Michelle Goldberg: ‘More Democrats Need to Be Doing This’

Summary

Podcast Summary: The Opinions – Michelle Goldberg: ‘More Democrats Need to Be Doing This’

Release Date: May 20, 2025
Host: David Leonhardt
Guest: Michelle Goldberg, Opinion Columnist, The New York Times
Featured Speaker: Senator Ruben Gallego

---

Introduction

In this engaging episode of The Opinions, David Leonhardt, director of the New York Times Editorial Board, hosts Michelle Goldberg, a seasoned opinion columnist. The discussion centers on the Democratic Party's performance since President Trump assumed office in January, evaluating both successes and areas needing improvement.

---

Democratic Party Performance Since Trump’s Inauguration

Negative Perceptions vs. Underlying Strengths

David Leonhardt begins by addressing the commonly held negative perceptions among Democratic voters, citing feelings of confusion, being out of touch, and weakness. He notes that while some of these critiques hold weight, there are significant indicators that Democrats are effectively serving as the opposition party to Trump. Leonhardt points out that Trump's approval ratings have declined, suggesting that Democratic strategies are impacting public opinion.

Michelle Goldberg offers a nuanced view, arguing that Trump's falling approval ratings are more attributable to his own policies and actions rather than Democratic performance. She states at [02:22], “Trump has probably done more to bring his approval rating down at this point than the Democrats have.”

Key Insights:

• Trump’s Approval Rating: Goldberg emphasizes that factors like Trump's tariff strategies and his frequent public appearances contribute significantly to his declining popularity.
• Democratic Unity: Leonhardt observes that Democrats remain largely unified in Congress, contrasting with Republican disarray.

---

The Role of Key Democratic Figures

AOC and Bernie Sanders: Leadership in Opposition

Michelle Goldberg highlights the impactful roles of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) and Bernie Sanders in opposing Trump’s agenda. She emphasizes their efforts in organizing large rallies and connecting Trump's policies to detrimental effects on voters.

At [04:16], Leonhardt underscores their importance: “These big rallies... help demonstrate substantial opposition to Trump in a very visible way.”

Maintaining Cohesion in Democratic Caucus

Leonhardt praises Hakeem Jeffries for keeping the Democratic caucus united and preventing fragmented voting on critical legislation. Additionally, he commends Chris Van Hollen for his proactive stance on immigration by visiting El Salvador to address asylum issues, noting the positive shift in public opinion on immigration as a result.

---

Internal Challenges within the Democratic Party

Leadership and Perception Issues

Michelle Goldberg discusses the initial shock and subsequent introspection within the Democratic Party following Trump's election. She points out a dichotomy among Democrats: those who recognize the severe threats posed by Trump’s policies and those who view him merely as a "worse Republican."

At [08:06], Goldberg states, “There’s people who really get the scale of the threat... and then there’s people who think Trump is just like a kind of worse Republican.”

Impact on Voter Sentiment

Leonhardt adds that Democrats' commitment to small-d democracy makes their unpopularity particularly concerning, as it suggests deeper issues within the party’s connection to voters.

---

Policy Focus: Immigration

Ruben Gallego’s Perspective

Senator Ruben Gallego shares his experiences addressing immigration challenges, emphasizing the extended period of inaction that damaged public trust. At [12:10], he explains, “We essentially lost the debate on immigration reform for years because the everyday voter doesn't trust us on the border and on immigration reform.”

Michelle Goldberg’s Analysis

Goldberg critiques the Biden administration’s response to border chaos, arguing that while limiting asylum was a temporary solution, it compromises the country’s foundational value as a refuge. She remarks at [14:15], “We gave up something that I think is pretty sacred.”

Proposed Solutions

Leonhardt mentions Gallego’s immigration plan, which includes increasing border agents and creating more pathways to legalization and citizenship. Goldberg concurs, suggesting that the real issue lies in resource allocation for effective screening processes.

