guestpost by wonkie
I’ve been thinking. There’s a lot of discussion on Bluesky of the “Dems don’t fight” type. The Democratic party is at a low point in opinion polling, probably because of the image of Dems as not fighters. There’s a feeling that the times demand a different sort of rhetoric from Democrats.
I’ve also been thinking about how to talk to MAGAS and MAGA adjacents.
I think it’s worth exploring how to communicate with MAGAs because, even when King Pussygrabber strokes out on the toilet at three in the morning, we won’t be over the madness. We will still have the MAGA voters, the Republican party’s commitment to the election tactics of Othering and engineered polarization, and the extensive well-funded Republican hate/fear propaganda bubble (Faux, etc) which, for many people, substitutes for news and shapes their voting behavior.
So my question is: Are MAGAs born or made? Yes, I know the dichotomy doesn’t exist in nature because the human experience is too messy for that. However, I do think there are people who are more toward the born side while others are made, and I think it may make a difference in how we pull people out of the fear/hate propaganda bubble and reduce the engineered polarization.
By born, I mean those people who seem to have an innate predisposition for “othering”. Goebbels used what he called “the thrill of horror” to appeal to these people. So did Caroline Calloway when she wrote materials for Charlie Kirk. Turning Point USA Writer Says It’s “Designed To Scare People” Boogeyman stories have been a staple of Republican political discourse for decades, “The War on Christmas” being a comparatively innocuous example compared to the current “Portland is on fire! Antifa is terrorizing the city!!!” There seems to be people who just fall for this shit naturally. Maybe the opportunity to be thrilled with the horror at the Other makes their life seem like a heroic fight against evil—and all from the safety of their couch. All they have to do is watch Faux and feel the thrill!
Caroline Calloway, the young woman in the link above, seems to be more of a “made” person. She grew up in a religious conservative family and was recruited into Saint Charlie of Free Speech for Conservatives Only (TPUSA. Dare I compare them to the Red Guard? There are similarities) at 17. Her role was to write hate literature designed to give that thrill of horror of the Other–meaning Black men and Democrats—to young white people.
Sadly for Turning Point, they lost their propagandist when she went to college and studied poli sci. Exposed to the wider world and some reality therapy, Caroline had a “crisis of faith”, left TPUSA, and is no longer a conservative.
How did that happen? In her case, learning about systems of governance and experiencing people outside of the framework of her upbringing, combined with her ability to examine herself and to change, led her to recognize that her deepest values lay outside the bubble of conservatism as she experienced it. She valued fairness, freedom of speech for everyone, the common good, civility, empathy. She didn’t learn those values at college; she already had them before she got there. Her change came when she realized that Charlie Kirk, TPUSA, and the Republican party all exist in contradiction to those values. That left the door open for her to walk out of the bubble and toward the Democrats.
This, of course, is why Kirk’s organization targets universities. He, and the heirs of his hate propaganda business, aren’t interested in free speech and are only secondarily interested in recruitment of young people. Their goal is to prevent anyone who grew up in the bubble from escaping through exposure to life outside the bubble while at a university. Hence, Kirk’s watch list of professors to be driven out of their jobs for thought crimes. And the beat goes on: Rutgers professor known as ‘Dr Antifa’ shares plans to relocate to Europe.
I don’t think it really matters that much if Trump is around to be the Dear Leader of MAGA or not. When he is gone, there will still be a whole Republican party that enabled him to the max and the hate/fear propaganda bubble will still be poisoning our political discourse.
So how do we communicate to break through the bubble? I don’t know what will work, but I know what doesn’t work: the traditional Democratic approach of being politely reasonable in discussion of policy based on the polite pretense that Congressional Republicans are capable of acting in good faith and the traditional “rise above them” response to Republican slanders, while outsourcing the more bluntly truthful discussion to Raw Story. The conventional “wisdom” was that Dems should appear moderate and reasonable to retain credibility with the MSM and pundits like David Brooks.
The result is a milquetoast speaking style where the content of the remarks is obscured by professorial language and a passionless affect. Schumer does this all the time.
Fuck that shit.
When someone needs to be told to fuck off then tell them to fuck the hell off.
