The Dictatorship

The 10 Democrats who voted to censure Rep. Al Green are misreading the moment

Published

1 year ago

March 10, 2025

The 10 Democrats who voted to censure Rep. Al Green are misreading the moment

This is an adapted excerpt from the March 6 episode of “All In with Chris Hayes.”

Every single day we are witnessing an unprecedented assault on our democratic order by Donald Trump and Elon Musk. They are backed up by a Republican majority in pursuit of an agenda that is not only likely unconstitutional but anti-constitutional.

Congressional Republicans spent most of Wednesday in meetings with Musk, practically begging the unelected billionaire to return some of their constitutionally mandated power of the purse. Meanwhile, Trump, acting like a mad king, is off starting trade wars and threatening to divert any money made from tariffs into what he is calling a “sovereign wealth fund.” Funds that critics worry could be paid out to his buddies in big business.

Democrats are working backward trying to fight the last war instead of pivoting to the political reality of the here and now.

This isn’t even a fraction of the possible corruption we are seeing on display every day. So it’s no surprise that people look around and ask: “Where are the Democrats? What are they doing as the opposition party?” The answer is: not much.

Part of the problem is that Democrats don’t have much power. They are shut out of both chambers of Congress, the White House and the Supreme Court. But it is also true that many elected Democrats are not exactly seizing the moment. A lot of them seem to have learned a very weird set of lessons from the defeat in 2024. They are working backward trying to fight the last war instead of pivoting to the political reality of the here and now.

We are dealing with Trump’s assault on the Constitution, so it is ridiculous to think that this strategy of playing it safe is the solution to that assault. Not every act of defiance against Trump’s anti-constitutional power grab needs to take into account what a swing voter in Wisconsin is going to think on Election Day in 2026 or 2028. Leave that to the political consultants and the front-line House members a year from now.

A lot of this renewed frustration stems from the Democrats’ response to Trump’s joint address on Tuesday. About four minutes into the speech, Rep. Al Green of Texas stood up from his seat to protest potential Medicaid cuts. Green was ultimately forcibly removed from the chamber by the House sergeant-at-arms.

He was the only Democrat who put up that kind of fight, and in response, one anonymous Democrat, whom Axios described as a centrist, told the outlet: “What [Green] did was inappropriate — and he became the story, not the price of eggs.”

That is just completely misreading the moment. This fight, right now, is not about the price of eggs. Maybe what Green did was the right thing; maybe it was the wrong thing. Either way, he is facing the consequences of his actions like an adult.

On Thursday, he was censured by his colleaguesincluding a handful of Democrats, for his protest. Green stood in the well of the House chamber to have the resolution read to him surrounded by dozens of his Democratic colleagueswho sang “We Shall Overcome” in solidarity.

But at least Green tried something. Now is the time for trying things. Everyone has an obligation as a citizen to defend the country’s democracy, this shared project that we all undertake together by any peaceful democratic means necessary.

Trump and the MAGA movement are organized. Their intentions are very clear. The world’s richest man appears to have control of the purse strings of the federal government. Trump is referring to himself as America’s “king.” Six weeks in, he is already going after his political enemies. They have a clear vision of a presidential dictatorship, and it’s everyone’s job to resist.

What we are seeing now is an attempt to rewrite the history of the first Trump administration that the so-called resistance from back then was a failure. It wasn’t. There were a million people marching in the streets the day after Trump was inaugurated the first time. Democrats were able to organize and beat back a repeal of the Affordable Care Act.

The resistance helped flip the House to the Democrats in 2018. And it fed into the largest popular uprising we have seen in a generation in 2020, during an election year. Democrats also flipped the Senate and unseated an incumbent Republican president for the first time in nearly 30 years. All of that has been rewritten as a failure, which in turn, has convinced folks that they just need to keep their heads down and hope they can run on egg prices in two years.

Not only is that strategy morally wrong, in my view, but it is strategically wrong. Resistance was the right course of action in 2017, and it’s the right course of action now.

Folks at the grassroots level understand that. We saw it when people staged their own protests outside Tesla dealerships. Or when so many folks show up to yell at their Republican representatives, the head of the National Republican Congressional Committee had to tell them to stop holding town halls. Or when a tiny government agency, the U.S. African Development Foundation, refused to let employees of Musk’s so-called efficiency project enter their office space. Or when, as Alex Wagner has reported, regular folks show up to meetings with state attorneys general to strategize on how they can best push back against Musk’s dismantling of the government.

Resistance was the right course of action in 2017, and it’s the right course of action now.

“I think the attorneys general believe that a big part of stopping this insanity is enlisting the American people,” Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes told Wagner. “This is going to be a people-powered movement, along with the AGs filing these lawsuits.”

“So obviously, we will continue to file these lawsuits, continue to protect America from this out-of-control billionaire and president. But ultimately, we also have to make sure that these stories — that are American stories, and stories of people who are being devastated by these cuts — are told, so that everybody knows what’s happening.”