---

Candidate Recruitment vs. Triangulation

Importance of Authentic Representation

Michelle Goldberg advocates for recruiting diverse candidates who genuinely represent their communities, contrasting this approach with attempts at ideological triangulation. She praises Gallego for his authenticity and connection to constituents, stating at [16:36], “A lot of the Democrats’ problems can be solved through candidate recruitment.”

Critique of Moderate Strategies

Goldberg criticizes figures like Governor Gavin Newsom for their attempts to appeal to a broad base without genuine connection, asserting that such strategies often fail to resonate with voters.

---

Authenticity in Democratic Leadership

Balancing Independence and Representation

The conversation delves into the necessity of Democrats maintaining authenticity while distancing themselves from extremist elements within their base. Goldberg argues that constant attempts to distance the party can appear weak and inauthentic.

At [22:06], Leonhardt agrees, emphasizing that authenticity is crucial for maintaining voter trust and support.

Impact of Inauthentic Leadership

Goldberg draws parallels to political figures who successfully balance firm stances with genuine representation, underscoring the importance of aligning actions with voters’ values and expectations.

---

Looking Forward: Protecting American Democracy

Strategies for Engagement

Michelle Goldberg outlines essential actions Democrats should take before the 2026 midterms to safeguard democracy:

1. Town Halls in Republican Districts: Engage directly with constituents in red states to demonstrate solidarity and leadership.
2. Protests and Public Demonstrations: Organize and participate in protests to galvanize public support and shift the national conversation.
3. Direct Voter Interaction: Encourage activities like attending town halls, participating in protests, and contacting congressmen to foster active civic engagement.

At [25:07], Leonhardt underscores the historical effectiveness of protests in influencing public policy and opinion, reinforcing Goldberg’s recommendations.

Historical Context and Optimism

Leonhardt and Goldberg express optimism that sustained grassroots efforts and public demonstrations can lead to significant political shifts, drawing on historical evidence of protest movements effecting change.

---

Conclusion

David Leonhardt and Michelle Goldberg conclude the episode by reaffirming the importance of active participation and authentic leadership within the Democratic Party. They emphasize that through strategic engagement and genuine representation, Democrats can strengthen their position and effectively oppose threats to American democracy.

---

Notable Quotes:

• Michelle Goldberg [02:22]: “Trump has probably done more to bring his approval rating down at this point than the Democrats have.”
• Ruben Gallego [12:10]: “We essentially lost the debate on immigration reform for years because the everyday voter doesn't trust us on the border and on immigration reform.”
• Michelle Goldberg [14:15]: “We gave up something that I think is pretty sacred.”

---

Key Takeaways:

• Democratic Unity and Leadership: Maintaining cohesion within the party and highlighting strong leaders like AOC and Bernie Sanders are crucial.
• Authentic Representation: Recruiting diverse and genuine candidates can bridge the gap between Democrats and voters in swing districts.
• Active Engagement: Town halls, protests, and direct voter interaction are vital strategies for protecting and strengthening American democracy.
• Policy Focus: Addressing immigration effectively requires both resource allocation and compassionate policy-making to restore trust.

This episode provides a comprehensive analysis of the Democratic Party's current standing, emphasizing the need for authentic leadership and proactive engagement to navigate the challenges posed by the Trump administration.

Transcript

[David Leonhardt]

The New York Times app has all this stuff that you may not have seen.

[Unnamed Speaker 1]

The way the tabs are at the top with all of the different sections.

[Michelle Goldberg]

I can immediately navigate to something that.

[Ruben Gallego]

Matches what I'm feeling.

[Michelle Goldberg]

I go to games, always doing the.

[David Leonhardt]

Mini, doing the wordle.

[Unnamed Speaker 1]

I loved how much content it exposed me to things that I never would have thought to turn to a news app for.

[David Leonhardt]

This app is essential.

[Unnamed Speaker 2]

The New York Times app. All of the Times all in one place.

[Michelle Goldberg]

Download it now at nytimes.com app.

[Unnamed Speaker 2]

This is the Opinions, a show that brings you a mix of voices from New York Times opinion. You've heard the news. Here's what to make of it.

