Category: Demographics/Psychographics

By Posted on Posted in Activism, censorship, Democracy, Demographics/Psychographics, Diversity, Innovation, localism/locavore, Mindset, Networking, Politics, Social and Economic Justice, Talking to the Other Side Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

One of the strongest local economy advocates I know is Michael Schuman, who publishes the Main Street Journal. Today, he took on the US president’s attempts to strongarm voters and rig the election. And then he noted that David Plouffe, a key advisor in Obama’s successful “out of nowhere”run for the presidency in 2008, has said that demographically, he can’t win.

Schuman says the way to defeat Plouffee’s defeatism is to get half a million Democrats to move to states where T narrowly squeaked by in 2024. North and South Dakota, Wyoming, and Montana all went GOP by less than 150,000 votes. These states are contiguous with each other—so, if that shift happened, we’d have an entire new liberal REGION bordering progressive Minnesota on the east and with only a thin strip of the Idaho Panhandle separating it from progressive Washington to the northwest. And it’s worth remembering that as recently as 1979, George McGovern—probably still the most progressive major-party presidential candidate in my lifetime—was the more conservative senator from South Dakota.

I agree that Plouffe is wrong. And so are all those pundits who keep howling at us that the Dems need to move way to the right.

But I’m not convinced that Michael Schuman’s solution is the way to get there. First, it’s going to be very hard to find those half million people willing to start their lives over for a hope of shifting their new state blue. Second, it’s going to be even harder to coordinate that effort so that just enough people land in the right districts in each of the swingable states. Third, there’s no guarantee it will work. Republicans would get wind of it and work much harder to get their base out or to recruit new residents of their own.

Fourth, and most importantly, a new culture doesn’t easily impose itself on an already established culture. I am a New York City native living in a rural area, on a working dairy farm in Massachusetts. My neighbors have 600 cows. New YorkCity values and lifestyles won’t work here. You want to build quality relationships with your neighbors, and that doesn’t happen by storming in, taking over, and stomping on the opinions and values of your neighbors. I seasoned for 17 years in a small college town and learned to be “bicultural” before I made the big move to the farm. If the existing communities feel disrespected, there will be no progress.

Here’s what I suggest instead: The Dems could finally figure out how to talk about real issues that working people care about without negating the social equity and environmental justice pieces. They need a lot more candidates like AOC, Bernie, and Mamdani, who’ve shown that we can move mountains if we organize where people are, and we don’t need to sacrifice the justice agenda to do it.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Demographics/Psychographics, Diversity, Ethics in Government, Ethics: General, language, Politics, propaganda, Protests and Crackdowns, Psychology, Social and Economic Justice, Talking to the Other Side, Uncategorized Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 From today’s NY Times email newsletter, “The Morning”:

President Trump does not seem interested in de-escalating anything in Minneapolis. This week, he said that one justification for the shooting of Renee Good might have been that she had been “disrespectful” to officers. Being disrespectful is a form of speech, though — one protected by the Constitution.

With Trump, it’s always a clue that if he accuses someone of bad behavior, he is doing/has done it himself. This is on the same day that news broke about Trump giving the finger and two F-bombs to a Ford employee who called him out as a “pedophile protector”—which the Times mentioned in that same newsletter. The link above is to The Guardian, because the Times uses paywalls.

But Trump showing the emotional maturity of a two-year-old yesterday is just the latest in a lifetime flinging insults at individuals, groups, and whole countries. This is what he said about racism in 1989  (followed by the response decades later by a Black commentator whose offer to Trump to tour Baltimore after Trump disparaged that city was declined). 1989 was also the year he ran a full-page ad in all four of NYC’s daily newspapers calling for the death penalty for five Black youths falsely convicted of rape and later exonerated.

And ever since he rode that golden escalator to announce his candidacy in 2015, it’s been a nonstop barrage. He mocked a reporter’s physical disability. He called Africa, Haaiti, and El Salvador “shithole countries” and called for increased immigration from Norway (a White-predominant country) in 2018 and—just a month ago, on December 9, 2025—not only admitted the comment (which he’d denied at the time) but bragged about it and added Somalia to the list. For years, his racism led him to deny that Obama was born in the US. If that lie were true, Obama would have been ineligible to serve as President. He repeatedly attacks and insults his opponents—Biden and Harris, of course—but even former loyalists that he drove away, including then-Vice President Mike Pence and one of his biggest loyalists in Congress, Marjorie Taylor Greene. And his history of insulting and objectifying women—individuals as well as women as a class—is just as bad as his racism and ableism.

Worst of all, the vile xenophobic anti-immigrant rhetoric of his first campaign and term has not just increased. It has morphed into something truly evil: a war against immigrants that empowers a poorly trained, poorly vetted goon squad army of ICE and CBP agents to rain terror down on immigrant neighborhoods, whose residents are snatched from cars, homes, workplaces, and even their immigration court hearings—with zero due process and extreme violence—and sent to far-away gulags in the US and in countries where these victims have no connection. The conservative Cato Institute lists a multipronged attack on immigrants and citizens, from revoking legal status of people who came here legally to multiple attacks on the Constitution and due process. This is unlike anything in US history. It’s even more extreme than the detention of Japanese immigrants and descendants during World War II—for which the US has apologized and made reparations. Many US citizens have been caught in these sweeps and illegally detained. And much of what ICE is doing is a wildly illegal expansion of the powers they are chartered with. They are not supposed to take a police role other than in matters of illegal immigration (as I document in the Appendix, below). And they are not supposed to shoot people. Yet, Time Magazine reports today that  “Immigration agents have fired at or into civilian vehicles in at least 13 instances since July.” That would include the two people shot since the murder of Renee Nicole Good last week, in Portland, Oregon. At least four of those were fatal. Add to that the 32 people who died in ICE custody in the past year.

