In England there are signs everywhere to “mind the gap.” If we translate that into English we would discover they are talking about the gap between the platform and the train. Since public transportation really isn’t a thing here in Texas, we can certainly borrow that term and apply it to our politics.

We see two gaps that threaten long-term stability in our country. The first gap is the gap between how many people consider themselves to be moderate, liberal, progressive, or leftist and how many of those politicians actually end up representing us in Congress. Yet, the percentage of total voters registering as Democrats is growing. So, there is a gap between the number of representatives that are Democrats and the number that should be Democrats.

That’s a problem that’s not easily fixed. As we have seen in Texas, the GOP has a stranglehold on the state. Very few particularly like any of the Republicans that occupy state offices and yet they continue to vote for them. This has been a two decade tradition. They have rigged the game to make it easier for them to win. It will take a doubling of efforts to get that turned around and we see the same thing nationwide.

The second gap is one Democrats can address and address immediately. This is the gap between what gets done in Washington, Austin, and any other government center and what people actually think on the issues. Take any issue and you can see clear fault lines of where the public actually is on the issue. You could talk abortion, gun control, health care, public safety, education, or any other issue.

What Americans think on these issues is pretty clear. Overwhelming majorities agree on numerous planks on all of those issues. Yet, we are told America is a center-right country with center-right values. The problem is that this statement has no basis in fact when you actually look at public opinion polling on each of those issues individually. The GOP is on the wrong side of each issue and it isn’t even particularly close.

Democrats collectively make the mistake of getting off message. Either they overshoot these widespread popular opinions by suggesting things beyond what the general public want or they bungle up the messaging with slogans that don’t reflect the will of the people. These things are simple. Let’s keep them simple.

For instance, Americans want background checks on gun sales, don’t want guns in the hands of dangerous criminals, and generally don’t want automatic weapons in anyone’s hands. These are easy things to keep hitting over and over again. Yet, Beto O’Rourke introduced the idea of gun confiscation. That pushed the envelope too far and made him seem extreme. So, stick to background checks, keeping guns away from criminals, and an assault weapons ban. That’s easy messaging that will resonate with the majority.

It’s about simple messaging. When people understand what you are for and they are for the same things they vote for you. When they think you are an extremist or if they don’t understand what you are for they don’t vote for you. It’s really as simple as that. You find out what they like and then keep repeating that you are for that and the other side is against that. You keep repeating that until they understand. You keep repeating it. That is how you close the gap.

A friend asked me who I thought would win the governor’s race in Texas. We know who is going to win the governor’s race in Texas. We knew before Beto even entered the race. We knew it was Greg Abbott no matter what was said in any debate, any ad, or anything that might happen between then and election day.

Abbott has been governor for eight years. Ignore the thousands of deaths during COVID. Ignore the dozens of deaths during the great freeze. Ignore the numerous children killed in school shootings. Think back to any of the Abbott ads on the radio or television. Have any of them touted anything he has actually done as governor? How sad is it for a guy to basically run on the platform of “my opponent is too extreme” when he’s been governor for eight years?

One particular ad had a woman who lost her son to murder. The murderer had been let out on bail by the judge. The Abbott campaign is using this as a reason not to vote for Beto. Huh? The governor doesn’t set bail and Beto hasn’t held elective office since running for Senate in 2018. By any reasonable measure, Abbott has been a horrible governor and he is going to win re-election. Many around the state have given him the nickname Governor Death and he is going to win re-election. Dan Patrick has been a horrible lieutenant governor and he is going to win.

If you want any further proof then consider the case of Hershel Walker in Georgia. He is within the margin of error and he can’t find a coherent thought with a flashlight and road map. He actually flashed a toy badge on stage during the debate and said he was a cop. He paid off a girlfriend to get an abortion and tried to do it a second time and somehow claims to be pro-life. Yet, he could still win the Senate seat there.

It’s easy to blame gerrymandering and restrictive voter laws in these situations and that’s true to a certain extent. I’m sure that peels off five to ten percentage points and that can be enough in a number of races. However, we have to ask ourselves why that is enough when considering candidates like this. We have to ask why an attorney general that has been under indictment for his entire term will get another one.

Somewhere along the line we have to look inside and ask ourselves why a party that continually puts up smarter candidates with smarter policy ideas seem to lose to these dullards. These are policy ideas that a majority of the population support. There must be something else. I personally think it is a combination of things. I think it’s a combination of really bad branding like “defund the police” and other catch phrases that just backfire. It’s also the relative ease of taking things like “wokeness” and weaponizing it against the left. Most people don’t honestly care about gay marriage, transsexuals, or other issues one way or another. They are just tired of being told they aren’t sensitive enough.

Cohesive communication isn’t easy, but the Republicans have managed to do it for decades. Break it all down and it’s incredibly simple but it is darn effective. You find something that resonates and you keep repeating it. That’s what we don’t do. We are everywhere. We talk about climate change, the wealth gap, equality issues, saving democracy, and helping out kids with college, health care, and gun control. I know I’m leaving stuff out. It’s time to find a cohesive message that works and stick to it.