[David Leonhardt]

I'm David Leonhart, the director of the New York Times Editorial Board. When I ask Democratic voters how they feel about their party's performance since President Trump took office in January, I tend to hear a lot of negative responses. Words like confused, out of touch, and maybe above all, weak. Some of those critiques are accurate, but there is also a reason to believe that the Democrats may be doing a better job as Trump's opposition party than many people recognize. After all, Trump's approval rating has significantly declined since he took office. That's a sign that some of the Democratic critiques are landing. And if you look at Congress right now, you'll see that Democrats are largely united while Republicans are bickering about what to include in their big budget bill. Democrats, to be clear, do have a lot of problems. They don't control a single branch of government, and their party is even less popular than Trump is. Today on the opinions, we're going to talk about what the party is doing right, what it's doing wrong, and what it should consider doing next. We have a great guest to talk about these issues today, my colleague Michelle Goldberg, a Times opinion columnist who's reported extensively on the Democrats response to Trump. Michelle, welcome to the show.

[Michelle Goldberg]

Hi David. Thanks for having me.

[David Leonhardt]

Okay, let's get into it. It's a cliche, a famous cliche to say that the Democrats can never get anything right. There's a joke about the media always writing Dems in disarray. So let's defy the cliche and start by talking about what the party has done right in the four months since Trump took office. Again. What do you think is on that list?

[Michelle Goldberg]

Okay, before we do that, and I'm going to do that, but I do kind of want to take issue with the notion that Trump's falling approval rating is necessarily connected to the Democrats performance.

[David Leonhardt]

Oh, good.

[Michelle Goldberg]

Because I think that Trump's falling approval rating is first of all connected to his insane tariff strategy. And also just that the more people see of Trump often, the less they like him. When he's not in power, people project all these ideas onto him, and then when they see the kind of chaos and cruelty that he brings, you know, some people obviously love it, but you always sort of see some erosion.

[David Leonhardt]

That's fair. Can I just make one point in response to that, which is I'm not really sure how else we can measure the Democrats performance other than Trump's approval rating. And I do think it's possible. It's completely disconnected from the Democrats, but I also think if they can bring his approval rating down or if his approval rating does come down, it is going to be bad for Trump. I assume you agree with that.

[Michelle Goldberg]

Of course it is. Yeah.

[David Leonhardt]

Okay.

[Michelle Goldberg]

I just think that Trump has probably done more to bring his approval rating down at this point than the Democrats have.

[David Leonhardt]

I agree with that. With that said, what do you think the Democrats have done? Right?

[Michelle Goldberg]

Well, I think certain Democrats have been doing the right thing. So I'll name a couple. And this isn't necessarily to say that I think that their political approach is the one that the party as a whole needs to adopt going forward. I should just say that, you know, obviously AOC has been really strong in going out into the country, showing the scale of opposition to Trump, even in red states. You know, kind of putting together with Bernie Sanders these massive rallies and connecting Trump's kind of corruption and autocratic tendencies to these policies that are going to make a lot of voters, including a lot of his own voters, worse off financially.

[David Leonhardt]

I think you just made a really important distinction there. If I can jump in, which is what AOC and Bernie are doing is. Is really valuable. They are demonstrating that there is substantial opposition to Trump in a very visible way. Right. These big rallies. And we know this has worked before. Right. It worked to help defeat his attempt to repeal Obamacare when people got out there to town hall meetings. That isn't necessarily saying that the AOC Bernie approach should be the future of the Democratic Party in every way. But I think a lot of moderates have gotten wrong. The fact that what AOC and Bernie are doing is important and valuable.