Trump’s hypocrisy takes many other forms, too. Examples:

  1. He’s praising protesters in the streets of Tehran even as he decries them in any state that voted for Kamala Harris.
  2. Killing more than 100 Venezuelan sailors (95 as of November when this article was written), then invading the country and kidnapping its (admittedly thuggish) leader on the pretext of interdicting drugs, but pardoning the biggest drug dealer of them all, former President Hernandez of Honduras. Of course, we all know and he hasn’t tried to hide that it’s really about the oil.
  3. Claiming to be a law-and-order president but inciting the January 6, 2021 riot at the Capitol and then pardoning even those rioters who physically attacked police officers.

Please let your Representative and two Senators in the US Congress know that you find this unacceptable and you want them to withhold funding from ICE until it starts obeying all relevant laws on search and seizure, delineation of responsibility, due process, and use of force. If they balk at that, defund the agency at least until Minnesota is allowed to fully participate in the investigation of Good’s murder—and then keep pressing for more accountability. And please share this post widely.

 

Appendix: Perplexity.AI Report on what ICE is and is Not Allowed to Do

I asked Perplexity, the AI engine I tend to use for serious research and factchecking, “In what situations is US Immigration and Customs Enforcement allowed or not allowed to act as local police do?” Because both AI and traditional search engines may or may not return the same results for the same search, and because AI results are not written by a human and therefore not subject to copyright, I’m copying the entire answer. Drawing on ten different sources including the BBC, the Massachusetts state government website, and the ACLU, it is quite illuminating:

 is a federal civil immigration agency, not a general police force, so it can enforce federal immigration and certain federal criminal laws but cannot simply “act like” local police enforcing state or local law. Its actions are further limited by the U.S. Constitution, federal statutes, and by how much local police choose or are allowed (under state law) to cooperate.?

What ICE is allowed to do

  • Enforce federal immigration law. ICE can stop, detain, and arrest people it has probable cause to believe are removable (deportable) from the U.S., and can place them in immigration detention and initiate deportation cases.?

  • Enforce certain federal crimes. ICE can investigate and bring cases involving immigration-related crimes like human trafficking, document fraud, and smuggling under federal criminal statutes.?

  • Make public?space arrests with probable cause. In public places, ICE may arrest someone if agents have probable cause the person is removable and likely to escape before a warrant can be obtained; they may also execute valid arrest warrants in public.?

  • Enter homes with judicial warrants or consent. ICE may enter a private home only with the occupant’s voluntary consent or a judicial warrant signed by a judge; an internal ICE “administrative” warrant alone does not authorize entry into a private residence.?

  • Conduct raids and surveillance within legal limits. ICE can conduct operations at homes, workplaces, and in communities and can use data collection and digital surveillance tools, subject to constitutional limits on searches and seizures.?

  • Request help from local law enforcement. ICE can ask local agencies to notify them when someone is being released or to hold a person briefly through “detainers,” and can enter formal agreements (287(g)) that deputize some local officers to perform limited immigration functions.?

What ICE is not allowed to do

  • Cannot enforce state or local non?immigration laws. ICE does not have authority to enforce purely state or local offenses (like routine traffic violations or most state criminal laws) unless a separate federal authority applies.?

  • Cannot enter homes using only an ICE form. An ICE administrative warrant (Form I?200/I?205) does not let agents force their way into a private home; without consent or a judicial warrant, they must stay outside or in common/public areas.?

  • Cannot force local police to act as immigration officers. Local agencies cannot be compelled to carry out civil immigration enforcement; they decide whether to cooperate, and many jurisdictions legally limit that cooperation.?

  • Cannot use detainers as binding orders. ICE detainers are requests, not mandatory orders; local agencies may violate state law or the Constitution if they hold someone past their release time without proper legal authority.?

  • Must comply with the Constitution. ICE arrests, searches, and detention are constrained by the Fourth Amendment and due process requirements, just like other law enforcement; unconstitutional stops, searches, or holds can lead to liability.?

How ICE differs from local police

  • Scope of authority. Local police are generalists enforcing broad state and local criminal laws within a limited geographic area, while ICE has a narrow subject?matter focus (immigration and related federal crimes) but nationwide reach.?

  • Civil versus criminal. Much of what ICE does is civil (removal/deportation) rather than criminal prosecution, so ICE can detain someone for immigration violations even when no crime is charged, which is different from typical local policing.?

  • Limits on cooperating with ICE. Many cities and states have “sanctuary” or similar policies that allow cooperation on serious criminal matters but forbid or restrict participation in routine civil immigration enforcement.?

When ICE and local police can overlap

  • Joint operations on crime. Local police may work with ICE when investigating federal crimes (for example, human trafficking or gang cases) where immigration issues also arise.?