I think we need to communicate moral outrage and patriotism forcefully while openly attacking Republican tactics. Start the Truth and Reconciliation with loud, clear, unequivocal truths about the Republican party leaders’ behavior and actions. Expose them. Contradict them. Mock them. Attack them.
It feels to me like Tim Walz was on the right track with his line about weirdness. (How ‘Republicans Are Weird’ Caught Fire Thanks to Tim Walz) There was a lot of concern trolling about that from the msm and some Dems about that. Oh no, no, no, Democrats must be polite and rise above etc. Plus there was Republican outrage. (Democratic party’s ‘Trump is weird’ strategy rattles Republicans) But I believe that when Dems say things that trigger an attack of hysterics on the part of Republicans, then they have probably hit a nerve and should repeat whatever they said louder. The decision to drop the “They’re weird” attack was, I think, a mistake.
More of this, please:
Rhode Island Senator Sheldon Whitehouse said, “Healthcare for illegal aliens” is the new “immigrants are eating cats and dogs in Springfield. The Republican Playbook is simple: make up a baseless lie, repeat it every chance you get, hope and pray that everyone blames Democrats for the crisis you created. Republicans don’t want to govern. They want to rule.”
He doesn’t politely explain a Dem POV—he calls Republican politicians racist liars, exposes their bad faith, and clearly explains their malicious trickery. He asserts the bare truth in terms that anyone can understand.
Or this: Pritzker warns against Trump sending troops to Illinois in raging speech:
‘Jackbooted thugs’ Over the top talk? Nope: An ICE agent rammed a woman’s car, shouted abuse at her and shot her—and then lied about who rammed who. There’s a video! There’s also a video of ICE agents murdering an immigrant and don’t forget the helicopter raid on an apartment building and the zip tied children. We need to call things by their real names—no toning down for the sake of appearing moderate. Stop worrying about pleasing the NYT editors and Politico. Put the truth out there, bluntly.
Or this: ICE Barbie (Kristi Noem Triggered by Man in Chicken Suit on Portland Trip). I like the characterization of Neom as a humorless poseur who shouts about antifa terrorists when she sees a man in a chicken costume. Mockery is a good tool for exposing bad faith.
The “kitchen table issues” are moral issues and should be talked about that way. “Lives are at stake. Republicans need to fund health care. Their plan is immoral.” (cf Facebook)
Will this jar the “born” people to abandon the Republican hate/fear propaganda? I don’t know. There’s a subset of the Republican base that gets a vicarious thrill out of what they see as displays of power. If there is any way to communicate with them, it will have to be by displaying power back at Republican leaders. Besides, it’s a moral imperative to stand up to thugs and bullies. Can Democrats jar people like Caroline into a recognition that their good values are contradicted by the patterns of behavior shown by most Republican leaders and organizations? Maybe. There are Republican voters who value fairness; have respect for the law; dislike bullies and thugs; don’t want government of, by and for the superrich; and don’t want to be aligned with unconstitutional behavior. The Republican leaders have engaged in false advertising about their entirely imaginary moral superiority for decades while Democrats talked about policy on the assumption that policy was understood to arise from values. It’s way past time for Democrats to claim morality LOUDLY AND OVERTLY and to put issues into a moral framework. Do that, and the Carolines of our society will have a way out of the fear/hate propaganda bubble.
I think we need to give the Overton Window of acceptable discourse a good hard yank in the direction of Dems being bad asses when it comes to word choice and phrasing. We’ve endured decades of Republican engaging in slanderous lying while Dems held themselves and were held by the media to a higher standard. I think we need to remain truthful, but polite? Moderate in tone? Fuck that shit.
Someday, hopefully, we’ll go through a truth and reconciliation phase. Let’s get that started by shouting the truths out loudly and clearly
Ha, that’s what comes of not looking at the papers (or anything else) till 6.30 pm*! Thanks hsh.
Now from me: on the issue of Biden’s v Trump’s records, I was going to snarkily ask bc what, as a lawyer, s/he thought about Trump’s annexation of the entire (as near as he can) legal system and DOJ to go after his “enemies”. I was going to contrast it with the prosecutions and convictions of Trump while Biden was POTUS, but lo, I don’t have to. Here (from the Atlantic) is something today:
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/10/trump-political-prosecution-democrats/684556/?gift=cx0iluuWx4Cg7JjlT8ugCThgNr42oHPKHeuYkIOS1gc&utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share
I haven’t actually read it yet*, but from a brief skim it looks like they do a decent job….
the group texts of Young Republicans.