[Michelle Goldberg]

I just think people are so scared and desperate and, you know, want to see leadership that to them, speaks to the scale of the emergency. We're taping this on Friday. I wrote this column about Democrats and Biden's cognitive decline, and I got so many angry emails from readers saying, you know, why are you focusing on looking backwards? Don't you understand the. Of the disaster that has befallen us? And, you know, those people, the scale of the loss and the grief that they feel, which I understand. Cause I feel it, too, that I assumed, for all my cynicism about American politics, that I was going to die in a liberal democracy that wasn't that far removed from the one I was born into. And so, you know, and those people just feel. And this isn't really a question of left versus right, it's more sort of passivity versus fighting. And I think anybody who can just show that they a understand what people who feel like they are living in a kind of hellish emergent dictatorship, anyone who can kind of speak to them, say that they're there with them, that they're gonna do what they can to stand up for them. You know, I think that Governor Pritzker in Illinois is doing this. I think Senator Chris Murphy is doing this, and I think more Democrats need to be doing this.

[David Leonhardt]

Okay, what else do you think the party's getting? Right?

[Michelle Goldberg]

So, a couple other things. I think that Hakeem Jeffries has been very good at keeping his caucus together to make sure that they're not kind of giving Republicans votes to help pass some of these harmful bills that they're trying to shove through with their very narrow majority. I think that Chris Van Hollen took a risk that really paid off by going to El Salvador and pursuing the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia. And, you know, when Van Holland went down to El Salvador, there was some skepticism among, I think, some centrist Democrats and pundits that immigration is one of Trump's better issues? Why are we highlighting the salience of it? And why should Democrats be aligning with this person who obviously shouldn't have been deported to El Salvador, but isn't the kind of person that you want to make the poster boy for asylum cases, you know, But I think that he took a risk. He drew attention to this atrocity. And if you look at the polling, you know, the polling has moved. Immigration has stopped being such a great issue for Donald Trump. And in some polls, he's actually underwater on it. And majorities of people believe that Kilmar Abrego Garcia should be returned. We're going to talk about this idea of kind of how much Democrats need to moderate. And obviously, you do need to be somewhat in line with public opinion. But I think Democrats also need to understand that public opinion isn't a static thing. And that they have some agency in shaping it.

[David Leonhardt]

Okay, what do you think the party's done wrong?

[Michelle Goldberg]

I think that there was a lot of shell shock when Trump was first elected, especially because he won the popular vote as well as the Electoral College vote. And that led to this period of intense self flagellation and also passivity. Right. And I think that that left a lot of people feeling really leaderless. And then I've also. I wish I could say more about this, but I've had some off the record conversations with Democrats, and I divide my kind of off the record conversations with Democrats into two groups. There's people who really get the scale of the threat that we're facing, the scale of the kind of potential transformation of the kind of country and the kind of regime that we're governed by. And then there's people who think that Trump is just like a kind of worse Republican and who basically think that things are going to bump along some version of normally. And I think that the latter people might think I'm hysterical. I think they're suffering from a catastrophic lack of imagination.

[David Leonhardt]

So I actually agree with you in large part about the scale of the threat. I did not think that I would be living in a version of the United States where the threat to democracy was as big as it is today. And so for me, that actually is an argument about why the Democrats need to be particularly rigorous and introspective about why they are so unpopular among so many voters. Because they are essentially, of our two political parties, the only one that has shown a real commitment to small d democracy. And if voters are rejecting them for other reasons, it's a really big problem for our country. And so I want to ask you, I want to get into a couple specific.

[Michelle Goldberg]

Well, can I ask you what's your theory for why they're so unpopular?

[David Leonhardt]

I think there's a mix of things. I think some of it is bad luck. I think you can argue that a bunch of the inflation stuff is bad luck that afflicted ruling parties in much of the world, both right and left. And then I think there are two other factors that the Democrats inflicted on themselves. One is Joe Biden's age and the denial about that. And that is backward looking. And then there's the fact that the party really got out of step on a whole bunch of big issues with public opinion in a really big way. Republicans are out of step on abortion, as you and I have talked about, clearly. But the list of issues in which the Democratic Party got out of step with public Opinion might be longer. And the extent to which the Democratic Party moved so far, I don't even know if left is the right word. But so far left, if you want to describe it that way, on immigration, way out of step with the American people, was just a huge problem in. In this election. Do you think that's unfair?

