Connect with us

Politics

Trump and Vance think anti-immigrant hate is good politics. They’re mistaken.

Published

on

Trump and Vance think anti-immigrant hate is good politics. They’re mistaken.

Over the weekend, Ohio senator and vice presidential nominee JD Vance made a stunning and unintentional admission: He’s a liar.

For more than a week, Vance, former President Donald Trump and many of their allies have spread falsehoods about the town of Springfield, Ohio, and its Haitian immigrant community. Most infamously, Trump last week repeated the now oft-debunked claim that Haitian migrants in the town are stealing and eating pet dogs and cats.

But on BLN, Vance gave away the GOP’s game. “If I have to create stories so that the American media actually pays attention to the suffering of the American people, then that’s what I’m going to do.” He claimed that the “American media” ignored the “problems in Springfield” associated with the impact of Haitian migration on public services in the town until “Donald Trump and I started talking about cat memes.” Vance tried to explain away his verbal slip, but he couldn’t avoid the truth: “creating stories” is another way to say “making stuff up.”

Most insidious is the effect on the local Haitian community, which is increasingly under siege.

The consequences for such lies are both obvious and frightening. A steady stream of bomb threats has forced Springfield officials to temporarily shutter government offices, hospitals, elementary and middle schools, and two local colleges. On Monday, a local festival celebrating “diversity, arts and culture,” was also canceled — a fitting monument to Trump and Vance’s racist attacks.

Most insidious is the effect on the local Haitian communitywhich is increasingly under siege. As Vance’s rhetoric has made clear, his concern is not the Haitians’ immigration status: They are in America legally. Rather, the issue is their skin color and background of those moving to Springfield. As the vice presidential nominee argued on X this weekendthe real question about Springfield is, “Should we drop 20,000 people from a radically different culture in a small Ohio town in a matter of a few years?”

Never mind that, like so many immigrant communities before them, the Haitian community in Springfield has more than acclimated itself to their new homes. Their “positive influences” on the town have been noted by everyone from Springfield’s Republican mayor and local business leaders to Ohio’s Republican governor, who has decried the Trump/Vance-led attacks as “garbage.”

But would Vance make such proclamations if the 20,000 people were, say, from Norway? Would he make the same argument about urban gentrification and thousands of white yuppies moving into a predominately Black or Hispanic community?

When Vance claims that “what is happening in Springfield is coming to every town and city in this country if Kamala Harris’ open border policies are allowed to continue,” his intent is not difficult to discern. His incessant focus on “illegal immigration” and problems “at the border” is nothing more than a racist dog whistle to MAGA voters. And it’s one that minority communities have seen play out in America for centuries.

The last nine years of American politics have shown us that Trump and his minions only sing from one anti-immigrant hymnal.

It’s also quite purposeful. As Marc Caputo reported Sunday for the Bulwark, “Privately, Trump aides think it’s a net plus,” writes Caputo. “The longer the discussion is about migrants, the less it is about tougher topics for them. ‘We talk about abortion; we lose. We talk about immigration, we win,’ said one Trump adviser.”

“But what about the blowback from spreading an incendiary story for which there is no evidence?” Caputo asks. “‘We’ll take the hit to prove the bigger point,’” the adviser responds. NBC News reports that Trump is planning to visit Springfield “soon,” which surely will fan the flames even more.

Immigration is indeed an effective policy issue for Trump. In the most recent ABC/Ipsos pollhe polled 10 points better on it than Harris. But he also polls seven points better than his Democratic rival on the economy and inflation. Not only are those issues the top concerns for undecided votersbut they have the added benefit of not utilizing unabashedly racist sentiments. To side with Trump and Vance because of concerns over the economy is asking a heckuva lot less of voters than siding with them over naked immigrant bashing. The former doesn’t require a cleansing shower after wading in the political sewer.

The last nine years of American politics have shown us that Trump and his minions only sing from one anti-immigrant hymnal. Since 2016, immigrant-bashing has been the issue that most consistently unites GOP candidates — and it’s one that has taken on an even darker hue this cycle, with routine talk of immigrant “invasions” into the U.S.

There is, however, less evidence that it’s an effective political strategy. In 2018, Trump-supported candidates regularly used xenophobic attack lines in their campaigns. This was the election of “migrant caravans” and “bad hombres.” It didn’t work. Trump trotted out the usual dog whistles in 2020. So did Republican candidates in 2022. Neither led to political success. Maybe 2024 will be different, but the evidence is against xenophobic broadsides against immigrants as a route to political success.

In fact, the constant attacks on immigrants and the rising tensions in Springfield and around the country could be a net negative for Trump. The unending negativity that now defines the Trump campaign, the constant feeling of chaos and fatigue around the former president has a profound effect. The demagoguing over Springfield may energize MAGA world but, for the anti-Trump wing of the electorate, it’s a reminder of everything loathsome about the former president. Unfortunately, for Trump and now Vance, shame has always been an emotion in short supply, so there’s little reason to expect the racist, immigration bashing to stop. There’s also not much reason to think it’ll work.