You’d think Hitler would be a bright line. Wouldn’t you? What the hell is funny about gas chambers?
My father, step-father, father-in-law, and uncle, all fought in WWII. Uncle didn’t make it back. They would freaking puke to see this.
They think this crap is funny. “Edgy”. It’s all a joke, right? Owning the libs for fun and lols.
And now they’re all gonna whine because they’ve been outed and some of them are losing their jobs.
I affirm the idea that we don’t want to dehumanize other folks. That said, these folks dehumanize themselves.
And I understand that there are Good And Reasonable Conservatives, but there are a hell of a lot of folks like this. These are not “fringe” characters, they are leaders in the Young Republican movement. Leaders.
Good And Reasonable Conservatives, if you want to engage in civil and constructive dialog with your counterparties, you need to get people like this the hell out of your party and your movement. I know I sure as hell have nothing to say to them, and am not interested in anything they might want to say to me.
To borrow wonkie’s language, they can fuck right off.
I can’t make them go away. You – reasonable conservatives, wherever you are – can. Or at least you can try. They do not deserve a place in governance, in political leadership, or in public conversation.
If you want people to stop calling MAGAs and conservatives in general Nazis, STOP INDULGING THE NAZIS IN YOUR COMMUNITY. If you can’t do that, the rest of us can’t believe you when you say they “have no part” of your world. They do have a part of it, they are right there in plain sight.
I’ve just read hsh’s link about the Young Republicans. Surprise, surprise. And also to see that J D Vance continues to distinguish himself. Jesus F Christ.
Russell:
I appreciate the numbers view, and I agree that our country can accept a significant number of (legal) immigrants. How many is a policy decision and best made by Congress rather than having that decision made de facto by illegal immigrants.
To be clear, I am in favor of immigration and I am sympathetic to anyone trying to improve their life. I worked professionally in the immigration area years ago (pre-ICE). I too see the very real fear that is out there now. I saw that fear in downtown LA during the Reagan years around the time of amnesty and see it again today amongst the immigrant population when I visit the Pasadena area for work.
As for how this is being handled now, I agree with you to a significant degree. Depending on who you listen to, it either is or is not focusing on those we would all agree should be deported (criminal record, pending criminal charges, gang members, etc.). DHS says 70%. Other reports are much, much less. I’m strongly in favor of deporting anyone who entered without inspection with a conviction or criminal charges pending or gang association. I also think the resistance isn’t helping calm things down and that to me is by design. Doxing produced masks, which engender fear and are then criticized as fascist. And on it goes.
As for the rest of those here without papers, how do you prefer those to the 5 million or so waiting in line? There are IMO far more who entered illegally already in the country. I think the numbers are underrepresented. See this MIT-Yale study before the Biden border surge estimating 22M in the country illegally (or more):
https://insights.som.yale.edu/insights/yale-study-finds-twice-as-many-undocumented-immigrants-as-previous-estimates
While that study is contested by the usual think tanks (such as Pew), it seems to open up the possibility that there are a lot more than commonly believed.
Being in the United States without some kind of legal status is a civil, not a criminal, violation.
Your statement doesn’t distinguish between visa overstays and entry into the US without inspection. Unless something has recently changed, my understanding is:
If you sneak across the border without inspection, you are a criminal (misdemeanor).
If you overstay your student or tourist visa, you are typically not (civil).
But if you are deported after an overstay and enter again without approval, felony. Same for those denied entry and try to enter again.
Whether or not you or I like the law, that is what I believe it is. The vast majority of the debate centers on those trying to enter without inspection, not the overstays. It also includes those here under Biden’s much-expanded rules for asylum and parole, seen as illegitimate by many. Either way, we are not talking about a speeding ticket.
bc: Doxing produced masks, which engender fear and are then criticized as fascist.
I’d like to know more about this “doxing”. I do not trust Kristi Noem’s statements about it any more than I trust her DHS 70% statistic. Let’s hear about a few actual cases.