  • 287(g) agreements. Under 287(g) “jail?enforcement” agreements, certain local jail officers are trained and authorized to perform specific immigration tasks (like issuing charging documents or detainers) under ICE supervision, but they still must follow constitutional and state?law limits.?

  • Information sharing and notifications. Where allowed by state and local law, police may share booking information or give ICE notice of a person’s release, even if they cannot legally hold the person longer just because ICE asked.?

Situations where ICE is more restricted than local police

  • Protected or sensitive areas (policy?based). For years, ICE policies limited enforcement in places like schools, hospitals, and churches, though recent DHS actions have rescinded some of those “sensitive location” protections; policy can be more restrictive than what the Constitution alone requires.?

  • Entering private spaces. Local police with state?court warrants for state crimes may enter a home to arrest a suspect; ICE, by contrast, often relies on administrative warrants that do not permit entering a home without consent, so ICE’s ability to mimic a home arrest by local police is more limited.?

If you want, a follow?up can focus specifically on how these rules work in Massachusetts and what they mean for day?to?day interactions with ICE.

 
 
 
 

 

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Abundance and Prosperity, Activism, Business-general, Consumer Issues, Corporate Social Responsibility, Demographics/Psychographics, Diversity, Eco-friendly, Energy & Sustainability, Environment, Ethics in Government, Ethics-International, General Commentary, Gratitude, Green Business, Green Living/Green Lifestyles, Innovation, language, Marketing Trends/News, Media Ethics, media-general, Mindset, People Helping People, poverty, propaganda, Psychology, Publishing, Science, Social and Economic Justice, Talking to the Other Side, Technology Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

“We have built the safest civilisation in human history while convincing ourselves that we live in the most dangerous. Billions of people experienced measurable improvements in health, safety, and material conditions in 2025. That progress didn’t make the news. But it happened anyway, one vaccine, one school meal, one kilowatt-hour at a time.”
—Angus Hervey, Fix the News

From Fix the News, one of several good-news publications I receive—and one that skews toward science-based progress. This one does start with a depressing summary of the news we’ve all heard—but then moves into a long series of victories that most of us didn’t even now about. It pauses to excoriate mass media for amplifying the negative and superficial (e.g., celebrities) while ignoring unsexy but vital stories such as the amazing ocean treaties and the actual elimination of rampant fatal diseases, country by country. And then it finishes with another long list of victories for humanity and the other creatures we share this amazing planet with.

You won’t be sorry to spend ten minutes with this. https://fixthenews.com/p/the-telemetry?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=4861955&post_id=182468358&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=sl4r&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Activism, Democracy, Demographics/Psychographics, Diversity, Ethics in Government, language, Mindset, People Helping People, Politics, poverty, Psychology, Social and Economic Justice, Talking to the Other Side Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I was not expecting to be totally blown away by a politician’s victory speech on Election Night. But I was moved to tears several times.

Whether you like his politics or not, you have to acknowledge his oratorical skills—both in the crafting of this speech and in the delivery, where he comes across to me as humble, inclusive, and committed. And if speaking is any part of your communications (which it should be), there are a lot of lessons in this speech.

The politician is Zohran Mamdani, just elected as the first Muslim mayor of New York City—a municipality with more population than 38 of the 50 US states.

You can view it at https://www.c-span.org/program/campaign-2025/zohran-mamdani-election-night-victory-speech/668370 (including the sweet family moment at the very end) and read the full transcript at https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/05/nyregion/mamdani-speech-transcript.html (I had to set up a free account to see it).

He hits high notes immediately, quoting Eugene Victor Debs, “I can see the dawn of a better day for humanity.” Debs ran for president as an open socialist—from his prison cell. Then Mamdani hits us with this powerful and poetic paragraph centering his working-class base:

Fingers bruised from lifting boxes on the warehouse floor, palms calloused from delivery bike handlebars, knuckles scarred with kitchen burns: These are not hands that have been allowed to hold power. And yet, over the last 12 months, you have dared to reach for something greater.

Next, a hat tip to his opponent, who he wishes “only the best in private life.”

Then came the only thing I would have edited out: “But let tonight be the final time I utter his name, as we turn the page on a politics that abandons the many and answers only to the few.” His deeper meaning is ambiguous, but it could be seen as holding some resentment, not wanting to even speak the opponent’s name again. I would have skipped the first clause and jumped to “We have turned the page on a politics that abandons the many and answers only to the few.” When I listened, I misheard the word “utter” as “honor,” and that may color my negativity toward the bit about not speaking his name.

But he pivots immediately to his mandate for change, for making the city affordable, and for including marginalized populations:

Thank you to those so often forgotten by the politics of our city, who made this movement their own. I speak of Yemeni bodega owners and Mexican abuelas. Senegalese taxi drivers and Uzbek nurses. Trinidadian line cooks and Ethiopian aunties. Yes, aunties.

He then tells stories of a few people he met during the campaign: a man who has to commute two hours each way because he can’t afford to live in the city, another who can’t afford to take a day off, and a woman who says she’d lost her love for her city.