Michael A. Cohen

Michael A. Cohen is a columnist for BLN and a Senior Fellow and co-director of the Afghanistan Assumptions Project at the Center for Strategic Studies at the Fletcher School, Tufts University. He writes the political newsletter Truth and Consequences. He has been a columnist at The Boston Globe, The Guardian and Foreign Policy, and he is the author of three books, the most recent being“Clear and Present Safety: The World Has Never Been Better and Why That Matters to Americans.”

Read More

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

Pritzker helped a Black woman become senator. Some Black leaders are still mad at him.

Published

on

Congressional Black Caucus members, after a stinging loss in the Illinois Democratic Senate primary, are training their ire on Gov. JB Pritzker — and saying it’s on him to rehabilitate the relationship.

After Pritzker’s outsized financial support for Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton helped lift her to victory, lawmakers vented frustrations that his money unfairly tilted the race in her favor and away from their candidate, Rep. Robin Kelly, a CBC member who finished a distant third. And as Pritzker eyes a 2028 presidential bid, some members, cognizant that the path to winning the Democratic Party’s nomination will run through the caucus, signaled they won’t forget that he crossed them this round.

“He has to justify what he did,” said Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.). “I’m sure at some point if he decides to run, he’ll have to come with that justification. As to whether or not it has merit or not, remains to be seen.”

Pritzker’s money helped put Stratton on the path to becoming just the sixth Black senator in U.S. history. But by boxing out Kelly, he frayed his relationship with the caucus, which holds significant sway over which candidates break through with Black voters — a large and powerful voting bloc the billionaire governor will need if he chooses to run for the White House.

“Keep in mind, the Democratic candidate for president that prevails has to go through [the CBC],” said Rep. Joyce Beatty (D-Ohio). “The CBC is very strategic and so if there is an issue … we will lay out our framework for what it will take” to get our endorsement, she added.

Many top CBC officials are in no rush to make the first move to mend fences.

“We don’t need to reach out to the governor,” said Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.) who chairs the Congressional Black Caucus PAC, adding that the group is focused on midterm races and delivering House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries the speaker’s gavel.

“Others are going to have to reach out to us,” he said of Pritzker. “Those conversations happen when those conversations happen.”

Pritzker’s political arm issued a statement in response saying he was “proud” to support Stratton, Illinois’ first Black lieutenant governor: “With only six black women having served in the U.S. Senate throughout its history, Gov. Pritzker supported his partner in governance because he’s worked side by side with her for almost a decade and knows she will deliver for the people of Illinois,” Jordan Abudayyeh, Pritzker’s spokesperson, said.

His team did not address questions about CBC members’ concerns, but did point to Rep. Jim Clyburn, the powerful South Carolina Democrat, saying ahead of the election that Pritzker was “free to support” anyone.

Clyburn on Wednesday told Blue Light News he would “expect” for Pritzker to support his No. 2 and that he was not focused on 2028.

Still, lawmakers’ veiled threats lay bare the difficulties Pritzker could face beyond Tuesday’s primary. And they underscore the duality the CBC is navigating as high-profile defeats of their members in Illinois and Texas raise questions about their political influence — even as they celebrate Stratton’s victory.

In interviews with more than a dozen CBC members on Wednesday, they made clear their irritation is not with Stratton, who many said will be welcomed into the caucus if she wins as expected in November. Their indignation rests solely with Pritzker, who they accused of playing kingmaker by pouring millions of dollars into propping up Stratton.

Tensions flared between the powerful legislative voting bloc and the billionaire governor in early March. CBC Chair Yvette Clarke lashed out at Pritzker, saying she was “beyond frustrated” with the governor for “tipping the scales” a nod to his funneling of $5 million from his super PAC to help catapult Stratton into contention with Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, who for much of the primary was leading in the polls and started with a massive cash advantage.

Many CBC members, and Clarke specifically, took Pritzker’s presence in the race as a snub to Kelly, who had a long-standing beef with Pritzker after he worked to oust her as chair of the Illinois Democratic Party in 2022. While both Kelly and Pritzker were said to have moved beyond it, the Senate campaign reopened old wounds.

Clarke issued a statement — some 12 hours after the Illinois Senate primary was called — to congratulate Stratton on her victory, calling it “a significant moment for Illinois and the nation that calls for unity” before pivoting to praise Kelly.

The CBC chair on Wednesday said she and Pritzker had not spoken.

“I’m sure there’ll be a moment where we’ll have a conversation,” Clarke said. When asked if she felt like she needed to initiate a conversation with the governor, she responded tersely. “No, I don’t.”

Former Illinois Sen. Carol Moseley Braun, the first Black woman elected to the body in U.S. history, endorsed Stratton in the race. She took issue with CBC members’ intense focus on the governor’s role in the process instead of the historic outcome, and said the group seemed more focused on backing its own than expanding Black representation.