I am quite prepared to believe that there have been instances of people being publicly identified as ICE “agents”, and I can easily believe those people were annoyed and embarrassed. But what else happened?
–TP
I don’t claim to know very much about illegal immigration to the USA, but it seems to me that if one genuinely wanted to attack the problem one would go after the employers, who have much more to lose than the illegal immigrants.
I’m going to guess that Trump hasn’t done that. Tell me if I’m wrong.
if one genuinely wanted to attack the problem one would go after the employers, who have much more to lose than the illegal immigrants.
Fact is, nobody has done it. It’s now peculiar to Trunp & Co., so it’s not just about Trump being a big empliyer of illehals.
The law has been in place forever. But when I.C.E. (or its predecessors) make a raid on a workplace, somehow the employer never faces legal consequences. Even in cases where the employees really are illegally here (and not merely of the “wrong” racial or ethnic group).
TP:
Indictment for three women following an ICE agent home and livestreaming it:
https://www.justice.gov/usao-cdca/pr/federal-grand-jury-charges-three-women-following-ice-agent-home-work-and-livestreaming
DHS’ announcement re Portland doxxing here:
https://www.dhs.gov/news/2025/07/11/anarchists-and-rioters-portland-illegally-dox-ice-officers-and-federal-law
Note that you can actually look up the Antifa group doing this on the web and see the actual posters they were distributing. I’m not going to link to that, for obvious reasons. But I take that as verification of what Noem is saying.
Arrest of a Santa Monica man for doxxing an ICE attorney:
https://smdp.com/news/crime/santa-monica-man-arrested-for-allegedly-doxxing-ice-attorney/
Tony P. – I’d like to know more about this “doxing”. I do not trust Kristi Noem’s statements about it any more than I trust her DHS 70% statistic. Let’s hear about a few actual cases.
Not meaning to come in here and force bc to engage and defend this while outnumbered. I do think it is important to note, though, that this particular scenario does not start with people on the left being upset that the Trump administration is enforcing the immigration laws and respond by doxxing ICE agents wholesale.
It starts with ICE being given arbitrary quotas and being sent out to grab people based on language and ethnicity, and detaining and deporting people without due process.
And even with that, the few people who have actually been doxxed (as opposed to those who are afraid of being doxxed – not for enforcing the law, but for being violent while pursuing these reprehensible tactics) only ended up getting doxxed because they were the ones caught being especially, shockingly violent on video while engaging in these reprehensible tactics.
Should the public’s response here be to say that all ICE agents should be allowed to wear masks so they need not fear being identified, or should it be to say that ICE needs to stop these show raids and use their enforcement power only to go after the actual criminals in a way that does not violate their right to due process? And if we protest it should be both, which of the sides of that choice should be the one we give priority to?
Hello bc –
Thank you for your thoughtful response! I’ll try to reply briefly.
I think you are correct as regards the law. The severity of the offense depends on whether someone came through a federal entry point vs. just walking across the border somewhere, and also whether someone is trying to re-enter illegally after having been deported.
Thank you for the clarification and correction, I appreciate it.
First, we are on the same page as regards people with criminal histories or demonstrable gang affiliation. I would except folks whose “criminal history” is a moving violation, but certainly crimes against persons or property are legitimate grounds for deportation or refusal of entry.
I don’t actually prefer the folks who are here without legal status to the 5 million waiting in line. If I understand the estimates of the size of the “no legal status” numbers, they actually include many of those 5 million – people waiting for an asylum ruling, people here under TPS, basically anyone who has not yet been granted permanent legal residency.
For folks who did straight-up sneak in or overstay their visa – people who are *not* in the pipeline – it’s legitimate to deport them, or at least require them to justify their presence here on some legitimate basis (fear of being killed if they return, frex). But I also think we need to be realistic about what we can do without turning the country into a police state. Reagan offered amnesty, we’ve since had Dreamers, those are both programs intended to deal with the situation humanely and realistically. Don’t know if they are appropriate to the current situation.
I personally would be fine with defining a structured path to residency for folks who have been here for some time – 5 years? pick a number – and who have no criminal record. Especially folks who are in families of mixed immigration status – right now we are deporting people who have kids here, and who have been here for years and years. That doesn’t seem right, to me.
