Democratic.

If we look at the Democrats who succeeded Republican candidates:

Franklin Delano Roosevelt had a strong platform behind him and was running against the Great Recession advocating for the latest economic theory.

John F. Kennedy was literally running against Richard Nixon and had LBJ behind his back. What more needs to be said?

Jimmy Carter was running against the Watergate Scandal.

Bill Clinton won with a massive spoiler caused by Ross Perot.

Obama ran on a campaign of hope and change during a massive recession.

Joe Biden was literally running against an epidemic.

On top of this, the list of Democrats in the last 100 years who have won a majority of the popular vote twice are Barack Obama and Franklin Delano Roosevelt. That’s it.

If we look at the Republican candidates over the last century who were not running against an incumbent, most are not very impressive.

• 1928/1932: Herbert Hoover was a career civil servant, unfortunately he was not a skilled politician and failed to pass any significant legislation. He was unwilling to fight for civil rights, and failed to grapple with the Great Depression.
• 1952: Dwight David Eisenhower was the best man the Republicans have run for the Presidency in the last 100 years.
• 1960: What do I need to say about Richard Nixon?
• 1968: Come on, it was Richard Nixon, he literally worked with North Vietnam to keep the war going.
• 1976: Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon, making him no less guilty than the crook who he succeeded.
• 1980: Ronald Reagan literally negotiated with the Iranians to keep Americans hostage, which I consider to be treason.
• 1988: George H. W. Bush was complicit and involved in all of the Reagan Administration’s crimes, such as the Iran Contra Affair.
• 2000: George W. Bush had a mixed record as the governor of Texas leading on wind energy, but also being a supporter of the death penalty and violated the Establishment clause.
• 2008: John McCain was a highly respected relatively moderate Republican senator in the eyes of many.
• 2016: Donald Trump was the least qualified major Presidential candidate in the history of the United States, and has countless rape allegations against him.

Eisenhower, and arguably McCain were the only truly decent Republican Presidential candidates over the last century. The caliber of Republican Presidential candidates has been criminal or unconstitutional, and almost all have been of poor character.

Democratic candidates on  the other hand have generally been either unwilling to embrace the Democratic platform, or unwilling to really challenge the Republican orthodoxy of the last 100 years. With the exception of Adlai Stevenson, the candidates who did not do that go by the title President.

There are three types of major Democratic Party candidates:

• Failed to embrace or downright blamed Democratic policies for America’s woes, or angered the progressive base with their appeal to the center strategy:
  • George McGovern
  • Hillary Clinton
• Got lucky with a third party spoiler or ran against a severe crisis:
  • Jimmy Carter
  • Bill Clinton
  • Joe Biden
• Ran a truly progressive campaign:
  • Franklin Delano Roosevelt
  • John F. Kennedy
  • Lyndon Baines Johnson
  • Barack Obama
• Tried to succeeded a very moderate Democrat who enacted many Republican policies
  • Al Gore
• The presumptive nominee was assassinated
  • Hubert Humphrey
• Ran against a literal war hero
  • Adlai Stevenson

Only one incumbent Democrat was defeated in the last century, and that of course was Jimmy Carter.

There has only been one time we ran a progressive Democrat to succeed an incumbent Democrat, and that year was 1952. We almost ran progressive Bobby Kennedy in 1968, a truly insane year with multiple high profile assassinations, including our presumptive nominee, and the nation was reeling from an ongoing conflict and spinning out of control. In 1952 Adlai Stevenson ran against General Eisenhower, who had sky high popularity due to his service in World War II.

I believe that in 2024 we should try running a progressive. Al Gore and Hillary Clinton both failed, and neither are truly progressive candidates. Barring a war hero running on the Republican ticket or our candidate getting assassinated, given the popularity of progressive proposals, I think a pragmatic progressive would be the right choice to lead a winning ticket. We of course need to ensure Democrats do as well as possible down ballot, getting as many progressives as possible to run and win in districts across the country, and that will enable the Democratic President not just to win but also to succeed in passing legislation. Another reality is that with only two exceptions every Democratic President has won fewer votes in their reelection than their initial election. Franklin Delano Roosevelt won a larger percentage in 1936 as opposed to 1932, and Clinton won a larger percentage of the vote in 1996. In order to make sure our next President can hopefully run for two terms, we need someone who can really rally the voters out in 2024 with coattails which extend to every state legislature in the country. We will do this by speaking to issues which face real Americans day after day, and that will get people out to vote. Jaime Harrison supports the 50 state strategy, the same strategy which was used by President Obama in 2008, and if we use that then we should be able to keep the Presidency until 2032 at the earliest. If we have a trifecta in 2025 and the President and congress are willing and able to use their power to pass legislation to solve the problems facing America, lack of access to college, and other problems which face our country on a day to day basis, the message will be that the Democrats saved America from the 2008 recession, Democrats rescued America from the COVID epidemic, and went forward and did more than the bare minimum. It will be easier to recruit volunteers, easier to get people to vote, and as long as the Democratic National Committee supports local candidates and builds leadership from the ground up, and congress makes America more equal, more free, and better all around, there is absolutely no reason why the Democrats cannot keep government for the foreseeable future.