The NRA has been stumping for Greg Abbott pretty hard and heavy. I hear their radio spots at least a few times every day. Beto O’Rourke has an F rating according to the NRA. However, Greg Abbott has been governor for eight years. I’m still not sure why we should vote for him. The only thing he tells us is why we shouldn’t vote for Beto O’Rourke.

Terrorism is defined as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.” I don’t know why that word popped into my head just now. It must be one of those random thoughts that have nothing to do with anything.

That same dictionary defines domestic terrorism as “the committing of terrorist acts in the perpetrator’s own country against their fellow citizens.” The Patriot Act said that people are engaging in domestic terrorism is they perform an act “dangerous to human life.” So, if we follow this random tangent to it’s logical conclusion we would have to assume that people that participate in mass shooting events are domestic terrorists.

Mind you, I’m not calling the NRA a sponsor of domestic terrorism. I’m simply defining terms. The city of San Francisco has already done that. Many Americans already agree with San Francisco. However, lets walk this through. You have an organization that opposes waiting periods, background checks, and any sort of regulation of semi-automatic weapons, age limits, licensing, or carry restrictions. They support an 18 year old’s right to openly carry an AR-15 whether they have passed a background check or not.

So, there is a sizeable gap between supporting any right to own a firearm and where the NRA currently stands. According to Gallup, as of 2020 only 32 percent of Americans owned a firearm and only 44 percent lived in a household with at least one firearm. However, that is in stark contrast to the number of firearms actually in the United States. So, if there are 1.2 firearms per person, but only 32 percent of people own a firearm then that means that the average gun owner has three or more guns.

Whether the NRA are domestic terrorists, support domestic terrorism, or are indifferent to terrorism is for shock jocks to consider. One could credibly claim that the NRA serves a very small segment of society. After all, even most gun owners are in favor of waiting periods, background checks, and restricting access to certain weapons. Most support age restrictions as well. So, when one earns an F grade from the NRA what exactly does that mean? I’d say it means he is a decent and reasonable human being.

A thought occurred to me when I heard the third version of the Greg Abbott attack ads against Beto O’Rourke. It seems he is too extreme on gun control. They played what was obviously an abrupt cut of him saying he would confiscate everyone’s AR-15. Then, they went on to talk about how he has an F rating according to the NRA in terms of his voting record.

I could say a lot of things here and did when I was in the car by myself. A few of those things are words that shouldn’t be said around young children or anyone of a delicate nature. I could also say a few choice things about the NRA and have before. If I ever run for office they will be data mined and I’ll have to explain them off somehow. That’s kind of the point. This is the world we live in now.

If I translate my inner thoughts in the most delicate way possible, I’d say I couldn’t care less what the NRA thinks of me or my stances on gun control. I’m not looking for NRA approval after all. I’d rather be a good human being and promote policies that support life and public safety. If they would like to abrupt cut that and infer that I am saying they are not for supporting life or public safety they can go ahead. Hell, I’ll even underline and bold it for them.

As much as I or anyone else would like to call them domestic terrorists or people that sponsor domestic terrorists it wouldn’t be responsible for me to do that. After all, most people don’t make complex distinctions between sane and responsible gun owners and those that are insane and unreasonable.

The point is that when we advocate something we have to consider the feasibility of it getting approved and whether it would actually work. There are any number of ways of taking guns off the streets that don’t involve going door to door and taking it from their cold, dead hands. The unfortunate reality is that if you used the door to door method you would likely invite that outcome more than a few times.

Few things in this world make me more angry than gun violence. When I hear the stories of dead children, scared children, or frightened multitudes in any public place it makes me want to scream at every Republican politician and anyone with an A grade with the NRA. I’d like to say they can take their A grade and thousands in PAC contributions and shove it up their backside.

As Democrats, liberals, progressives, leftists, or caring moderates we must agree on one thing and only one thing. We want to make the world a better and safer place. I think all of us can agree on that. We may not agree on how to completely do that or what lengths we need to go to so that can happen. We need to focus on what we do agree on and move from there. In terms of gun control, we agree on background checks, waiting periods, and the ban of certain weapons. We agree that other weapons shouldn’t be legally owned or wielded by teenagers.

We need to enact these laws on things we do agree on and put our heads together on the rest. Confiscation is way too controversial and likely too dangerous to enact. Let’s think of other ways to regulate behavior without punishing responsible gun owners. We are smart people, so we can make this happen.

We take a break from our regularly scheduled programming to take a look at a couple of commercials from the Texas governor’s race between Greg Abbott and Beto O’Rourke. As it stands, I only hear pro-Abbott commercials. Three things have struck me from these ads.

Beto O’Rourke is for defunding the police

All Democrats and progressives please read the following sentence carefully. For the love of everything good and holy, please stop doing this. You come up with these slogans you think are winning slogans, but the other side just uses them against you.

Most people don’t understand nuance. I know you don’t literally want to eliminate police departments. I know you are not literally for anarchy. The average voter doesn’t understand the idea of spreading resources around to other agencies that would be in a better position to handle certain issues. They just see a hoard of criminals coming to your door.