[Michelle Goldberg]

No, I don't think it's unfair, but I think that you're missing something. I think that there's another reason why they're so unpopular. I don't discount any of the ones that you just listed, but if you look at the polls, Democrats are really unpopular with Democrats, right? That's part of the reason why their approval ratings are at historic lows and they're unpopular with Democrats because they don't think they're fighting hard enough. You know, not because they want them to triangulate more, but because they want them to stand up more.

[David Leonhardt]

I think to win elections, they're gonna have to bring along not only Democrats who want them to fight harder, but also the sort of swing voters who think the party got out of step. And what I think is interesting, I mean, you got at this earlier, and I think it's a really important distinction. You can fight hard and still be on an ideological extreme. And when I look at the Democrats who won really tough races in places that Trump also won, I see two things. They don't come off as weak. In fact, they come off as quite strong and tough and often populist. But they also come across as moderate on a bunch of issues. And I want to play something for you and get your response to it. This is Ruben Gallego, the senator from Arizona who won that state, even though Trump ended up winning it by more than 5 percentage points over Kamala Harris. Here's Senator Gallego.

[Ruben Gallego]

When the Democrats basically dropped the ball on the chaos on the border for many years, we essentially lost the debate on immigration reform for years because the everyday voter doesn't trust us on the border and on immigration reform, because for years they saw that chaos on the border, and we did nothing. The Biden administration finally moved, but by then it had been so long and the damage had been done.

[Michelle Goldberg]

So I think he's obviously right on the politics. I guess the one thing that enrages me about this debate, especially when sort of people are like, well, you have to give Trump credit for closing the border is what we had to sacrifice to do that, right? So when Biden finally acted on the border, he basically shut down the asylum process. That was the cost of containing the Chaos at the border in the absence of legislation that would give you the resources to, like, vastly scale up the personnel that you would need to kind of hear all these claims and weed out the ones that were bogus because our legislative system is so dysfunctional. The way that Biden finally got on top of this was to give up something that I think is pretty sacred and is a pretty big loss. And you can argue that that was necessary. Maybe it is. But we don't talk enough about why it was so hard to control the border without the sort of resources that were required, while still honoring this thing that I thought was beautiful and sacred about this country, which is that we were a refuge for many people and now we're not. And so if that's something that we have to give up to stave off fascism, I'm open to that argument. I think it might be true. But I also think it's a tragedy.

[David Leonhardt]

I think it would be a tragedy, too. I'm hopeful we don't have to give it up. I agree.

[Michelle Goldberg]

But we have. We gave it up.

[David Leonhardt]

We have given it up for now. I think the slight reason for optimism is presidents tend to produce backlashes to their policies. I think this presidency of Trump's will make Americans more favorable toward immigration than they were when he took office. I do think we have to solve a really hard problem, which is given moderate transportation networks, huge numbers of people can make it to this country and claim asylum. And we have to figure out how to distinguish between those who would like to move here and those who are legitimate candidates for asylum.

[Michelle Goldberg]

Right, but that's. I mean, that's actually not that insoluble a problem if you just put the resources into hiring the people to screen them. Right. That's been the thing that we can't do.

[David Leonhardt]

Yep, yep. And that will take a lot more resources. And we mentioned Gallego. He actually has just come out with an immigration plan which calls for many more border agents who have more authority to make asylum decisions. And there are details there that people will debate, but something like that, along with more pathways to legalization, which is what his plan also calls for, and a path to citizenship for dreamers and others still, I think should be the long term goal.