I’m curious to understand your point about the folks “waiting in line” a little more clearly. Are they “waiting in line” here in this country, i.e., their status is in process but not yet granted? Are they waiting in some other country for a request to immigrate to be granted? I want to understand how the presence of an undocumented person here harms them, or is unfair to them in some tangible way.
Purely from a practical point of view, the focus should be on people who are here with no legal status and who are making trouble. Criminals, gang members. And I agree that the DHS numbers are BS. My understanding, based on cites of ICE’s own statistics, is that 80% of the people being held in the Burlington facility near me have no criminal record.
Lastly, I agree that if ICE folks didn’t wear masks, they would be at risk of being doxed, and that there is potential for harm there. I would counter that *if they weren’t acting as they are acting*, that risk would be significantly reduced. Cops, FBI, etc. generally don’t find it necessary to wear masks. ICE’s own behavior – their violence and total disregard for due process – is what creates, or at least exacerbates, that risk. They are lawless.
I agree that it’s a hard problem, and that there is no perfect solution. But what we are doing right now is nuts. Not “nuts” as in “silly and amusing”, but “nuts” as in harmful and destructive, not just to immigrants, but to all of us.
Due process applies to everyone, or else we are all at risk of losing it.
If I’d known russell were responding on the doxxing thing and covering the same points I was making, I’d have saved the typing and the risk of further piling on bc.
Also, I just noticed that we can now edit our comments after posting them. Let us try our best to use these powers only for good.
There again – editing your already posted comment may end up getting that comment marked as potential spam, so we may have extra motivation not to abuse the edits.
Hi all, just a quick bts note. Nous is right, editing a comment gets it put in the spam bucket. There was also a comment from bc there which I have pulled out and posted, it was blocked because it had 3 links.
I’m making a separate post to get opinions on some things on the blog so as not to disrupt this discussion. Thanks!
I’m v glad nous’s “edited” comment below was rescued. I think it is exactly right.
Russell:
The waiting in line people are those waiting for consular processing (for a green card) and the quotas that apply. These are people outside the US. If you count the family preferences and business categories, I think it is around 5M. The wait times are published in the Visa Bulletin. It has gotten a lot longer lately. Some categories, especially applied to Mexico, have incredibly long wait times. Decades I think for some.
I would find something along the lines of what you suggest (5 years, no criminal record) acceptable for a starting point of discussion. I have reservations, though. Reagan’s amnesty was supposed to be coupled with a secure border so as to not provide an incentive to come illegally. That didn’t happen and here we are. And those coming in legally typically need an affidavit of support to prevent them from becoming public charges. How would that be accomplished here? And how to make it fair to those waiting in line? Any path to permanent residency and citizenship should be slower than the legal path and have some sort of cost to it.
Regarding ICE, I too have my concerns based on what I’ve seen. But the media is fanning the flames here too, methinks. The reporter arrested while “going to the bus stop” allegedly threw an unknown liquid on the officers. I watched an MSNBC compilation of uncooperative detainees and wondered whether the person being arrested had more than just a fear of being deported (as in a criminal record). Verified info would be helpful. The AP announced a Marine dad was arrested and deported while visiting Camp Pendleton. The son says no criminal record. DHS says he was ordered removed in 2005 and has a 2020 conviction for DV and aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.
DHS responded to the protests outside the Illinois facility with posts showing some of those arrested and countering what it says are Pritzker’s “lies.” Could our intrepid AP chase this down?
https://www.dhs.gov/news/2025/10/15/meet-some-worst-worst-broadview-ice-facility-illinois
https://www.dhs.gov/news/2025/10/06/dhs-debunks-governor-pritzkers-harmful-lies-about-operation-midway-blitz-chicago
And regarding the Burlington facility, 20% having a criminal record is pretty high IMO. The question I have is whether the remaining 80% have 1) an order of removal; 2) have been charged with a crime or 3) have any gang affiliation. Information on that would be nice. If the majority are law-abiding, hard working people not dodging an order of removal, I’d have concerns. If they are Abrego Garcia, not so much.
So it’s okay to violate constitutional rights and due process so long as ICE can trot out a few actual criminals afterwards.
Gotta burn the constitution in order to save it?