“To weigh in on this race was just backwards,” she told Blue Light News. “[Kelly] was a member of the caucus and so it’s understandable on that level. But at the same time, Juliana deserved at least something from that group.”

Many current CBC members refrained from attacking Pritzker directly, however — another sign of the complex politics at play. Congressional Democrats want Pritzker’s billions to help bankroll their bid to retake control of the House and make Jeffries, the minority leader and New York Democrat, the first Black speaker. They’ve already been working him behind the scenes.

“I’ve already reached out to Governor Pritzker,” said Rep. Steven Horsford (D-Nev.), a former CBC chair. “I’ve talked to him this morning, in fact, and I’ll talk to him in the weeks and months to come, because I have one objective: to win this House, to help win the Senate, and to make sure we end the chaos that’s coming out of this administration.”

Others took pains to separate their evaluation of Pritzker’s role in propelling Stratton to victory from any campaign he may run in 2028, suggesting they were willing to reset the relationship.

“You will still have to show your bona fides, and you still will have to make your case as to why the CBC and Black people should take you into consideration. So we have reset it,” Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Calif.) said. “Good for him, for her, but that has no bearing on the 2028 race.”

Shia Kapos contributed to this report. 

Continue Reading

Politics

Judge orders restoration of Voice of America

Published

on

NEW YORK (AP) — A federal judge on Tuesday ordered the Trump administration to restore the government-run Voice of America’s operations after it had effectively been shut down a year ago, putting hundreds of employees who have been on administrative leave back to work.

U.S. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth gave the U.S. Agency for Global Media a week to put together a plan for putting Voice of America on the air. It has been operating with a skeleton staff since President Donald Trump issued an executive order to shut it down.

A week ago, Lamberth said Kari Lake, who had been Trump’s choice to lead the agency, did not have the legal authority to do what she had done at Voice of America. In Tuesday’s decision, Lamberth ruled on the actions she had taken to respond to Trump’s order, essentially shelving 1,042 of VOA’s 1,147 employees.

“Defendants have provided nothing approaching a principled basis for their decision,” Lamberth wrote.

There was no immediate comment on the decision by the agency overseeing Voice of America. Lake had denounced Lamberth’s March 7 ruling, saying it would be appealed. Since then, Trump nominated Sarah Rogers, the undersecretary of state for public diplomacy, to run USAGM. That requires Senate approval, a step that was not taken with Lake.

Patsy Widakuswara, Voice of America’s White House bureau chief and a plaintiff in the lawsuit to restore it, said she is deeply grateful for the decision.

“We are eager to begin repairing the damage Kari Lake has inflicted on our agency and our colleagues, to return to our congressional mandate, and to rebuild the trust of the global audience we have been unable to serve for the past year,” she said.

“We know the road to restoring VOA’s operations and reputation will be long and difficult,” she said. “We hope the American people will continue to support our mission to produce journalism, not propaganda.”

Voice of America has transmitted news coverage to countries around the world since its formation in World War II, often in countries with no tradition of a free press. Before Trump’s executive order, VOA had operated in 49 different languages, broadcasting to 362 million people.

Read More

Continue Reading

Politics

Judge orders restoration of Voice of America

Published

on

NEW YORK (AP) — A federal judge on Tuesday ordered the Trump administration to restore the government-run Voice of America’s operations after it had effectively been shut down a year ago, putting hundreds of employees who have been on administrative leave back to work.

U.S. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth gave the U.S. Agency for Global Media a week to put together a plan for putting Voice of America on the air. It has been operating with a skeleton staff since President Donald Trump issued an executive order to shut it down.

A week ago, Lamberth said Kari Lake, who had been Trump’s choice to lead the agency, did not have the legal authority to do what she had done at Voice of America. In Tuesday’s decision, Lamberth ruled on the actions she had taken to respond to Trump’s order, essentially shelving 1,042 of VOA’s 1,147 employees.

“Defendants have provided nothing approaching a principled basis for their decision,” Lamberth wrote.

There was no immediate comment on the decision by the agency overseeing Voice of America. Lake had denounced Lamberth’s March 7 ruling, saying it would be appealed. Since then, Trump nominated Sarah Rogers, the undersecretary of state for public diplomacy, to run USAGM. That requires Senate approval, a step that was not taken with Lake.

Patsy Widakuswara, Voice of America’s White House bureau chief and a plaintiff in the lawsuit to restore it, said she is deeply grateful for the decision.

“We are eager to begin repairing the damage Kari Lake has inflicted on our agency and our colleagues, to return to our congressional mandate, and to rebuild the trust of the global audience we have been unable to serve for the past year,” she said.

“We know the road to restoring VOA’s operations and reputation will be long and difficult,” she said. “We hope the American people will continue to support our mission to produce journalism, not propaganda.”

Voice of America has transmitted news coverage to countries around the world since its formation in World War II, often in countries with no tradition of a free press. Before Trump’s executive order, VOA had operated in 49 different languages, broadcasting to 362 million people.

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending