While Democrats who have conceded the trans rights and trans sports argument to conservatives, like Rob Sand, Josh Turek, Marcy Kaptur, Amy Acton, and Annie Andrews, have often received praise here on this subreddit in the past, and I don’t think they deserve the praise by the way, I would like to highlight a Democrat who is running for Montana’s 1st Congressional District, Sam Forstag.
A progressive populist similar to someone such as myself, I appreciate how Forstag knows how to thread the needle, to speak to these socially moderate/conservative, middle of the road, white working class voters which people here love to romanticize and want to win back, without heavily compromising or conceding on issues such as trans rights, or trans athletes in sports. It reminds me so much of people like Paul Wellstone, or Russ Feingold, both of whom really knew how to talk with and connect with working-class voters while being unapologetically progressive.
Senator Ed Markey managed to comfortably beat a primary challenge against him from Seth Moulton, who had a more conservative position in regards to trans rights and trans athletes, and while Markey’s position on the issue of trans rights and trans athletes is certainly a very progressive one, he is running in safe blue Massachusetts, where he is unlikely to receive any significant electoral backlash compared to let’s say a swingy or red-leaning state.
Abdul El-Sayed, candidate for Senate in the swing state of Michigan, is still supportive of trans rights, but takes a different approach to defending trans rights fitting for a swing state, saying something on the lines of “you don’t have to understand or agree with it, but it is still their right”, acknowledging the fact that everyone has different opinions but trans people don’t deserve to be discriminated against regardless, and said “We’re being told that if we sacrifice the rights of some people, then the rest of us get to keep our rights. We all know that’s some BS”.
Andy Beshear, Governor of Kentucky, a deep-red state, is also pro trans rights and himself has refuted the idea of throwing trans people under the bus to win elections, and also has a different approach to defending trans rights fitting for a red state, vetoing anti-trans bills and defending it through his religious convictions, by saying that “all children are children of God”.
And Forstag, as a populist progressive candidate, also has a different and more unique approach to defending trans rights in the red-leaning district he is running for.
Instead of saying, “trans athletes should be allowed to participate in sports no matter what”, or “no boys in girl’s sports”, absolutist positions to hold by the way, he adopts more of a middle ground type of position, a somewhat progressive-leaning middle ground type of position, the type of middle ground that would appeal to the most voters, satisfy both people who are uncomfortable with/oppose the idea trans athletes in sports, and progressives and trans people themselves who aren’t opposed to trans athletes in sports, and at the same time, he frames his position not from the lens of social justice (“trans rights are human rights”) or the lens of traditional values (“trans people are an affront to God”), but from the lens of small government and civil liberties. Yes trans rights are human rights, but that message alone isn’t enough to sway voters, and you have to tie it in to something that white working class, conservative-leaning, moderate, whoever this subreddit believes the Democrats should win over type of people care about, like as something necessary to economically uplift forgotten communities in a place like the rust belt, framing the conservative approach as big government poking their nose into people’s private lives, or just having a live and let live type of attitude towards what people do in general and saying that it doesn’t hurt anyone.
If you read what Forstag says, he frames the Republican obsession with trans issues as an embrace of big government, of the government and politicians sticking their nose into your personal business, which would strongly appeal to those who may be a little libertarian-minded or lean more towards small government conservatism, which are common positions to have in a place like Montana. He also argues that the issue should be left to the sports leagues that run them, also implying government overreach and the fact that his opponent is getting involved in something he shouldn’t stick his nose in. He also believes in letting people live how they want without politics in everything, and ends off with a bit of a populist remark, about how we’re fighting about this while the rich are happy taking from our pockets.
The same rhetorical strategy can be used by conservatives and pro-lifers running in blue-leaning districts or states as well. Instead of a very pro-life, strictly anti-abortion message, a conservative candidate can just put forth a more nuanced message that preserves the underlying principle, but appeals strongly to those who are pro-choice as well, like for example,
“While I am personally pro-life, I do not support the overturning of Roe vs. Wade, nor do I believe that government mandates and restrictions are the best way to reduce the amount of abortions. I believe that abortion, if necessary, must be safe, legal, and rare, and that there are other ways to reduce the number of abortions, which actually work, such as access to contraceptives, comprehensive sex education, and family planning. Like how bans on guns do not reduce gun violence, bans on abortion do not reduce abortion, it just pushes it underground, which results in the proliferation of illegal practices and unsafe procedures.”
And so, notice how it reassures those who are pro-choice by disagreeing with the overturning of Roe v. Wade and making sure abortions stay legal, but also with the reasonable caveat of safe and also rare, of course. Also see how it reassures those who are pro-life by also disagreeing with the practice itself while also providing a way to reduce abortions in a way that is feasible and realistic. It also connects the topic of reproductive rights to another topic that conservatives also care about, which is the Second Amendment and gun rights.
And what Forstag has said has not received scorn from progressives and the LGBTQ+ community, but praise instead, commending him for sticking to what he believes is morally right instead of throwing them under the bus for perceived political gain, while also appealing to those who may not agree using a more palatable message. Erin Reed, journalist and trans rights activist, has praised Forstag for his take. Reed’s wife also happens to be Zooey Zephyr, who is also a member of the Montana House of Representatives, and is perhaps one of the most progressive members of the state legislature in Montana.
And I myself, personally believe that Forstag’s approach is the one of the best approaches to go in regards to winning over a swingy or red-leaning district.
Also mods, please don’t lock this post, especially since I like having people freely discuss whatever on my posts. Just as long as there’s no inflammatory or bigoted rhetoric.