Of course, Abbott has to throw in a reference to Black Lives Matter. Again, they have successfully linked BLM with crime and anarchy. Is it fair? Of course it isn’t. Are most of them lawless thugs? Of course they aren’t. People don’t stick around long enough for a lengthy explanation. So, being for BLM and being for police reform means you are pro-crime and for the forces that are bringing crime to our neighborhoods.

Beto is for Open Borders

Clearly he isn’t. He has said this multiple times. What he is for is streamlining our immigration policy and process so that people can enter the country safely and we can identify the bad guys quicker. He has talked about tearing down the wall because most experts agree the wall is virtually useless. Of course, most people only hear the first half of that particular statement.

So, this argument came down to two statements. First, hoards of drug dealers and mules are bringing over fentanyl. That’s oddly specific. That statement is both true and misleading. China actually produces the most fentanyl, but Mexico is seeing an increase. The one that got me was that the border between Mexico and the United States is the most dangerous border in the world. I almost pulled off the road into a ditch laughing. It is the most dangerous border in North America.

Beto is too dangerous for Texas

As we teach our students, pathos (emotion) is the most effectively logical appeal there is. To hell with facts or credibility. We just want you to believe that Beto O’Rourke would somehow kill thousands because he’s inherently dangerous. What happens if you are dangerously incompetent or reckless? A simple Google search on COVID showed that over 90,000 Texans have died from COVID since March of 2020. Most of those came in the first year when our beloved governor decided to lift protocols and keep local governments from imposing their own.

Remember the great freeze? You know the one where our grid virtually shut down statewide because we were in a hurry to deregulate everything that moves. Yeah, this is the one they still haven’t fixed and came close to having more blackouts this past summer. Yeah, THAT freeze cost 246 Texans their lives.

If you count the period when Greg Abbott was attorney general in Texas, we have had a rash of mass shootings in Texas. Take a look at the timeline. Most happened under his watch as governor. Yet, he and the legislature have hurdled head first into policies that would virtually give anyone unfettered access to any weapon they might want. Yet, we cannot predict or control what might happen at our schools and are just dumbfounded when these shootings happen. So tell me, isn’t Greg Abbott too dangerous for Texas?

Yesterday, the leaders of Texas and the GOP held one of their perfunctory press conferences. It was one of those deals where we decry the tragedy, offer our thoughts and prayers to the families of the victims, and tell ourselves there was nothing that we could have done to prevent it. One of these is done by rote. One of these are empty. One is a lie. I’ll leave you to figure out which one is which.

 

Yesterday, the Democratic contender for the governor of Texas decided to interrupt the proceedings. His message was simple. The performance art on stage was exactly that. We know how to prevent these things. We knew it would happen. We know not the exact time or the exact place, but we knew it would happen. Then, he was given the message we all are given in this moment: you are politicizing a tragedy.

Beto wasn’t taking it and decided to cause a scene. I’m not sure if what he did will help or hurt his election chances. My gut tells me a few things. First, it tells me that 95 percent or more of the voting public has already made up their minds. My gut tells me most Texans agree with Beto and most Texans think Greg Abbott has been a disastrous governor. My gut tells me all of this won’t matter and that Abbott will somehow win the election anyway.

Yesterday morning, our daughter texted us from school. She was hiding in a closet in her Chemistry classroom. She was looking around for items to throw in case a gunman penetrated the classroom and the closet space. It was somewhere between 15 minutes and 30 minutes until the district and/or news organizations finally said everything was okay. Those were the longest 15 to 30 minutes of my life.

Earlier this year, they essentially lost two days to bomb threats. We went through the same cycle of worry, dread, and relief. These two events are cruel reminders that we don’t have the control we think we do. They are cruel reminders that all of this can end in the blink of an eye. They are cruel reminders that we can’t afford to wait until “the time is right” to politicize a mass shooting.

Unfortunately, there is always a mass shooting in the forefront of our brain. Maybe we can politicize Buffalo now. In Texas, maybe we can politicize Santa Fe now. Maybe we can politicize church shootings, mall shootings, theatre shootings, and concert shootings. Maybe someone should send out a rule. Maybe it could be a mandatory waiting period.

I say to hell with that. I am not going to lose my daughter because a right wing politician doesn’t want to somehow suppress the image of 20+ dead Texas children and teachers while they accept a check from the gun lobby. I am not going to lose my daughter because the NRA wants to have their show and advertise their wares on the same week as a mass shooting in their state. If you are going to have the audacity to do that then you will have to stomach all of it. You will have to stand there and tell the world that you care more about someone’s right to own an automatic weapon than about the lives of school children. I’m going to politicize every damn second of it.

Either lives matter or they don’t. Either you care about the safety and security of our children or you don’t. Either you have compassion for all of the people walking this Earth or you don’t. Certainly compassionate and caring adults can differ on policy. We are all adult enough to realize that. Compassionate and caring adults do not have a waiting period to solve a problem. If the floods are coming you don’t make people wait to develop solutions not to drown. When people are freezing to death you don’t tell them that heat is political and shouldn’t be discussed during the crisis. The notion is patently ridiculous. When our children are being blown away at school it is most definitely a crisis and it is most definitely political. We better talk about it right damn now before the next one of these happens again.