His inclusiveness and focus on the glowing future expand to his enormous volunteer network:

This victory is for all of them. And it’s for all of you, the more than 100,000 volunteers who built this campaign into an unstoppable force. Because of you, we will make this city one that working people can love and live in again. With every door knocked, every petition signature earned, and every hard-earned conversation, you eroded the cynicism that has come to define our politics… To my campaign team, who believed when no one else did and who took an electoral project and turned it into so much more: I will never be able to express the depth of my gratitude. You can sleep now.

Then he acknowledges just how ambitious his goals are:

Central to that vision will be the most ambitious agenda to tackle the cost-of-living crisis that this city has seen since the days of Fiorello La Guardia: an agenda that will freeze the rents for more than two million rent-stabilized tenants, make buses fast and free, and deliver universal child care across our city.

Years from now, may our only regret be that this day took so long to come. This new age will be one of relentless improvement. We will hire thousands more teachers. We will cut waste from a bloated bureaucracy. We will work tirelessly to make lights shine again in the hallways of NYCHA developments where they have long flickered.

Safety and justice will go hand in hand as we work with police officers to reduce crime and create a Department of Community Safety that tackles the mental health crisis and homelessness crises head on. Excellence will become the expectation across government, not the exception. In this new age we make for ourselves, we will refuse to allow those who traffic in division and hate to pit us against one another.

From there, he segues directly into something even more ambitious: confronting a hostile federal government and the bigots who enable it—those who want to sow division and hatred, while he calls for unity and invokes, one after another, Jews and Muslims (two other groups who are often at odds on certain issues)—leading first with the community that he is not a member of, but that I am:

In this moment of political darkness, New York will be the light. Here, we believe in standing up for those we love, whether you are an immigrant, a member of the trans community, one of the many Black women that Donald Trump has fired from a federal job, a single mom still waiting for the cost of groceries to go down, or anyone else with their back against the wall. Your struggle is ours, too.

And we will build a City Hall that stands steadfast alongside Jewish New Yorkers and does not waver in the fight against the scourge of antisemitism. Where the more than one million Muslims know that they belong — not just in the five boroughs of this city, but in the halls of power.

No more will New York be a city where you can traffic in Islamophobia and win an election. This new age will be defined by a competence and a compassion that have too long been placed at odds with one another. We will prove that there is no problem too large for government to solve, and no concern too small for it to care about.

This next bit could sound like bravado—I’d love to hear some specifics on HOW he will meet those high expectations—but to me, it comes across instead as another call for unity and actual bravery: being willing to stand up and be counted—and looking ahead to what future would-be dictators we will need to organize against:

They want the people to fight amongst ourselves so that we remain distracted from the work of remaking a long-broken system. We refuse to let them dictate the rules of the game anymore. They can play by the same rules as the rest of us.

Together, we will usher in a generation of change. And if we embrace this brave new course, rather than fleeing from it, we can respond to oligarchy and authoritarianism with the strength it fears, not the appeasement it craves.

After all, if anyone can show a nation betrayed by Donald Trump how to defeat him, it is the city that gave rise to him. And if there is any way to terrify a despot, it is by dismantling the very conditions that allowed him to accumulate power.

This is not only how we stop Trump; it’s how we stop the next one. So, Donald Trump, since I know you’re watching, I have four words for you: Turn the volume up…

So hear me, President Trump, when I say this: To get to any of us, you will have to get through all of us. When we enter City Hall in 58 days, expectations will be high. We will meet them. A great New Yorker once said that while you campaign in poetry, you govern in prose.

If that must be true, let the prose we write still rhyme, and let us build a shining city for all. And we must chart a new path, as bold as the one we have already traveled. After all, the conventional wisdom would tell you that I am far from the perfect candidate…

He goes on to poke a bit of fun at himself, listing several characteristics that would have been thought of as liabilities—then proclaiming, “I refuse to apologize for any of this.”

And he concludes with inspiration: another strong call for hope:

Let the words we’ve spoken together, the dreams we’ve dreamt together, become the agenda we deliver together. New York, this power, it’s yours. This city belongs to you.

Again, I suggest that you watch the speech, take notes on what you feel did and didn’t work, and think about what you can bring to your own presentations.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Activism, Democracy, Demographics/Psychographics, Diversity, Energy & Sustainability, Ethics in Government, Marketing Techniques and Philosophies, media-general, Mindset, Peace and War, People Helping People, Politics, poverty, Protests and Crackdowns, Psychology, Social and Economic Justice, Talking to the Other Side Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

“When they go low, we go high.”
—Michelle Obama

This week, two prominent Democrats gave opposite but equally crazy advice?

Thom Hartmann says we should open up the bag of Republican dirty tricks and start using them. And in what he calls a “daring” maneuver, Carville tells us in a New York times op-ed to “roll over and play dead.”

The above Carville link is for subscribers. I don’t have a sharing link.

Carville’s “plan” was properly shredded by Gil Duran of FrameLab, who says what I would have said:  Carville is ignoring the moral issue that real people are getting hurt. Democrats have to frame themselves as the opposition, loudly and clearly; silence is complicity. And principled resistance is what creates change (more on that in the What to Do section, below)

But let ME take on Hartmann, who usually talks sense. The moral arguments are obvious, but let’s talk about the impact in practice. And then we’ll talk about what to do instead.

