The Democratic Party is far from perfect to be sure. There are times when they frustrate me beyond reason. It wasn’t all that long ago that I pretty much held mot powerful Democrats in contempt at least part of the time. But they have improved in recent years and I think it’s important to recognize that. The party has dropped much of its reflexive centrist dogma and, at least is more flexible ideologically. That the old dog Joe Biden could change his spots says everything about where it was and where it is today.
And let’s get serious. Compared to the neo-fascist MAGA party they are sane which, at this point, is all that really matters.
On Monday I argued that the Democratic reaction to Menendez—which has picked up steam since then—was a sign of a reasonably healthy institution.
In response I’ve been told that I overstated the case. That the Democrats’ reaction is highly contextual. That if Menendez was a D in a state with a Republican governor who would appoint his replacement, then Democrats would be just as corrupt and unhealthy as Republicans. It’s really all about power. Both sides.
This is incorrect.
For starters, we have many apples-to-apples comparisons in the way of “context.”
-Had the Senate convicted Trump and removed him from office, he would have been replaced by Mike Pence.
-Had Ken Paxton been removed from office, his replacement would have been chosen by the Republican governor.
-If George Santos had resigned his seat would have remained open and would not have changed the balance of power in the House.
In case after case Republicans failed to police their own side even when it would not have cost them anything.
So the very least you can say about the Democrats is that, confronted with the same scenario as Republicans, they frequently choose the better part.
But that’s obvious. The “shifting context” argument is an attempt to move goal posts so that rather than giving Democrats credit for a thing they have done well compared with Republicans in the same situation, Democrats are compared to a hypothetical version of themselves.
This is projection. Republicans are so obsessed with the maintenance of power that they insist everyone else would pursue it with the same single-mindedness they have.
And I’m happy to grant that maybe, in that hypothetical situation, Democrats might not be their best selves. If the Senate was 50-50 and Menendez resigning meant that Republicans would take over the chamber, would Democrats be as good as they have been?
Maybe; maybe not.
But again, compare the Democrats not to a theoretical example of perfect consistency, but to the Republican party as it actually exists in the world today: Marco Rubio is arguing that Menendez should not resign. He is doing this purely because he thinks that this position might, at some point, theoretically help Republicans gain power in the future.
This is toxic behavior and it is absolutely not something that Democrats have done in recent years on the occasions when they were confronted with Republican scandals ranging from Roy Moore to Donald Trump.
Anyone who cannot admit that the Democratic party is a healthier institution—much healthier—at the moment is selling something.
I think we know what they’re selling, don’t you?