Resistance requires people to activate, coordinate and organize — to work together. The struggle to preserve American democracy is on all of us. It would be great if Democrats got on board, but they won’t be the ones leading the charge. The American people will.

Chris Hayes

Chris Hayes hosts “All In with Chris Hayes”at 8 p.m. ET Tuesday through Friday on BLN. He is the editor-at-large at The Nation. A former fellow at Harvard University’s Edmond J. Safra Foundation Center for Ethics, Hayes was a Bernard Schwartz Fellow at the New America Foundation. His latest book is “The Sirens’ Call: How Attention Became the World’s Most Endangered Resource” (Penguin Press).

Allison Detzel

contributed

The Dictatorship

Monday’s Campaign Round-Up, 6.22.26: Why Trump backed both Republicans in a key S.C. race

Published

20 minutes ago

June 22, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Monday’s Campaign Round-Up, 6.22.26: Why Trump backed both Republicans in a key S.C. race

Today’s installment of campaign-related news items from across the country.

* In South Carolina’s gubernatorial raceDonald Trump endorsed Lt. Gov. Pam Evette last month. Last week, however, ahead of this week’s primary runoff election in the race, the president published an online item telling voters that “you can’t go wrong” with either Evette or state Attorney General Alan Wilson.

If this sounds at all familiar, it’s because Trump has done this before. Around this time two years ago, for example, he endorsed both Republicans running in a congressional primary in Arizona. And two years before that, he endorsed two leading contenders in a Senate primary in Missouri.

Only the president can say for sure why he ended up endorsing Evette and Wilson in the South Carolina race, though it’s worth emphasizing for context that GOP primary voters have already ignored his direction into two gubernatorial primaries this month, and it stands to reason that he hoped to avoid a third.

* We’re one day away from a variety of notable racesincluding but not limited to South Carolina’s gubernatorial race. There are also some congressional primaries in a handful of statesincluding Maryland, New York and Utah.

* In took a while, but the ballots have been tallied under Maine’s ranked-choice systemand we now know that Democrat Hannah Pingree, the former state House speaker, will face off against Republican Bobby Charles, who worked at the State Department during the Bush-Cheney era.

* As for Maine’s closely watched congressional racestate Auditor Matt Dunlap won the Democratic nomination in the battleground 2nd District, defeating state Sen. Joe Baldacci, who enjoyed the backing of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. Dunlap will run in the fall against a familiar figure: former Republican Gov. Paul LePage, who had moved to Florida a few years ago, but who returned to run for Congress.

* In California’s congressional special electiontwo Democratic candidates — state Sen. Aisha Wahab and Melissa Hernandez, a Bay Area Rapid Transit director — have advanced to an Aug. 18 special general election. The winner will fill the vacancy left by disgraced former Rep. Eric Swalwell, who resigned in April.

* In a new commercial shared first with MS NOWDemocrat James Talarico has launched his campaign’s first multimillion-dollar ad buy in Texas’ gubernatorial race. In the 30-second spot, Talarico focuses on affordability and the cost of living. The state lawmaker will face scandal-plagued state Attorney General Ken Paxton in the fall.

* And in New Jersey, Republican Rep. Tom Kean Jr.who has been missing from Capitol Hill since early March, will reportedly return to work on June 30according to a statement from his spokesperson. Neither Kean nor his office have offered any public information about why he has been away.

Steve Benen is a producer for “The Rachel Maddow Show,” the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He’s also the bestselling author of “Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans’ War on the Recent Past.”

The Dictatorship

Trump tries dual endorsement in South Carolina as his pick for governor flounders in polls

Published

20 minutes ago

June 22, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Trump tries dual endorsement in South Carolina as his pick for governor flounders in polls

Jun. 22, 2026, 11:39 AM EDT

After President Donald Trump’s pick for governor in Iowa lost in the Republican primary earlier this month, the president argued that he “would have endorsed the other person” if he had “the proper information.”

Trump is taking no chances in the South Carolina gubernatorial primary. Over the weekend he rescinded his exclusive endorsement of Pamela Evette, the lieutenant governor, announcing instead that he would support both Evette and her runoff opponent, Alan Wilson, the state’s attorney general.

The move put Evette’s political future in jeopardy: Even before Trump’s dual endorsement, she trailed in limited public polling and was seen by political observers in South Carolina as a weak candidate with little to show besides the president’s coveted endorsement.

“Her chief distinction from Alan Wilson was that Trump endorsed her,” said Dr. Dubose Kapeluck, a professor of political science at the Citadel Military College of South Carolina.

Trump’s dual endorsement “was a kiss of death,” he told MS NOW.

Evette, who moved to South Carolina from Ohio to found a successful payroll and HR company in 2000, has been lieutenant governor since 2019, serving under Gov. Henry McMaster, who is term-limited.

In office, she has pursued meaningful but little-celebrated policies, like a key tort reform bill, according to Gil Gatch, a Republican member of the South Carolina state House and an Evette supporter.