  1. This makes us no better than them. If we use the same slimy methods, voters will just say “Tweedledum and Tweedledumber” and stay home—as millions of Biden voters did this past November. Just as we don’t accept violent terrorism to redress wrongs, so we should not accept disenfranchising others And if you think the so-called “stop the steal” movement that tried to steal back the 2020 election was bad, imagine if they actually had cause!
  2. Republican-lite has never worked for the Dems. Republican-lite gave us the impasse under Biden when Manchin and Sinema blocked progress over and over. A generation ago, Republican-lite brought us Newt Gingrich and his “Contract with America” (which progressives dubbed “Contract ON America,” in the hitman sense).
  3. For decades, Republicans have been “the party of  no”—and that includes “no, you can’t vote.” Denying others voting rights, even those we disagree with, would make Democrats also the party of “no, you can’t vote.” Democrats were that party in the segregated South during my childhood, and we all know by now what a huge mistake that was. Ironically, the Republicans are still criticizing the Dems for these old sins, even though, as Greg Palast notes, they themselves have taken voter suppression to new levels. But Harris had the chance to call out Republican voter suppression well in advance of the election, and according to Palast, her failure to push on this was why she lost.

In the 2024 election, failing to speak directly and meaningfully to the working class—coming across as yet another Republican-lite—led to the perception that Harris was an elitist who was beholden to corporate funders and was not in tune with white working-class people, despite policy platforms (that got little coverage) that were much more favorable to workers. Being too timid not only to beat a continuous drum calling out her opponent’s slide toward open fascism AND his cognitive decline but to mobilize an army of respected surrogates and send them into swing states to bring that message home over and over and over was a huge mistake. The country should have been flooded with messages about the harm that her opponent would do, his history of crime, and his repeated failures of competence.

Mind y0u, I think Harris also did a lot of things right, despite the truncated campaign. The focus on joy was brilliant. The promise to undo the damage of Dobbs (the Supreme Court decision that overturned Rowe v. Wade) was given full weight. The promise to be a president for all in the US, not just the Blue states, inspired many.

What to Do to Change This for Next Tuime

  1. We win more when we play bigger. I think the things that hurt the Harris campaign the most other than voter suppression of Democrats in Red states was her unwillingness to play big on certain issues. Being way too weak on Gaza almost certainly cost her Michigan—and was the reason multiple New Hampshire voters told me (when I knocked on their doors this fall) they weren’t voting for either presidential candidate. It would have been so easy for her to give a slot to Ruwa Romman, Palestinian-American legislator from Georgia, whose unity speech had been vetted by the Harris team. Flip-flopping her former correct opposition to fracking and barely mentioning climate change cost her many environmentalist votes. And she seldom addressed the elephant in the room of Republicans denying Democrats and poor people and people of color and people who didn’t want to catch a contagious disease the right to vote.
  2. We also win when we’re much more visible. There’s been a ton of grassroots organizing going on since the election—but with a few exceptions such as the Democratic legislators’ protest in front of the Treasury, it’s not showing up in the media, people don’t encounter it on their way to work, and non-activists don’t know it’s happening—because it’s been on Zoom rooms and inside houses of worship and college classrooms, and not out on the streets. This is a both-and. Do the organizing, do the lobbying, do the important but quiet stuff—but also get out there by the thousands and be seen! In my teen years, I went to a peace demonstration almost every weekend, many times boarding a charter bus from NYC to Washington to participate. Tens of thousands, sometimes hundreds of thousands, over and over again helped to bring that horrible war in Vietnam to a close. A few years earlier, the 1963 March on Washington and other massive demonstrations, plus people in the streets openly defying segregation, helped move a proud civil rights agenda forward into law, and gave LBJ the spine to back up those laws with enforcement. Even small actions can make a difference. Just 2000 people at Seabrook, New Hampshire in 1977 changed the course of US energy away from nuclear and toward renewables, when 1411 of us got arrested and held for up to two weeks. The sustained months of action at Standing Rock, opposing the Dakota Access Pipeline, started with just 200 people.
  3. The Dems have to combine Bernie’s anger and speaking truth to power, Kamela’s and Tim’s focus on joy, and AOC’s youthful energy and super-personable outreach that works equally well face-to-face or on video. (Note: the above link takes you to the links to all of my Facebook posts that mention her or share her work. It is open to the public; you should be able to view the videos and read the quotes even if you’re not on Facebook. If you want to pick one, go for the interview by Bernie, posted December 3, 2024.)
  4. As Bernie has done for years, they must focus on the class issue—not to the exclusion of its current constituencies, but intersectionally, inclusively. They have to recognize that the struggle for rights is the struggle for rights—whether those rights are denied for race, religion, gender, sexuality, economic position, class , age, ability, or any other category. This message has to be presented in ways that make all of these constituencies feel seen, heard, and valued: when one group gains, it “lifts all boats” and “makes the pie higher” for everyone; when one makes progress, it doesn’t take away from the others.
  5. Dems have to go to the Red states and Red audiences. Dems have to emulate Pete Buttigieg and get interviewed by MAGA media outlets like Fox—and do so as articulately and persuasively as he does. They have to reclaim populism and get in front of voters who wrongly saw the billionaire convicted-felon and serial-liar Republican candidate as populist.
  6. Democratic politicians have to be more outspoken. They need to cite real human tragedies resulting from these cruel policies and open hatreds by real people who’ve been hurt, name them, and tell their stories on the floor of the Senate and the House and at their Town Hall meetings back in their home districts. And they need to give copies in advance to the media and engage their base to pressure those media to show up and cover these statements.
  7. All of us need to widen our resistance tactics. In the pre-Internet, pre-COVID era, nonviolence scholar Gene Sharp listed 198 nonviolent social change tactics. Many more have been added since, including this list of 100 mostly digital nonviolent tactics. 21 more showed up when I searched for “nonviolent resistance techniques during covid.” And remember: governments typically fall when just 3.5 percent of the population stops complying and withdraws consent, according to research by Erica Chenoweth and Maria Stephan.

