Resistance is hard. But it works

Resistance works, folks. Everyone who spoke out against ICE arresting 5-year-old Liam Conejo Ramos, the boy in Minneapolis who was photographed in a bunny hat as they took him away, should feel proud right now. Both Liam and his father, who were sent to a horrific detention camp in Texas, have been released. 

The entire incident has come to symbolize what vile liars Donald Trump and his administration are. They told their voters the people they’d be deporting were the “worst of the worst.” That’s impossible to believe when they’re rounding up kindergarteners. Even more than the killings of Alex Pretti and Renee Good, Trump imprisoning children shows that this is just a fascist government engaged in an ethnic cleansing campaign. The more of these stories we can get out there, the better. 

Women are turning hard against ICE

 The significant gender gap in politics is well known by now, with about 10% more women voting for Democrats than men. I was still struck by how much it’s bigger on the issue of ICE: In a recent New York Times poll, 70% of women disapproved of the agency, versus only 55% of men. 

Women are so uncomfortable with ICE now that, as Madeline Peltz at Number Two Pencil reports, female right-wing influencers are in a full-blown panic, trying to convince their angry audiences that all this racist violence is OK. People like Allie Beth Stuckey are lecturing their viewers, telling them that they’re letting their hormones and their dumb lady-brains trick them into thinking that it’s bad to have untrained and uncontrolled paramilitary goons terrorizing innocent people and arresting 5-year-olds. 

It seems to me that exactly the opposite is true: Men who support ICE are letting toxic masculinity cloud their thinking. But a lot of what’s fueling women’s revolt here is their anger at being lied to. The whole pitch to women on ICE has been a variation on all the moldy myths of chivalry: You have to give men unchecked power because they’re going to “protect” you. You know, from even scarier men. 

In reality, when men have too much power, women end up abused, not protected. And we’re seeing the same with ICE. They’re not protecting women and children. They’re attacking them, imprisoning them, terrorizing them and, as in Renee Good’s case, killing them. Women in Minneapolis aren’t safe because of ICE. Women are standing up against thugs with guns and masks, and they’re trying to protect small children by wielding baseball bats. 

I hope at least some women who voted for Trump, or who aren’t all that upset about him, learn something from this. That queasiness they’re feeling right now is the realization that giving men too much power doesn’t keep anyone safe. We don’t need “protectors” who turn on us the second we’re inconvenient. We need real equality. 

Support the progressive journalism you trust. Become a Salon member today!

Please, Democrats, learn the right lesson from Texas

Everyone is buzzing about Democrat Taylor Rehmet beating Republican Leigh Wambsganss for a Texas state Senate seat in the Fort Worth suburbs. As well they should! Trump won that district by 17 points last year, and Rehmet just won by 14 points, making this an unthinkable 31-point swing. That just doesn’t happen, even in special elections like this. 

I’m thrilled, but also worried. I fear Democratic leadership will learn the wrong lesson from this, which is that they don’t have to change anything. All they need to do, they might conclude, is stand back and let Trump self-implode, and then they’ll win by default as frustrated voters pull the “anything but Trump” lever. 

That shortsightedness is exactly why Trump won in 2024. Many voters see Democrats as weak and feckless, and they grew so alienated and dissatisfied with the “lesser of two evils” option that they didn’t show up for Kamala Harris. I honestly believe that she’s a good person, but the boring, overly cautious Democratic brand made it tough to rally people behind her. 

Rehmet isn’t just a generic Democrat, by the way. He was backed by Run for Something, which actively coaches its candidates to be more than a not-Trump placeholder. But as founder Amanda Litman told me on “Standing Room Only,” her organization isn’t exactly beloved by the current Democratic establishment. Leadership is addicted to bland, cautious candidates that wealthy donors prefer, but who don’t excite actual voters. They’re addicted to money, and can’t stop thinking that it’s always what matters most in elections.

Wambsganss, the GOP candidate, spent over $2 million in that race, while Rehmet won with $346,000. She had wealthy backers, and he mostly had small-dollar donors. Sure, money matters, but it is not the most important thing. I’m begging Democratic leadership to learn from this, and start welcoming more dynamic candidates. 

Join the conversation: Comments are open for subscribers!

Click the speech bubble icon to leave a comment or click the heart to like this post.

What we're reading this week

• “Minnesota Proved MAGA Wrong,” Adam Serwer, The Atlantic

• “Trump Has Only One Tool in His Toolbox,” Jamelle Bouie, New York Times

• “The ‘Melania’ movie is empty, foul and worse than we imagined,” Coleman Spilde, Salon

• “The regime moves to make journalism a crime,” Paul Waldman, Cross Section

Forwarded this email? Get Standing Room Only in your inbox twice a week.

ALSO FROM SALON