Democrats, beware the ‘agit-slop’
There’s a difference between raising hell and sabotage.
When I logged on yesterday, this is what Bluesky showed me: “Adam Smith hedges on Hegseth impeachment.” Smith is a congressman from Washington. He will be the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. The trendline suggests that a leading Democrat is getting cold feet. The impression was made a couple days after 11 Democrats missed a House vote to impeach Pete Hegseth. The cumulative effect is that once again, the Democrats are weak and ineffective, even after the generational wipeout that was the 2026 midterms.
Sounds antisemitic-ish
That trendline is stupid. That some Democrats did not show up to indict the secretary of defense does not indicate lack of conviction. It indicates they got jammed. Departing Kentucky Congressman Thomas Massie introduced eight articles of impeachment Monday. Speaker Mike Johnson held the vote Tuesday, the day before Veterans Day. He apparently closed the vote early while Democrats were en route to the Capitol. That trendline is also suspect. The Tennessee Holler, a “progressive” outlet with a massive following, suggested that absent Democrats were rubbing elbows at an “AIPAC-linked Super PAC event,” which is a none-too-subtle allegation against soon-to-be House Majority Whip Katherine Clark. The implication is that not only are the Democrats weak and ineffective but they’re also in league with Israel against the American people. If that sounds antisemitic-ish, that’s because it is.
Dictate the terms of engagement
Hakeem Jeffries could have managed his caucus better. He and Democratic caucus leaders must now face the consequences of appearing to fall down on the job before the serious work of governance and oversight begins. Clark seemed to acknowledge that reality. She told “Democrats in a closed-door meeting Wednesday morning that the party had disappointed the American people by not having all of the members there for the impeachment vote, and that it was their job to show up for the people who sent them there,” Semaphor reported. At the same time, she said the vote was almost certainly lost given that only one Republican, Massie, crossed the aisle to advance his articles. As I see it, however, that’s not the problem. The problem is letting people who do not have the party’s best interest in mind – whether it’s Johnson or Massie or so-called “progressives” – dictate the terms of engagement.
Don’t get played
That’s the lesson here. Don’t react to the Republicans’ choices. Don’t react to those of “progressives.” Make them both react to yours. Fortunately, leading Democrats seem to understand that reality, and that their party is vulnerable to getting played. Semaphor reported that Adam Smith feared that “internecine conflict … could take attention away from cost-of-living issues that powered their midterm gains.” For that reason, Smith said, “we have a very difficult set of decisions to make and I don’t think we should hastily make them.” Jim Himes, who will be the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said that after the new Congress is seated, the Democrats can plan investigations and schedule votes in a time of their choosing, “rather than letting their hand be forced early,” Semaphor reported. “I think we should do oversight and investigations under our own timetable, not Tom Massie’s,” Himes said. “And I’d really like to see affordability stay at the center of the agenda.”
Unreal things becoming real
Being careful and being cowardly are two different things, but such nuance gets erased by algorithms. The day before the midterms, Time ran a story about Adam Smith. The headline was “Why a Top House Democrat Now Supports Impeaching Trump and Hegseth.” Yet yesterday morning, Bluesky told me “Adam Smith hedges on Hegseth impeachment.” Smith did not change his position over the course of a week, so what happened? One reason is Thursday’s story in Semaphor going viral. The headline – “Some Democrats want to pump the brakes on Hegseth impeachment” – is misleading while still being accurate. But the main reason is our media environment. It is designed to maximize conflict and division, even just the appearance of them. Add to that bad actors like The Tennessee Holler (Alan Elrod calls it “agit-slop,” a combination of Soviet-style “agitprop" and “slopulism”), and you have conditions in which unreal things become real things that Democrats must contend with.
[Leave a tip in the tip jar! Say $10? THANKS!]
Zealots take voters for granted
It’s difficult knowing what voters want the Democrats to do with the power they have been given. To be sure, anyone can point to any data set for any reason, and declare a mandate, but it’s not that easy, and anyone who says otherwise does not have the people’s interest in mind. Indeed, “progressives” who claim to know the answer are acting with as much zealotry as the cult of maga. They will probably benefit from failure, as it would prove their allegations against the Democrats, thus bringing them more attention in a media environment designed to maximize conflict and division. Moving forward judiciously, choosing their own time for discrete action, for their own reasons, is prudent to say the least. A huge number of voters who have never voted for Democrats before took a chance on them, and the Democrats cannot afford to take that for granted. Neither can the rule of law. (The Cook Political Report issued an update today. The Democrats’ lead in the House vote is now up to 13.7 points.)
Lies, deceit and propaganda
The Tennessee Holler posted a clip of Hakeem Jeffries’ press conference Thursday. “JUST NOW: Unopposed Speaker candidate @hakeem-jeffries.bsky.social lists ‘Dramatic change’ priorities for Democrats in the next congress.” On that list were ending the war and tariffs, reversing Medicaid and SNAP cuts, and extending ACA tax credits. The post suggests that the Democrats are focused on affordability, not accountability. Moreover, the subtext of the post is that Jeffries is giving mere lip-service to “dramatic change,” and that "the Democratic establishment" is complicit in the deception by allowing him to run “unopposed.”
Hakeem Jeffries in his own words
I watched the presser. Turns out that list of “priorities” was nothing of the sort, nor was it newsworthy, but instead his way of illustrating what the Democrats are going to do for the voters who entrusted them. In fact, Jeffries was explicitly asked about priorities – affordability or accountability – and he explicitly said all of the above. “We’ve got to deal with accountability, because there’s a cost to corruption when you have people in government who are stealing from the American people, screwing over the American people, and short-changing the American people. They should be held accountable for ripping off taxpayers, as opposed to putting the focus on actually making life better for everyday Americans.”
Congress as “rival”
Jeffries continued: “Congress has a responsibility to serve as a check and balance on an out-of-control executive branch. That’s not a partisan thing. It’s a patriotic thing. ... The journey that we’ve now been on for 250 years, James Madison made the observation that at its best, Congress effectively should be a rival to the executive branch – rival. These Republicans have been nothing more than a reckless rubber stamp for the extreme maga agenda. That’s unacceptable. We’ve got to relentlessly focus on affordability and we’ve gotta make sure that we are delivering the type of accountability that the American people are demanding.”
Raising hell versus sabotage
I think there is utility in raising hell, forcing party leaders to hear things they would prefer not to, getting them to align their sense of self-preservation with an issue. That may be the outcome in the Senate, for instance, where Chris Van Hollen has decided to challenge Chuck Schumer for majority leader. If Schumer survives, he will know which way the wind is blowing, and act accordingly. But there is a difference between raising hell and sabotage, pushing leaders and cutting them down with lies, deceit and propaganda. Unfortunately, we live in a media environment in which bad faith of all stripes is not punished but rewarded.