But voters could be forgiven for knowing little about Evette besides the fact that Trump endorsed her, which he did just days before the June 9 primary. Visitors to her campaign website are greeted with a full-screen message labeling Evette as “Trump-endorsed.” The first line in her X bio states the same. Pro-Evette television ads are quick to tout the endorsement.

An accomplishment like tort reform, while noted on Evette’s website, “maybe could have been something that was highlighted more heavily,” Gatch told MS NOW.

The political makeup of South Carolina nearly guarantees the next governor will be whoever emerges on Tuesday between Evette and Wilson. They survived a crowded primary field on June 9, and nearly every challenger who fell short of the runoff publicly endorsed the attorney general.

“She’s just not a good candidate,” Josh Kimbrell, a state senator who failed to make the runoff and has since said he’d back Wilson, said of Evette.

“She kind of assumed this was a coronation, and that was never going to go over that well,” he added.

Even some pro-Trump voters were confused by the president’s initial endorsement of Evette, whom he called “a good friend, fighter, and WINNER” in a social media post in May.

“I have no clue why Trump would endorse Pamela Evette,” Leland Lemmons, a 30-year-old Trump supporter told MS NOW as he exited a polling site in the Greenville suburb of Easley on June 9.

“She’s served, you know, a decent time. I just haven’t seen much fruition of what she’s done in office,” he added.

In a post on Truth Social Friday announcing his dual endorsement, Trump wrote, “I can’t hurt one of them by only Endorsing the other, so, therefore, I am going to Endorse, for Governor of South Carolina, both Pam Evette and Alan Wilson!”

In a subsequent statement on X, Evette said, “I was proud to come in first as [Trump’s] endorsed candidate for Governor on June 9th. Looking forward to doing it again on June 23rd.”

After The Washington Post foreshadowed the dual endorsement last Tuesday, allies of Evette were quick to denounce the possibility.

“I would guess that’s fake news,” Suzanne Pucci, a member of Evette’s finance committee, told MS NOW of the chance Trump would also endorse Wilson. “She’s probably not real worried about it.”

Another close ally and supporter told MS NOW at the time the report was “a total, fabricated lie.”

“[Trump] is invested in Pamela Evette because she invested in him. He’s a loyal guy. That kind of stuff is important to him,” added the supporter, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

“With or without Trump, I think she is going to win,” they said.

On Thursday, a senior campaign aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity, brushed off the idea of a dual endorsement, telling MS NOW in a statement, “Pamela Evette has earned the complete and total endorsement of President Trump. She is the only Trump-endorsed candidate in this race and we look forward to delivering a big win for the president on Tuesday.”

Roughly 24 hours later, Trump retracted the exclusive endorsement.

Will McDuffie is a reporter for MS NOW.

The Dictatorship

Fears of an ‘economic catastrophe’ helped push Trump toward an Iran deal

Published

20 minutes ago

June 22, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Fears of an ‘economic catastrophe’ helped push Trump toward an Iran deal

As last week’s G7 summit in France got underway, a reporter asked Donald Trump whether his purported deal with Iran was final. “No, it’s not final,” the president replied. Later that day — during a visit to Versaillesof all places — he signed the framework anyway.

But moments after signing his name to the memorandum of understanding, Trump offered an unsubtle hint about what he was thinking at the time. Amid applause from those around him, the American president pointed down and then up while saying“Oil down, stocks up.”

In other words, Trump’s focus had nothing to do with natural security and everything to do with the economy. What’s more, the four-word phrase was part of a larger and underappreciated pattern. The Washington Post reported:

In the more than 100 days since President Donald Trump launched a war with Iran, he has offered a shifting list of reasons for why he started the conflict. But in explaining his push for peace, he named a priority much closer to home: protecting the stock market.

“I didn’t want to see economic catastrophe,” Trump told reporters gathered in the Alpine spa town of Évian-les-Bains, France, after the Group of Seven summit.

As the summit wrapped up, the Republican similarly said“I’ve studied presidents, some good, some bad, some great. Not too many are great and some really bad. … And the one president I did not want to be was the late, great Herbert Hoover. I didn’t want that and who knows what would have happened.”

He pushed the same point in an interview with Axios, which was released over the weekend.

“If I went further, the stock market would be much lower,” the president said. “Now think of this: I have one primary wish as president, in terms of people: I never want to be the late, great Herbert Hoover.”

The comments came days after Trump similarly argued“The alternative to this deal was a global recession. There are stupid people who want to see a global recession. They are just stupid people.”

Whether the president fully appreciates the implications of his own rhetoric, this string of comments doesn’t just shed light on his motivations for accepting a defeat, it also suggests he saw his failed policy in Iran as pushing the global economy toward a dangerous cliff.

In other words, based on Trump’s own comments, the war he started was poised to create an “economic catastrophe,” which he was desperate to avoid — and which led him to accept a framework that empowered Iran to get what it wanted in exchange for effectively no concessions at all.