So join a group, get out there and make some of what the late civil rights icon and long-time Congressman John Lewis called “good trouble.”Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Activism, Consumer Issues, Democracy, Demographics/Psychographics, Diversity, Ethics in Government, Mindset, People Helping People, Politics, poverty, Social and Economic Justice, Transparency vs. Secrecy, Uncategorized Tagged with , , ,

If you’ve been bewailing the presidential election and wondering how the country you love could have voted to elect this monster, this may help you feel better: Maybe we didn’t! A respected commentator makes a strong case that millions of votes in heavily Democratic areas of red and purple states were not counted.

Greg Palast came to my attention in the aftermath of the 2000 election–yeah, the one that gave George W. Bush the victory, and eight years as the worst president the US had had until 2017.

Palast, an investigative journalist with a strong background in forensic economics, made a compelling case that the outcome, hanging on a margin of just 537 votes in Florida following a partial recount that was stopped by the Republican-dominated Supreme Court, may have had a lot more to do with the tens of thousands of likely Democratic voters (especially absentee voters) who were purged from the roles, often because of false reasons like their name matching or nearly matching that of some convicted felon. I remember the figure of 96,000, which was bad enough.

While I can’t find that stat right now, I found another article by Palast, from 2004, noting that 178,000 voters from heavily Black areas cast ballots that were disqualified for equally spurious reasons. It’s the one with the headline and picture about Roger Stone.

Well, what do you know! Palast is now making an equally compelling case that  “4,776,706 voters were wrongly purged from voter rolls according to US Election Assistance Commission data.”

He says a single Republican operative challenged the eligibility of 32,000 mostly Black voters  in her county, others challenged thousands of voters elsewhere in Georgia, and similar efforts in Wisconsin and around the country deprived those nearly 5 million people of their chance to vote. The Republicans claimed these people had moved, because they didn’t return a postcard that looked like junk mail–and in some parts of Georgia, only 1% returned the cards.

If Palast is accurate–and I believe he is–Harris would have won at least those two states, the popular vote, the Electoral College, and the presidency.  She might have even taken Texas, where a new requirement to add ID numbers raised the rejection rate on absentee ballots from just 1% to 12%. (This is the same link as the 4,776,706 voters link above.)

In order to read that post in Thom Hartmann’s Substack newsletter, I had to become a subscriber. There is a no-charge level. But if you’d rather not subscribe, Palast makes many of the same points in this video, which is freely accessible. (It’s  the same link as the “single Republican” link above.)

While this analysis makes me feel a bit better about US voters, it doesn’t talk about how to reclaim democracy. In the video, he notes that he told the Democrats what steps they needed to do to protect voters at risk of being barred from voting or having their ballots discarded, but they didn’t see a need for pre-emptive action. Perhaps if they see this new data, they could make a claim to some body like the International Court of Justice that the election was a cheat. And meanwhile, this information gives us yet more reasons to resist the coup through every nonviolent tactic we can.Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Activism, Democracy, Demographics/Psychographics, Diversity, Energy & Sustainability, Environment, Ethics in Government, Innovation, language, Mindset, People Helping People, Politics, propaganda, Protests and Crackdowns, Psychology, Social and Economic Justice Tagged with , , , , ,

Welcome to 2025, a year that’s only two weeks old and already fraught. This is a
challenging time. Business leaders who believe business can make the world better for
the planet and its residents will face intense scrutiny and pressure to fold our tents. But
if we stand firm, if we continue to act on our sense of ethics, our decency, and our
knowledge that environmental and social responsibility is a business success strategy,
we will eventually prevail!

My heart goes out to readers and their loved ones who have been directly impacted by
the dozens of recent massive climate events such as the floods in the US Southeast,
Libya, and Uganda, earthquakes in China and Vanuatu, fires in California, cyclones in
Mozambique and Sri Lanka, volcanic eruption in the Philippines…and by human-caused
disasters, including the brutal wars in Ukraine and Gaza, the massive migrations from
areas that are no longer safe, and more.

Speaking of human-caused disasters—here in the US, starting on January 20, we face
an openly authoritarian, openly bigoted, and openly corrupt administration that brags
about how it will undo our progress on environmental and social issues and attacks
personal freedom. This new government plans to act not as a force for the greater good,
but to enrich kleptocrats and make life miserable for “enemies” within.

And many senior executives are pushing hard to enable that undercutting within their
own organizations. Companies are shredding DEI programs, universities are struggling
to come up with something equitable to replace welcoming admissions policies deemed
illegal by a partisan Supreme Court, and both social and mainstream media are
adopting policies that kowtow to authoritarians, from eliminating fact-checks and
enabling hate speech to suppressing criticism of the new regime. And alas, similar
governments already exist in Hungary, North Korea, Russia, and elsewhere.