It is absolutely impossible to understand my life without understanding that I have had cerebral palsy since the day I was born. Having cerebral palsy means that it forced me to have a strong sense of social justice for my entire life, because people with my condition have literally been murdered simply for existing. Family members discriminated against me because of my disability in a very cruel way when I was in high school, preventing me from finding employment. My already heightened sense of social justice was further amplified by this treatment. Combine this with general pervasive social discrimination against people with disabilities and my ability to find a job has definitely been hampered. I have tested this and I know for a fact that when I check that disability box on an employment form it is less likely they will call me back. I have run experiments on this issue. The results were depressing.

No wonder my sense for social justice is so strong. I will only ever know what life is like as someone who is disabled. It doesn’t matter if people know it or not, because if I am forced to out myself to a hiring manager their decision will be impacted by my checking the box and it doesn’t matter if the job is for a private company, most non-profits, or government. The callback rate is the same for all industries in my experience.

With this experience, no wonder I have a deep sense of social justice and when I see something wrong or insufficient I get angry. I get angry because it is an attack on me personally. When politicians refuse to use all possible mechanisms to fight evil it is a direct attack on my existence. For me I see no alternative than fighting hard to win just fights because people will literally die if we don’t.

If it wasn’t for how I was treated in high school because of my disability my mental health to this day would be significantly better. Even after abuse ends, its impact can last for decades. It would have made it easier to form romantic relationships, it would have been easier to not have a layer of depression over everything I do every day of my life, and it would have significantly improved my overall well-being if it wasn’t for the discrimination I have encountered.

Because of this discrimination I have experienced, I am easier to anger, I am slower to please (although when I am pleased by something that emotion is also magnified) and my reactions can scare people at times. There have been some times where the way I have been treated by others has made me so absolutely angry that I have literally scared other people. It has hurt my most important relationships and can make me feel very very alone. These reactions are proportional to how I have been treated in the past.

Finding other friends who both know what it is like to be disabled and discriminated against because of this fact of which I have no control over is very difficult. Merely being disabled will only help people empathize so much, it is the discrimination from my immediate family which has caused the deepest and longest lasting damage.

Being disabled made it harder to find a job, which makes it harder to get raises, which makes it harder to support myself. It is not that my disability makes it more difficult to do my job, it has no impact on that, but it took far longer for me to find work than it should have after finding college, which is also why the damage in 2018 when I suddenly found myself both housing insecure and unemployed was so absolutely damaging to me. For most people finding another job is easy, but for a disabled American who was only 25 at the time, whose only professional work experience of note was at a public college, it was significantly more difficult than for other people. That is why that event in 2018 is one of the most traumatic of my life and was the hardest on people who truly love me who had to observe it. It drove some people who clearly love me to be more distant because it was so painful for them to watch, and that makes me angry and sad. I am grateful that I am now fully employed at a wonderful company with good people, I just wish it happened years ago. It makes my life so much better in every possible way.

Anger is a valid emotion, and is important. Anger allows people to notice when things are not being done correctly, and then seek a course of action. If you can harness anger to make change then it can be a powerful force for good in this world. I wouldn’t put in the time for righteous fights when they appear, nor would I be so deeply disgusted by compromising measures if it wasn’t for my experience in this world. Every single action of political movement I do is to make it so that hopefully someday no one will have to go through the same types of experiences I have gone through, which are completely overwhelming at times. This includes actions like more progressive tax codes, environmental justice which impacts everybody, and voting reforms which make it so people who have unorthodox experiences are more likely to be heard.

Beyond the political activism I very deliberately become involved in organizations which actively fight injustice and work to make the world a better place. I spend my time in these places because I have this inherent unshakable belief that the world can become better.

No wonder I studied political economy in college, and no wonder that sometimes I very forcefully speak my mind when issues concern my existence. It makes perfect sense and I really hope that someday we can live in a world where we treat each other with kindness.

And I pray that as I grow older I will become more calm and able to control my deep emotions while never sacrificing my deep sense of justice.

Today is the second day of the third Democratic trifecta of my life. President Biden is planning on sign the executive orders he can to fix most of the damage Trump did through executive orders, which is exactly what President Biden should be doing this week.

Soon eyes will turn across the lawn to the Capitol Building where the House is going to be working on passing Biden’s proposed bills which require Congressional approval in order to pass.