[Michelle Goldberg]

Right. So actually, I mean, so the interesting thing is that I don't know if there's any daylight actually between Gallego's position and that of a lot of progressives. I mean, the really different thing is his affect. You know, he. I was in Arizona a bunch in the run up to the 2024 election. And you know, Gallego is a Marine, he's Latino, he's a normal person, he's charismatic. And I think that that stuff goes a pretty long way. And I tend to think that a lot of the Democrats problems can be solved through candidate recruitment and just recruiting people who come from the communities that they want to represent, who are fluent in the cultural norms of the places that they come from. I think that's very different than say a. And I think you probably agree with this. It's very different than say a Governor Gavin Newsom who is, you know, doing this really sort of pitiful and thirsty triangulation to try to appeal to some mythical group of voters who, you know, are sort of skeptical of Trump but really want to hear from Charlie Kirk.

[David Leonhardt]

Yeah, I mean, I would be very surprised if Newsom ended up being the Democrats next presidential nominee.

[Michelle Goldberg]

Me too.

[David Leonhardt]

Your point about that, a lot of this is about messaging brings me to another Democrat who won in a place where Trump won, which is Alyssa Slotkin, who is a House member now. She's a senator from Michigan. She won a very narrow race in Michigan and she has criticized the party for being weak and woke. What do you think of that critique?

[Michelle Goldberg]

I think it's basically right. I would like to hear her be more specific about what is the elements of wokeness that she wants to jettison. I mean, I'm all for getting rid of kind of newfangled alienating language, but I mean, if you look at the Democrats who have won in places that Trump also won, they're not necessarily say anti trans right. Like John Fetterman definitely isn't. Andy Beshear definitely isn't. Marie Glusonkamp Perez isn't. They differ from the party on various different issues. And I think that there's probably just some inherent value in demonstrating independence. But it's hard to say like what is the style of moderation that unites all of the Democrats who win in red districts. I mean, what do you see as being the thing that ties them together?

[David Leonhardt]

I agree with that. I don't think there's any particular issue that's necessarily important for Democrats to moderate on. Maybe with the exception of immigration. I think there's a version of elite social liberalism that is very unpopular in this country and was ascendant, I don't know, roughly from 2016 to 2021. We can dispute the exact. I think it's important for Democrats in tough places to pick a fight or maybe two fights with that version of elite social liberalism that's unpopular, but I don't think it necessarily has to be on some technocratic policy grounds, and I don't think it has to be on any one issue. If you think about the ones you've mentioned, like Gluzenkamp Perez, the House member from Washington, she voted against student debt relief, and that sent a signal. And so I do think it's important basically for these Democrats to pick a fight.

[Michelle Goldberg]

I guess so. I mean, yes, maybe you might be right. As an electoral matter, I do think there's a sort of pundit brain that thinks that, you know, sort of like one of the most important moments in modern American politics was Bill Clinton denouncing Sister Soulja during his first presidential campaign.

[Unnamed Speaker 3]

I defend her right to express herself through music, but her comments before and after Los Angeles were filled with the kind of hatred that you do not honor today and tonight. She told the Washington Post about a month ago, and I quote, if black people kill black people every day, why not have a week and kill white people? I know she is a young person, but she has a big influence on a lot of people. And when people say that if you took the words white and black and you reversed them, you might think David Duke was giving that speech.

[Michelle Goldberg]

You kind of constantly hear this refrain that Democrats need this Sister Soulja moment to put distance between themselves and the party. And I think if you go back and look at the Sister Soulja speech, it was in a speech to a civil rights group, and he had at that point already developed a lot of deep relationships and credibility with a lot of black leaders. He wasn't necessarily trying to. He was trying to demonstrate his independence, but he also wasn't kind of sneering at them or trying to stick a finger in their eye. And I do think that there is a kind of pundit brain that wants to see Democrats constantly punching left, that wants to see Democrats scorning a big chunk of the Democratic electorate. And again, I'm torn because I understand the need to show independence on a lot of these things, but I actually think it also there's something weak about kind of constantly wanting to show that you're not like these voters. I mean, there's another axes that voters, I think, judge people on and that we also should try to evaluate them on, which is authenticity versus inauthenticity. And there's certainly candidates for whom it's really authentic to them to be scornful of certain kind of like liberal social mores. You know, I'm thinking of Dan Osborne. I mean, he's not a Democrat. He was running as an independent, but he ran this, like, very, very interesting independent race. Came really close in Nebraska. He really is this kind of, like, union guy, you know, really does have this chip on his shoulder. And I say that in a good way, actually, about people that he regards as coastal elitists. And I think that's fine if that's really where you are. But I also think that, you know, there is something to be said for standing up for your actual beliefs and your actual voters and, you know, the people who support you and kind of refusing to do that can also look really weak.