But there’s plenty of good news, too:

  • Several countries, including Brazil, Chile, and
    Columbia, have tossed out right-wing dictators.
  • Others including Germany and France turned back far-right candidates and slates.
  • In the US, many left-of-center candidates and ballot initiatives won even in states that went for Trump.
  • Under-the-radar organizing by progressive grassroots organizations is massive.
    And these groups are finally working together. I went to one national Zoom meeting that
    had 140,000 registrants, 100,000 attenders, and the active participation of at least five
    national grassroots groups. Individually and collectively, they’re crafting and launching
    to best create nonviolent strategies to resist Trump policies and nominees.
  • These organizing efforts marked its first victory in November with the almost immediate collapse of Matt Gaetz’s nomination for Attorney General, which culminated in the release of the US House ethics report on his long list of transgressions.

And that’s just the beginning. Visit this page from Nonviolence News for a torrent of more good news, most of which I hadn’t even known about until their newsletter crossed my desk. I don’t see
everything on their list as good news, but the vast majority certainly is.

So instead of drowning in doom and gloom, get active, get involved, get excited. Remember, as Nerissa Nields put it in her song, “Tyrants Always Fall” (written during the earlier Trump administration), “There are more of us than there are of them.” And become an even more effective agent of change!Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Activism, Democracy, Demographics/Psychographics, language, Marketing Trends/News, Mindset, Politics, propaganda, Psychology Tagged with , , ,

Relax and take some deep breaths. Get time in nature and in physical exercise. And think about these truths:

  1. Just forget about the polls. They self-acknowledge that when an election is as they all seem to think it is, the margin of error is greater than the projected margin of victory. In other words, each state they forecast could go either way.
  2. Judge more by both the magnitude and demographics of early voting. 76 million people have voted ahead, even though society has recovered from the pandemic that created a huge wave of early voting four years ago. Women and youth are very prominent in these early returns, and that bodes well for the Democrats.
  3. Remember that we will probably not know the results Tuesday night and maybe not for a few days, because all these early votes have to be added into the tabulating machines and some states don’t allow that until after the polls close—and because really close races will trigger recounts (by hand, in some places). The only exception would be if the votes are so overwhelmingly in one direction that adding in the early votes won’t change the results. And that’s not likely in the seven swing states that will determine the winner. So don’t get anxious because the result can’t be called yet. That’s normal.
  4. As the campaign has progressed, so has enthusiasm for Harris, including endorsements from not just A-list celebrities with enormous followings but also many former Trump staffers. Meanwhile, facing diminishing crowds, lots of empty seats, and people leaving early, Trump continues to deliberately alienate large sectors of the electorate with his hatreds, vindictiveness, name calling—and rambling narratives that simply don’t make any sense. And not only is Trump’s mental acuity seemingly on a rapid decline, so is his vaunted physical strength. He had trouble opening the door of that garbage truck that he rode (he was in the passenger seat, so no, he didn’t drive it) around the airport tarmac).

So those are some of the reasons why you shouldn’t waste energy fretting about the result until we know the result. And by then, I’m hoping we’ll have something to celebrate. Last month, I blogged ten reasons why I think Harris will win. My analysis has gotten validation from a number of sources, among them Michael Moore and Rachel Bitecofer. One day before the election, and after spending four weekend afternoons knocking on doors in a swing state, I remain calm and optimistic.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Activism, Democracy, Demographics/Psychographics, language, localism/locavore, Marketing Techniques and Philosophies, Marketing Trends/News, Mindset, Networking, People Helping People, Politics, Psychology Tagged with , , , , , , ,

I just came across a 20-something marketing genius who is not in the business of business. He’s the Democratic Party Chair for Mecklenburg County, North Carolina (Charlotte and environs). His job is to make sure Democrats vote on or before November 5, 2024.

Regardless of your politics, you can learn a lot from Drew Kromer in this 22-minute interview with Substack pundits Robert Hubbell and Jessica Craven. A few of my takeaways:

  • Understand your market, deeply. Kromer knows that his market is the roughly 500,000 registered Democrats in his county–and especially the huge subset that doesn’t tend to vote.
  • Craft your messaging as a win-win. To get his army of 5000 volunteers(!!!), Kromer didn’t say, “please come out and canvas, work your butt off in all sorts of weather, get doors slammed in your face” or even “come out and canvas, for the future of the country and to protect democracy.” I’ve canvassed for candidates and ballot initiatives, and I’ve experienced both of those His pitch was, ‘Hey, we’re having a party and it’s really close to where you live, come on out, have a good time, and meet neighbors who share your values’ (single quote marks because I’m paraphrasing).
  • Deploy resources where they do the most good. Kromer’s fundraising went into staff on the ground, a far more effective allocation than TV ads, which will not reach the typical unmotivated Gen Z voter who doesn’t consume much if any broadcast TV. A good ground game, where people are listening and talking and interacting with potential voters, is far more effective.
  • Keep the bigger vision in mind. Kromer says that if Democrats win his county, they win North Carolina. And if they win NC, they win the race. He shared his vision of a commentator on Election Night, having the results come in, saying on-air “What the hell happened in Mecklenburg,” and calling both the state and the nation for the Dems.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Activism, Democracy, Demographics/Psychographics, Diversity, Ethics in Government, Media Ethics, Politics, Psychology Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , ,

One of my regular readers messaged me Sunday night to ask if I planned to blog about Biden’s withdrawal. I said yes, but only once I’d figured out which angle to focus on. There are quite a few.