Then the bills are going to be sent across the building to the Senate, which is where our story really begins. With only 50 Democrats in the Senate even after all of the carnage of the last year, we are in desperate times, and desperate times call for desperate measures. The probability of the filibuster not being used by Republicans to block President Biden’s legislation is 0, and any idea that they will suddenly come to Jesus is absolutely naive.

In order to pass President Biden’s legislation to end this epidemic and save our economy, we need to do the nuclear option to remove the filibuster. I can see no other realistic path forward which doesn’t end with Mitch McConnell supporting a filibuster to block President Biden’s every move.

We have been through this before in 2009 and 2010 when President Obama proposed a wide suite of legislation and it got bogged down in the Senate when the Democrats had an even larger majority than today. Mitch McConnell is still the leader of Republicans in the Senate, and given how his strategy was successful in blocking Democrats in order to tire out their base in 2010, he has absolutely no incentive and has shown absolutely no sign of changing his behavior any time soon. The rules of the game are the same, making government dysfunctional, dropping turnout among Democrats low enough that Republicans can win the midterm, and they are in power again. It worked in 1994. It worked in 2010. We must make sure it does not work in 2022.

The Nuclear Option, the complete absolute repeal of the filibuster from the Senate rules will completely disarm Senator McConnell, making him just another Senator. This will allow Democrats to have the most productive congress since 1965-1969. The only way to make Senator McConnell an average Senator is to abolish the filibuster.

So, the first issue will be whether this will create an escalation? I don’t believe so. This is merely moving the Senate back to how it worked internally when our nation was founded, where a simple majority is enough to pass a bill. This is how functional democracies are designed. This is how every state legislature works as far as I am aware, and how the House works. The Senate is out of the norm on this issue, and it makes our entire government break down on a regular basis. Americans need to have a government which works for us, and we won’t have a government as functional as we need until the filibuster is abolished.

There will be reluctance to this by some who are concerned that if and when the Republicans take back congress that they can use this change against us.

So, first if we look at the 2022 maps we will see that there are no significant pickups for Republicans but several good chances for Democrats,

Democrats have easy pickups in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, with potential pickups in North Carolina, Florida, and Ohio. Republicans might be able to pickup seats in Arizona and Georgia potentially. But if Democrats continue the incredible organizing in those two states, the probability of Republicans taking those two states back goes down significantly. Basically, the 2022 Senate maps favor Democrats. In order to maximize our chances in 2022 we need to make sure that Democrats will get mobilized to vote. The easiest way to do this is show over the next 6 months that the Democrats will deliver.

The 2024 Senate map doesn’t have any very easy pickups for either party, with one potential pickup in Florida for the Democrats. West Virginia, Montana, and Ohio are potentially at risk, but the other states are safe.

If Senate Democrats give Americans a good reason to vote however, the odds will turn in favor for the Democrats like they did in 1966. They can do this if they abolish the filibuster.

If Senate Democrats fail to deliver this session, turnout will drop, Republicans might pickup seats in both chambers, and this will be a wasted opportunity.

If Senate Democrats deliver real progress which makes American lives better, we expand our majority in the House, and gain seats in the Senate, we can bring Texas into play by mobilizing its Hispanic population, we can mobilize African Americans in other Southern States like was done in Georgia by so many amazing activists, and then the 2020s can be the decade when America really starts to deal with systemic problems which our nation has had for centuries.

This future starts with the Senate Democrats abolishing the filibuster and ending this epidemic as soon as possible.

Democrats have the governorships in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Virginia, and Nevada. We are not going to see the same level of gerrymandering we saw after the 2010 census. If Democrats mobilize their voters, the House is safe. Even in the chance that the Senate becomes controlled by Republicans, they can’t do a lot without the House or the Presidency.

The Nuclear Option will mobilize Democratic voters, and the Republicans will need to become less extreme if they are ever to win again. If Democratic Senators deliver and we can make pickups over the next 2 election cycles then the Senate will lean Democratic. I don’t see any reason to fear a Republican Trifecta if Democrats show that they are willing to lead.

If Democrats are able to keep government and things improve, Fox News will have less fuel to add to their fire, and some of their viewership will eventually be forced to see something I like to call reality.

If we choose to be fearful and timid and we do not move on the filibuster now, we will get less passed than we should. The consequence will again be a drop in turnout among Democrats, and the possibility of Republicans taking the Senate is real. Fear truly is the path to total obliteration.

However… If President Biden can match his excellent executive orders with excellent laws passed by Congress then the Presidency will be leaning Democratic for the foreseeable future. If he uses his power to enforce our already existing voting rights laws across the country, then no one like Trump will be able to win again if people are able to vote.

If we abolish the filibuster and pass bold legislation to solve the very real problems America faces, the Democrats will likely control government for at least the next 10 years, forcing the Republican Party to abandon the policies of Richard Nixon and Donald Trump.

History is very clear. Democrats can either deliver or be defeated.

The time for bold action is now.

Abolish the filibuster.