I mean, that was Lincoln’s justification.
Does this rise to the level of slavery in terms of being a threat to the nation?
I don’t buy it, but it does seem to be selling well in conservative circles.
I am anti-fascist. One implication of that is: I want criminals locked up, not people who the government says are criminals. Lawyers surely understand the distinction. So when bc points me to government sites which lay out accusations of doxxing, I appreciate it — but I don’t take it for granted that I’m getting the whole story there. Since I am personally in no position to “get the whole story”, I am content to let courts do it. Back when Gitmo was a hot topic, I pointed out that habeas corpus is not merely a defendant’s right, it’s also one of mine: if the government, acting in my name, wants to lock somebody up, I want to know the reason why. Anti-anti-fascists may feel differently, of course.
Being anti-fascist does NOT mean I dismiss everything some Acting US Attorney says about any particular case. Maybe the facts ARE exactly what the “official government website” (with its “Democrats have shut down the government” banner) says they are. I get more suspicious when it comes to statistics. Have there been vastly more cases of ICE-doxxing than, say, judge-doxxing? Have more ICE agents than judges been harmed as a result of being doxxed? I don’t know what “official” government statistics show, but I have a hunch the present government might fudge them a bit.
Being a layman, I can accept that The Law forbids publishing certain personal information about some categories of federal employees. Maybe that includes IRS clerks, maybe not, but either way I haven’t heard about an epidemic of IRS clerks being doxxed. Running afoul of The Law by posting flyers like “This Revenuer lives in your neighborhood” doesn’t seem to be worth the trouble for anybody. So maybe the doxxing of “brave” ICE agents is motivated by their high-handed brutality, not their official “duties”, as others have pointed out.
BTW, as a layman, I can not claim to know what the Hatch Act has to say about partisan propaganda on “official government websites”, but also as a layman I have to say: yeesh!
Being a naturalized citizen, I have to write a whole ‘nother wall of text on immigration policy, but for the moment I only have time to ask: is it true or false that you have to be on US soil to ask for asylum?
–TP
What TonyP just said, particularly this masterfully sly section:
Maybe the facts ARE exactly what the “official government website” (with its “Democrats have shut down the government” banner) says they are. I get more suspicious when it comes to statistics. Have there been vastly more cases of ICE-doxxing than, say, judge-doxxing? Have more ICE agents than judges been harmed as a result of being doxxed? I don’t know what “official” government statistics show, but I have a hunch the present government might fudge them a bit.
From Propublica, via LGM
13 links, so being an admin has it’s perks.
Here is where I am today as regards calling a thug a thug.
This week we had folks in the Young Republicans organization telling us they love Hitler and who should be sent to the gas chanbers. The folks involved included a Vermont state Senator and the head of staff of a NY Assemblyman. The latter was the guy who “loved Hitler”.
Not fringe people.
Today I see that Mike Davis, former chief counsel for Chuck Grassley, former clerk for Gorsuch, and current head of the conservative Article III Project, decided to call House minority leader Hakeem Jeffries “George Soros’ house slave” in a post on X.
We also have a photo from the office of Congressman Dave Taylor, (R) Ohio, showing a picture pinned to a bulletin board with an American flag modified to include a swastika.
Plus all the ICE bullshit. Plus all the “manosphere” crap.
If you don’t want to be called Nazis, don’t be Nazis.
If you don’t want to be associated with Nazis, don’t associate with Nazis.
If you don’t want to be called fascist, don’t behave like a fascist regime.
If you don’t want to be called thugs, don’t send thugs in your employ into our cities and neighborhoods to abuse people.
If you don’t want to be called misogynist, don’t joke about rape being “epic”.
A hit dog will holler.
I’m not interested in dialog with people who consider folks who don’t look like them are some lower order of being. I don’t even know where the conversation could begin.
I’m not referring to bc, I do not get that vibe from him.
But it’s rampant in the right wing. Which owns the (R) party and the “conservative” name right now.
If you don’t like that, you need to take it back from them. I can’t do that, you can.
Clean your damned house. You have rats in the walls.
russell – Clean your damned house. You have rats in the walls.
A fitting metaphor. The GOP, like Lovecraft’s “The Rats in the Walls,” have a lot of racism and xenophobia on display.