Dem
52
Ties
2
GOP
46
This actually happened last week, but sometimes we have to play catch-up. Democratic U.S. Senate candidate James Talarico, running in Texas as he is, is in a very tricky position when it comes to the culture wars battle du jour. On one hand, a whole lot of Texas voters, including many independents and Democrats, do not like trans people, and are very susceptible to messaging on that point. (Z) watched the Texas-Ohio State football game, and there were a lot of very nasty ads, ads that recycled the old "The Democrat is for They/Them, the Republican is for You" line that was used against Kamala Harris. On the other hand, Talarico also needs the base, including the left wing of the base, to be excited about his candidacy. Those folks not only vote, they also donate money (which he is constantly asking for). If he throws trans Americans under the bus, many on the left will dismiss him as another empty suit.
Earlier in the campaign, Talarico veered a fair bit toward the more lefty/inclusive position. Last week, he veered back in the opposite direction. Sitting for an Interview with Fox, he said four noteworthy things: (1) He "missed the mark" when he previously said there are six genders; (2) He also "missed the mark" when he previously said God is nonbinary; (3) He would support a nationwide ban on gender surgery for minors; and (4) "I oppose trans athletes playing in girls' sports if it endangers safety or fairness."
As regards these statements, we'll say the following. First, there are actually more than six genders, if you count all of the possible XXYY combinations that exist. But if Talarico has to pretend that he thinks otherwise, that's probably not the end of the world. Second, as to God being nonbinary, this seems like the 21st century, anti-woke version of the old bit about "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" Truth be told, it's hard for us to wrap our mind around the notion that an all-powerful God would be constrained by something as human as a particular gender or a particular anatomical configuration. And note that, if you believe in the God of the New Testament, then he is capable of reproducing without benefit of penetrative sex. So, there's no proof that he needs to have a penis.
Third, gender surgery on minors is largely not done, and those that do happen are almost all teenagers who are on the cusp of adulthood and are having "top" surgery. So, Talarico isn't committing to anything all that radical here. Fourth, his remark on girls' sports is an obvious attempt to thread the needle. He's said he's open to a ban on trans-girl athletes, but he did qualify it by saying only if it "endangers safety or fairness." Since the sports leagues are already making sure to protect safety and fairness, Talarico isn't actually committing to all that much here, either.
In short, the would-be senator tried mightily to walk a narrow line. That said, there can be no question that these remarks are more accommodating of anti-trans voters than his past remarks are. It's almost like he was selling himself to only Democratic voters 3 months ago, and how he's selling himself to all voters. Given that the shift is palpable, lefty and pro-LGBTQ voters are unsurprisingly unhappy. We had a letter from reader G.B. in Collin County, TX that is illustrative:
You may have heard that James Talarico went on Fox News, and while he was there he said he was opposed to transgender student athletes "playing in girls sports if it risks safety and fairness."
Even if his actual words on air contained nuance about local decision making and individual vs team sports, he's been involved in secular politics long enough to know what the headline the next day would be. What makes it confusing is that Talarico has been leading Paxton in the polls more often than not, so it isn't like there's a pressing need for him to shake things up. Red state or not, he has an even shot at winning without throwing a tiny minority of Texans (and an even smaller minority of student athletes) under the bus. You could compare it to Obama in 2008 (probably) lying about opposing gay marriage, so that he could seem to evolve over his first term as public opinion did. But as far as I know that wasn't at odds with his prior record the way that Talarico's turn is with his voting record in the Texas legislature.
And besides being strange politics on multiple levels, it's given me reason to rethink my support for Talarico. I have a transgender brother who has gotten plenty of crap for it over the years. Some of that crap, flavored by religion and coming from family, had turned him off from organized religion for quite some time. Until the last few years, that is, when he found a campus group run by a Methodist church that actively welcomes LGBTQ+ participants. When he found a church that wasn't actively chasing people like him out, he was quite able to participate. Even as a nonreligious humanist, I've been happy for him being able to find a community where he can be his full self without feeling guilty about it.
While Talarico and his church are Presbyterians rather than Methodists, their engagement with secular politics is similar enough that my brother also became a fan of him. He was happy to see a Christian in public life in Texas emphasizing the love. That you are commanded to love your neighbor and that your neighbor is everyone, and that this should affect how you engage in the world. I had reservations about voting for a pastor, even a progressive one, for separation of state and church reasons, Talarico's more inclusive vision of an ideal community, religious or non, is one I found preferable to the closed-off theocracy that Ken Paxton and company aspire to. It was enough different from Jasmine Crockett engaging in petty bullying around Greg Abbott's wheelchair that I ended up backing him in March's primary vote.
Which makes it all the more disappointing to see Talarico decide to pander to the kind of narrow mindedness and bigotry that my brother was happy to find refuge from in his newfound church community. I don't know what's in his heart of hearts, but I do know that my view of the man is diminished. Even if I'm likely to still vote for him in November, even if he still has even odds of beating Paxton then, the victory would be tainted now. Jesus was more often than not at odds with both the secular and religious authorities of his time and place, up to chasing the moneylenders out of the Temple. Talarico has used that motif in his campaigning often. He should consider what his savior would be saying about Paxton and company now, and what he'd think about adopting those tactics for yourself.
Thanks, G.B.
Needless to say, Talarico is far from the first Democratic politician to operate on the theory that it will work to veer toward the center, because they'll still be the best available option for folks on the left. Our gut feel is that the Fox interview was a misstep, and will hurt Talarico more than it helps him. That said, he is running a skillful, disciplined, well-run campaign. And so, it is very likely that he has data (focus groups, polls, etc.) indicating that: (1) the anti-trans ads against him are working and/or (2) he can get away with a more centrist position on LGBTQ issues. So, take our gut feel with a few grains of salt.
Tomorrow, we'll have some interesting letters from readers on the question of why Talarico scares Donald Trump and the GOP so much. (Z)