[David Leonhardt]

I completely agree. I think the critique of Punta Talker is really important, and I think authenticity is really vital. I think what a lot of moderate Democrats would say in response to that is that the left part of the party has made this mistake of assuming that it is correct on the issues, on everything, and that the.

[Michelle Goldberg]

Well, everybody thinks they're correct. I mean, if you didn't think you were correct, they wouldn't be your views.

[David Leonhardt]

That's absolutely right. But I just want to say it is entirely possible for there to be Democrats who have Ruben Gallego's views about immigration, not because you think you need to do it to win elections, but because you genuinely think that the openness of Joe Biden's immigration policy was a problem. I think you and I might disagree a little bit on that, and that's okay.

[Michelle Goldberg]

But I'm just saying that I think.

[David Leonhardt]

It was people who have more moderate, hawkish views on the border. They might genuinely have those views and thus be more in line with the American people, rather than that they secretly want the Biden immigration policy, but they're doing something else in order to win elections.

[Michelle Goldberg]

Right, but that's what I mean when I talk about the key being kind of candidate recruitment as opposed to candidate triangulation.

[David Leonhardt]

Yes. Yes. Okay. Let's end by looking forward. Like you, I'm really worried about the state of American democracy. How are you feeling about what's important to happen before the 2026 midterms? What should people be doing now and in coming months to most try to protect? I think what you and I hold so dear about the American democratic system?

[Michelle Goldberg]

So I think it's really important, first of all, to. This is gonna sound kind of mushy, but I don't think it is to, like, make people realize that they're not alone and they're not marginal in being horrified by this, especially if they live outside of, you know, kind of really blue enclaves. That's why I think it's so important to be doing these town halls in Republican districts that you see a couple Democrats doing. Way more Democrats should be doing that. And, you know, Democratic senators should be doing those town halls in the red districts in their own state, you know, talking to the people that they represent whose own representatives are hiding from them. And. And the other corollary of that is it both. It demonstrates, I think, a certain amount of aggressiveness, but it also just brings people together in real life, and there's no substitute for that. I mean, protesting can sometimes feel kind of futile when you have an administration that really doesn't care what half the country thinks. But I actually think that protests, especially when they reach a certain critical mass, can really capture the public imagination and change the conversation. And so you have these protests. They're getting bigger and bigger. They're getting more frequent. At some point, I think they will reach a critical mass.

[David Leonhardt]

And I think it's important to say that there's a lot of historical evidence that protest can work. It can shift the debate, as you've said. It can even influence judicial decisions. There's evidence to that. And so watching cable television probably is futile, and tweeting may well be futile, but actually attending town hall meetings and attending protests really does matter.

[Michelle Goldberg]

And I think calling your congressman, like, all that stuff makes a difference.

[David Leonhardt]

Yes, it does. And I think that is exactly the right note to end this conversation. Michelle, thank you so much for coming on.

[Michelle Goldberg]

Thank you.

[Unnamed Speaker 2]

If you like this show, follow it on Spotify, Apple, or wherever you get your podcasts. The Opinions is produced by Derek Arthur, Vishaka Darba, Christina Samulewski, and Gillian Weinberger. It's edited by Kari Pitkin and Alison Bruzick. Engineering, mixing, and original music by Isaac Jones, sonia Herrero, Pat McCusker, Carol Sabaro, and Afim Shapiro. Additional music by Aman Sahota. The Fact Check team is Kate Sinclair, Mary Marge Locker, and Michelle Harris. Audience strategy by Shannon Busta and Christina Samulewski. The director of Times Opinion Audio is Annie Rose Strasser.