Monday morning, at 5:25 a.m., I had the lightning-bolt insight that I didn’t have to pick just one angle. This is a complex issue with many parts, and I can explore as many of those parts as I want to! So after an unsuccessful attempt to get a bit more sleep, I first sat down at the keyboard at 5:45 a.m., on five hours of sleep, and finally finished the first draft at 9:05 p.m. Then my wife suggested I break it into two pieces. In the clear light of morning, I followed her advice 😉.

Here are the first four:

 

  1. It’s Not About His Age!

There’s nothing magic about passing 80 that makes you suddenly lose all your ability. Pablo Casals was still making beautiful music into his 90s. Pete Seeger was still writing great songs, though he couldn’t sing them very well anymore. Grandma Moses (who didn’t even start painting until her late 70s) and Picasso were still making art. My activist friend, Arky Markham, used her public 100th birthday party to raise funds for her charity, while three years later her friend and mine, Frances Crowe, used HER public 100th birthday party to organize a demonstration for social justice. Her vision was “100 people with 100 signs for 100 causes;” she got 300. Strom Thurmond still displayed his reactionary politics as a US Senator into his 90s and served beyond his hundredth birthday. Though his Wikipedia bio notes that he wasn’t very competent for his last decade, that still means he was an effective senator long past the age Biden would have been at the end of his second term.

 

  1. But Biden’s Decline is Real—And So Is Trump’s

And yet, aging is real. We all age differently. Biden has been increasingly erratic. I believe George Clooney’s statement that the Biden he saw at a June fundraiser was not the strong, competent leader of the State of the Union Address or his more recent speech to NATO but “was the same man we all witnessed at the debate.” In an op-ed published in The New York Times on July 17, Clooney writes the Biden he was with last month “was not the Joe ‘big F-ing deal’ Biden of 2010” or “even the Joe Biden of 2020.”

I was also deeply concerned that Biden himself told a meeting of governors that he doesn’t want to schedule events past 8 p.m. because he needs to get more sleep. Unfortunately for Biden, being president doesn’t get you a lot of sleep. You’re going to be woken up frequently to deal with crises, and your schedule will demand late-night meetings. At least the president doesn’t have to deal with senior night-driving issues and drive there, as some of us do.

Even though his withdrawal was reluctant and belated, Biden has been deservedly lauded for putting his country ahead of his own ambition—something his recent opponent has proven over and over again that he is incapable of doing. Although you wouldn’t know it from the media coverage since the debate, Trump’s mental acuity (never his strongest suit) has also plunged. His speeches have been incoherent for months. As far back as April, Newsweek highlighted a prominent psychologist’s analysis on the David Pakman show that Trump was “faltering.” But for some reason, this story didn’t make many waves in the rest of the media, or in the public consciousness. Trump’s use of violent rhetoric, including plagiarizing Hitler not just once but on numerous occasions, got slightly more attention, but the media didn’t focus on it the way they did on Biden’s debate failure. I’ll go into more detail in Angle #5, in Part II.

 

  1. Deceiving the Populace Did Nobody Any Favors

The campaign should have been open and honest that Biden was declining. And Biden himself should have declared truthfully that even with just one term, he had one of the greatest records of accomplishment of any president in history—getting more done in one term than many presidents accomplish in two, despite never having control over both houses of Congress—and  it was time for him to relax, step back, and let a younger person get a turn to be the knight in shining armor. The ~14 million who voted for Biden in the primary should have been made aware that these flaws were showing up often enough to be worrisome—and they should have been presented with other choices. Challengers should have been given room to ramp up ahead of the primaries so that those 14 million voters would have been involved in choosing his successor.

And Biden’s record really is remarkable. Beyond the obvious big deals like bringing the economy back from the brink, hastening the end of the pandemic through science-based policy, passing infrastructure and recovery acts with a lot of good green stuff, walking his talk on supporting people of color and LGBTQ folks, and being the most labor-friendly president ever, here are 30 accomplishments you may not have heard about that harnessed the administrative power of the federal government to make huge progress on issues ranging from keeping our records private to shifting farming and energy to far greener paths to building stronger relations between countries that are historic enemies (such as Japan and South Korea).

 

  1. Biden Gained Office While Hinting that He Would Only Serve One Term

Recognizing that his age was an issue even in 2020, Biden signaled that he wouldn’t be likely to run again in 2024. While he didn’t come out and promise not to run again, private messaging was leaked to the public back then that strongly implied he would not seek a second term.

Later this week, I’ll post Part II, with more angles to examine, including a big surprise about the Democratic Party. As soon as it goes live, I’ll post a link here. If you post a comment, I’ll tag you when it’s ready.

 

Lifelong activist, author, international speaker, and TEDx Talker Shel Horowitz helps businesses succeed by building in environmental healing and social justice. His award-winning 10th book is Guerrilla Marketing to Heal the World. Find him at https://goingbeyondsustainability.com

 Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail