Individual Rights and Community Collectivism

Individual Rights and Community Collectivism.png

Topics Discussed:

  • Elijah McClain

  • Policing Reform Bill

  • Covid-19 Coverage

  • Individualism vs. Collectivism

  • The Kentucky Senate Primary

  • Presidential Polling

  • Party Conventions

Thank you for being a part of our community! We couldn't do what we do without you. To become a tangible supporter of the show, please visit our Patreon page, purchase a copy of our book, I Think You're Wrong (But I'm Listening), or share the word about our work in your own circles. Follow us on Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook for daily news briefs, GIF news threads, and our real time reactions to breaking news.

Next week, on July 3, we’ll be celebrating our 500th episode! Share in the celebration by using #PantsuitPolitics500 to share your favorite moments or episodes, how listening to the podcast has mattered to you, or why you listen.

Episode Resources:

Transcript:

Sarah: [00:00:00] Hello, everyone. Welcome to another episode of Pantsuit Politics. We are here today. Just we're just going to catch up on the news. Look, there's a lot going on in the world. So we're going to do our best to tackle the high points before we get started. The Pantsuit Politics, 500th episode celebration is in full swing.

[00:00:20] And I don't want to like call out users of other platforms. All I am going to say is our community on Twitter is killing it. They are making me cry every day. The threads with the gifts. It's just, it's beautiful. It's been so much fun. We love hearing from all of you about your Pantsuit Politics journey, what your favorite episodes, your favorite moments.

[00:00:44] So join us because this time next week will be the 500th episode of Pantsuit Politics, and we want it to be a community wide celebration.

[00:00:53] Beth: [00:00:53] So in the array of news that we have to cover, some of it is very recent and some of it is recently [00:01:00] gaining the kind of focus that it has deserved for a long time.

[00:01:02] So we'll start there in Colorado where Elijah McClain was killed almost a year ago while in police custody on August 24th, he was stopped as he was walking home after a nine one, one caller described a suspicious person. We'll go back to that in a second. The police report says he resisted officer contact.

[00:01:23] Body camera footage is excruciating and confusing. He talks about being an introvert. He just wants some space. Please respect his boundaries, but he's trying to cooperate. He tells them they're doing a good job. At one point, you hear a police officer say, Hey, I think he just took your gun. It's just really hard to understand what everyone was.

[00:01:42] Talking about it. It feels like you're listening to different situations. Unfolding police officers threatened having a dog bite him. They put him in a choke hold until he passed out. He awakened the police report says that he started resisting again. Paramedics came and sedated him. He suffered a heart attack in the ambulance and [00:02:00] was declared brain dead.

[00:02:01] Three days later, the coroner did not determine the cause of death. They listed physical exertion and a narrow left coronary artery as contributing factors. So no charges were filed. The officers were placed on administrative leave. They have since been reinstated because charges weren't filed Colorado, just enacted a police reform law that among lots of other things, bands choke, holds, and because of public outcry, enormous.

[00:02:28] Activism on social media, on behalf of Elijah McClain and his family, the governor of Colorado is looking at a new investigation and trying to figure out what the state can do from here. But this situation is horrible and it's easy to kind of get into the confusion of that scene and the police reports description of him resisting arrest.

[00:02:48] But when you zoom out, a person is dead because somebody called nine one one and said, he seemed suspicious, nothing about that. Is anywhere approaching. Okay.

[00:02:58] Sarah: [00:02:58] I mean, arrest resisting [00:03:00] arrest for what? Exactly. Walking down the street without a weapon, he had no weapon. He was walking down the street. That's it?

[00:03:08] That's it. He walked down the street. He went to the convenience store to get an ice tea for his sibling. And now he's dead. I mean, here we sit a month out from the death of George Floyd. We have two officers involved in the Brianna Taylor case still free. Now we have gotten closer to justice with the killing of Ahmed.

[00:03:28] Aubery the accomplices and the men who hunted him down and murdered him in the street have now been indicted. But, you know, I keep thinking about what do we do when there's no footage? What do we do in the footage? Like in this case is jumpy and confusing. Although I don't need footage. Right? We shouldn't need footage.

[00:03:54] Beth: [00:03:54] We shouldn't need a hashtag. I mean, that's the point to me. We shouldn't need it to go viral for [00:04:00] everybody to take these cases seriously.

[00:04:02] Sarah: [00:04:02] And that's what I think this shows, right. It shows the progression of the realization. It's like, if you, in certain circles, let me preface that. Among particular subset of white Americans, right.

[00:04:17] They wake up with the incredibly graphic video of George Floyd a month ago that there's just no denying the tragic, terrifying, traumatic events that unfolded over that eight minutes and 46 seconds. Okay. So we start there and now you're seeing sort of. Thanks in large part to the pushing and the amazing movement and activists of saying like, we're not just upset about this situation and we shouldn't need this graphic of a video.

[00:04:56] So let's go back and let's talk [00:05:00] about Ahmed. Aubrey, let's talk about Brianna Taylor. Let's talk about Elijah McClain and he won't be the last one. And we don't need to stop adjust situations where there is video, not to mention that we have new cases like Rashard Brooks. So this case in particular to me is sort of the logical extension of this movement.

[00:05:32] Let's keep scratching at this and not think. That because we arrested the three officers that murder George Floyd that were done because he wasn't the first one and he won't be the last one. And we have to keep looking into these cases. I think this one is so it's just so heartbreaking. [00:06:00] Something about him saying I'm an introvert.

[00:06:04] It shatters me. It's so sad. It's so sad. And I'm glad that it's finally getting the attention. It deserves.

[00:06:14] Beth: [00:06:14] Did you see Caitlin Dickerson's piece in the New York times about a Minnesota neighborhood that was kind of making this commitment together to reduce their reliance on police? She, yes. She wrote this amazing piece about how people are starting to recognize that they kind of don't know what to do besides call nine one one.

[00:06:35] When they see something that strikes them as not right. And how some of them are learning instead of being fearful of the homeless population that they see recognizing that no one protects the homeless population and they don't have walls either. And just the kind of beautiful way that she weaves together.

[00:06:54] The levels of consciousness that are being created through this conversation, it's really well done. And [00:07:00] I highly recommend it. We'll put a link to it in the show

[00:07:01] Sarah: [00:07:01] notes. Well, and I think there's space inside this movement and this cultural reckoning, because we know who called nine one one. There are records.

[00:07:15] It's not like nine one, one calls are anonymous. So I'm not saying the person who called nine one one. Should go to jail. I don't think that's the solution, but I do think, and maybe they already realize that the person who called nine one one on this young man, he's dead because of that action there's space for that there's space for that.

[00:07:41] And I'm not saying we're great at walking that line of looking at someone and saying, this is, these were the consequences of your actions. And not turning it into cancellation or shame. We're not great at that, but there needs to be responsibility beyond just [00:08:00] the police for what sets these moments in action.

[00:08:07] And sometimes it is the displaced fear. And paranoia, I think goes beyond fear paranoia. I mean, I will never forget having our local police chief. Tell me about how some of my neighbors call the cops on the meter readers all the time. Hey, everybody, we need to talk about that. Everybody needs to take a deep breath because that level of fear and paranoia and anxiety is very misplaced.

[00:08:37] Now I will say that that does not mean. That there is not responsibility for reforms with regards to policing itself. No matter how the call is initiated, we are in desperate needs of reform with regards to what happens once the call is placed. Now there's been a lot of discussion in the United States Senate about policing reform.

[00:08:58] We had [00:09:00] Republican Tim Scott leading the initiative on the Republican side for a police reform bill. There was sort of excitement that it might get done sooner than later. There was some reporting that Democrats weren't happy, but they were involved, but ultimately Senate Democrats blocked debate on this police reform bill.

[00:09:22] And so the house is voting on a democratic bill today, but it looks like Tim Scott's efforts in the Senate are dead for now.

[00:09:30] Beth: [00:09:30] I'm really upset about this. I'm trying not to be, but I'm really upset about it. I don't understand the thinking that the Senate shouldn't even debate something because it doesn't go far enough.

[00:09:46] It's not that Tim Scott's bill contains things that people fundamentally disagree with. I think everything in his bill is just. Total consensus, bipartisan consensus that these things need to [00:10:00] happen and that they are not enough fine, but what Tim Scott has said over and over is this is what the president says he will sign.

[00:10:08] So let's get something done and then keep working on the rest of it. And I really don't understand preferring zero to 60, 70% and this, especially because I think it's really important to continue letting the American people know that this work isn't done, just like when we did federal criminal justice reform, that was important work.

[00:10:30] It is a drop in the bucket of what needs to be done. If you really care about mass incarceration, about overzealous prosecution, about sentences that disproportionately impact people of color and are disproportionate to the crimes that have been committed. If you care about that stuff, the federal legislation.

[00:10:47] Was good and helpful and not even close to the work that needs to be done all over this country, because so much of it happens at the state level. And to me, that's the truth of any police reform too. [00:11:00] It is both good and not enough, and the push needs to continue. So I just don't understand saying we're not even going to have debate about this because we don't think it's aggressive enough.

[00:11:11] It feels to me like, would we shut down any kind of measure on gun regulation because it doesn't go far enough or would we take what we can get and continue to work? I affirm your

[00:11:22] Sarah: [00:11:22] frustration. I think it's hard. I think that criticism is fair when directed at a healthy functioning Senate. That you know, 10 years ago, I think that would have been a really fair criticism.

[00:11:43] I just have trouble criticizing Senate Democrats and Mitch McConnell Senate. I just because how are we supposed to act out of assumption of Goodwill when at every [00:12:00] turn. His leadership shows that that will not be returned. And that's usually not even the case, right. That there is no Goodwill and there is no fair motive.

[00:12:08] Right. And I also struggle because I don't know if this, in this moment when we are not just saying we need reform, but the, the communities affected are saying, we want a new system. If you kill the political momentum, Bypassing something. Do you keep the momentum by saying no, this isn't good enough because this moment doesn't call for changes around the edges.

[00:12:41] This moment calls for a complete rewrite of the system. I mean, I just, it's really hard and I'm not going to pretend that I know the answer and that there weren't political and electorial calculations with regards to the blocking of debate. I don't [00:13:00] think it's, it's easy from either side. I think that it's hard to, I know this was Tim Scott's bill, but it's hard.

[00:13:14] I'm sure for Senate Democrats to trust Mitch McConnell, to give him any leeway to give him any successes. When the momentum for bigger reform is definitely on their side. I just, I don't know. I think it's really hard.

[00:13:33] Beth: [00:13:33] At what point though, is this no longer about Mitch McConnell? I mean, if we have an emergent situation in this country around policing and we do, I don't know anybody who disagrees with that, but something has got to be done and we know because let's be honest, the democratic bill is also.

[00:13:54] Reform around the edges. You don't get a new system out of the United States, Congress on policing. It's not [00:14:00] available. That work has to be done at the state and local level. If you want a brand new system of policing in this country, the Senate is not where it happens. The house is not where it happens.

[00:14:14] You can get closer to that through some work in this Congress. And if the house bill goes through, even if it passes the Senate and the president vetoes it, what good has been done, there is always going to be, I totally agree with you about Mitch McConnell's bad faith, and that he has broken the Senate.

[00:14:32] Irreparably. My feelings about him are well-documented. I will never vote for him again. I will work tirelessly to support his opponent no matter who that person is. And also, when are we going to fix this? Are if Mitch McConnell is reelected, which every person who does serious polling in the state of Kentucky believes will happen.

[00:14:55] If he is reelected, are we just going to say well, from now on, even when something is pretty [00:15:00] good, we're not going to do it because we can't put another win in his column. I I'm sorry. I just think this is ridiculous. Not even having the debate on this. I don't have a lot of grace for, because he is offering to get something done.

[00:15:14] It is coming from a place. No one expect no unexpected Mitch McConnell to even agree to bring a bill to the floor on this. I don't understand, not taking the win. You don't have to vote for it. If you think it didn't go far enough, but to not have to bait on it. And I understand him Kane's criticism of the process that it should have gone through a committee in regular order.

[00:15:34] And I also think that if it had gone through a committee in regular order and taken too long, that would have been criticized. And those are tactics that the Republican party uses ad nauseum and it's gross and disgusting.

[00:15:47] Sarah: [00:15:47] Killing debate and not allowing debate is something he does concepts, right.

[00:15:51] Beth: [00:15:51] There is more blame on that side of the aisle.

[00:15:54] I just want the good guys to be the good guys on this. I want to go to the polls as a, [00:16:00] up and down the ticket democratic voter for the first time in my life. And I will do that despite this. I'm not saying like, Oh, this is just too much. I'm just really frustrated about it because I would like to be able to say to everyone around me in good faith, Hey, I know you are nervous about voting differently than you ever have.

[00:16:20] And also look like they're doing what they say and these people can govern effectively and we're going to get out of this nasty cycle. And I just really thought this would be the issue where that could happen.

[00:16:32] Sarah: [00:16:32] I just think the terrible reality is, I don't know if there is an escape from the nasty cycle when Mitch McConnell is still the Senate majority leader.

[00:16:43] Beth: [00:16:43] The house is also voting on DC statehood today, which I think would be a wonderful thing to get done in the next couple of months. There is no reason for Washington DC and not be adequately represented and treated like a state. So hopefully that

[00:16:56] Sarah: [00:16:56] will get through as a former citizen of the district of [00:17:00] Columbia, 700,000 people live in the district of Columbia without political representation.

[00:17:07] If you think it is frustrating. To have a representative or a Senator of either the same party, the opposing party, whatever that doesn't respond to your emails or doesn't vote the way that you wish they would imagine what it's like to not have a voting member of the house of representative and no Senator at all.

[00:17:34] Definitely not to it is. So outrageous that hundreds of thousands of Americans live without representation in Congress in 2020, it's just outrageous. And I desperately hope that as we are really, re-examining a lot of things in America and [00:18:00] making. What some would consider dramatic changes that adding the Washington D C and Puerto Rico as States to our country is one that we do because it's unacceptable.

[00:18:16] Beth: [00:18:16] We have another kind of depressing issue in the Senate where I'm going to be mad at the Republican side now, which I'm always mad at them to be honest with you in the Senate. But here's another example. We have a stalled bipartisan bill, imposing sanctions on China. And the point of this to me is less the sanctioned and more the United States saying very forcefully get out of Hong Kong.

[00:18:37] Like let these people have their independence. Everyone was on board. It was going well, the white house doesn't like it. And so Kevin Kramer, a Senator who co-sponsored, the bill is now blocking it at the white house's request. So again, the dysfunction just continues.

[00:19:03] [00:19:00] Sarah: [00:19:03] Beth, I'm struggling with the COVID coverage. 

[00:19:10] Beth: [00:19:10] okay. Tell me about your struggle.

[00:19:12] Sarah: [00:19:12] Well,

[00:19:17] I think there's not enough emphasis in the national coverage of the reality that COVID-19 is. Sort of the, the most important factor you can consider when it comes to COVID-19 is your geographical location. Now there's a paradox here. I think that if we had a federal response or truly national response, we would be in a better situation.

[00:19:54] I think that there are some things that are important to maintain, no [00:20:00] matter what I think a national emphasis on. Wearing your mask, a national emphasis on social distancing. Again, especially if it came from the federal government in a, um, concise and consistent manner would be delightful. However, I worry that Americans lose trust when the coverage is it's awful and they're looking around at some of their local communities and it's not.

[00:20:29] And the, in a surge. Uh, sort of never materializes or doesn't materialize to the, um, to the intensity that the national media is coverage. And there's this, this trust. I've seen this in my own community. I've seen friends who were on board were paying attention. And then when in March, particularly in my area of the country and when that massive surge hospitals filling up, never materialized.

[00:20:57] They felt a little duped. [00:21:00] And I just think that as we are, absolutely. And without argument experiencing another surge and particular areas of the country, I just think we need to find a way to articulate that. I think we need to find a way to discuss that and articulate that without this sort of chicken little energy that permeates across the country.

[00:21:30] Cause I don't think first of all, I don't think it's healthy for us. I think it makes people feel scared and they're more like less likely to make reasonable decisions about it becomes a. I will. Why should I try anything kind of situation? And also because I, I worry that it undermines trust. I

[00:21:50] Beth: [00:21:50] think you are absolutely right.

[00:21:51] That trust has been undermined in the way that this has been handled. I find it incredibly frustrating to be living through a time [00:22:00] that when it is written about 18 months, even two years from now, everything is going to sound so obvious. But in the midst of it, It feels horrific. And I mean, by that two years down the road, when we fully understand Corona virus, I imagine that the chicken little period will feel a bit silly except in so far as having that period of time did allow us to cope with what we're experiencing now.

[00:22:33] You know, I think the problem is we're in a process of learning. And when you're in a process of learning, it's hard to see yourself in that process. You just either see I've been practicing my letters. Like I told you, and I still can't write them and it's frustrating or whatever. Right. You just, you just feel all the emotion of being in a process of learning.

[00:22:51] And when that process of learning. So far removed from the average person, you know, I can't follow exactly what researchers are understanding. I can [00:23:00] not live that scientific method with them. It just makes it really difficult to hang in for it. But certainly down the road we're going to get, Oh, well the masks had to be contained for the people who needed them most at first.

[00:23:14] And so that's why they told us not to wear them. And then when the production. Reached the point where it could service the demand. They said, wear them, you know, and we had to lock down so that our healthcare system could brace itself for impact and locking down delayed. That impact a lot to the point where a lot of people believe there wasn't anything to be worried about in the first place.

[00:23:38] I understand what's happening. And I also understand why people are. Tuning out of it. And I also see that tuning out is having really terrible consequences. And I don't know what the right answer is either. I have a lot of grace for the officials trying to talk about this. Especially people like governor Beshear, who from the beginning has acknowledged that geographic disparity, [00:24:00] you know, every press conference for months, he said, I get that.

[00:24:03] Some of you live in counties where we're not reporting cases. Please don't rest on your laurels because of that, please understand that it can get to that County. It's probably already in that County. And we just don't know it. I mean, I feel like he has tried to thread this needle, but it is a really tough one to thread when you're asking people for so much sacrifice and they can't directly connect that sacrifice to some kind of affirmative result.

[00:24:26] That's the other problem here? Right? The good news is negative and that's really hard to process psychologically.

[00:24:33] Sarah: [00:24:33] I just think with the mass conversation in particular, all of us advocating rightly based on the science or what should everyone should be wearing a mask instead of calling people idiots and rolling your eyes and being frustrated, we need to be upfront and honest about the messaging from the beginning was confusing and wrong.

[00:24:52] It wasn't just that they were saying we're concerned, concerned about an outage. They said it would make it worse. Dr. [00:25:00] Fowchee got on 60 minutes and said that it will make you more susceptible to the virus and like denying that and pretending like that, that was not the messaging for weeks, I think is so problematic.

[00:25:11] It makes people defensive and makes people harden. It makes them not trust you. Now, when you're saying, please wear a mask. So I just think like there's some work we can all do individually instead of. The harshness with which we speak about people choosing to not to wear a mask or being defensive about being wearing a mask or calling them idiots and stupid and selfish, like do a little jujitsu.

[00:25:38] You're going to reframe the conversation pretty quickly. If you're like, I know that messaging at the beginning was so convert confusing to me. And it did seem like they were telling us that mask would make us more likely to get the virus. But it just seems like now that they have plenty of studies showing if we were wearing mask, it would really help.

[00:25:57] And I know it's, it's different than from the [00:26:00] beginning. And I got, I've been confused, but it seems like a small thing thing to do now, when everybody is acknowledging it helps, you know what I mean? Like instead of what seems to be happening, which is we're all just riding off massive amounts of people.

[00:26:13] When I think there's still some real social pressure that could work. But social pressure is not shame. Social pressure is I want you on my team. We're all doing this and we think it will help. And we need you instead of you selfish idiot. How dare you? I just, that whole thing to me, I think is deliberately ignoring how confusing and

[00:26:38] Beth: [00:26:38] just

[00:26:40] Sarah: [00:26:40] completely opposite the messaging was in the beginning.

[00:26:44] Beth: [00:26:44] And I think public health experts agree with you, Sarah. I mean, you hear constantly from people in this field. Hey, the route to go here is influence not authority. We should not be arresting people for violating, stay at home [00:27:00] orders. We should be talking to them about why staying, staying at home is healthy.

[00:27:04] We should not be imposing. Requirement's about masks. It's just going to fuel the culture Wars in the backlash. We should be inspiring people just like you're saying here's yeah, it's been weird. Yes. It makes the energy in a place feel different in a way that most of us don't like. It does. I will acknowledge that, like, it is a tiny, tiny sacrifice compared to the risk of not doing it.

[00:27:28] And yeah, it has some downsides. It does that. It is a sacrifice. It's a little one, but there is one I understand. I was talking to a friend of ours. Who's a wedding photographer and a lot of families are telling her, like, we don't want anybody to be uncomfortable because of masks. Well, I get that. I get that.

[00:27:48] And also, I don't want us to have 180,000 dead Americans, October 1st versus 146,000 dead Americans by October [00:28:00] 1st. And when you look at the modeling, it tells us that mass can save a whole lot of people's lives. And I'm not saying that to shame anyone. I'm just trying to do the cost benefit analysis in a realistic way.

[00:28:12] Sarah: [00:28:12] Well, and let me get why I'm on the soapbox. Let me get another thing off my chest now. They're like everybody just, you can be outside, be outside, go outside, but let's not forget that for months, they were straight up arresting people in parks, pushing people out of parks in New York city. Absolutely not go.

[00:28:28] You can't be outside. You can't be outside. I mean, it's just, I think acknowledging that is an inroad to that influence acknowledging. That the guidance surrounding COVID-19 has at times been confusing and has at times been contradictory can be an inroad to influence those whose behavior we want to change.

[00:28:50] Now, instead of if I acknowledge even in the smallest way that this guidance has been wrong in the past, then what I'm telling them is you don't have to [00:29:00] listen to it now. And I don't think that's the case. I think it's the opposite. I think not acknowledging that the guidance has been confusing and wrong and the coverage at times has been overly.

[00:29:11] Incendiary is making it worse. It's making it worse. It's shutting down the conversations. It's pushing people into their camps. It's making them defensive. And I don't want that because I think that's costing people their lives. And I think if we all want to move closer together and stop making this a culture war, then we have to acknowledge that, that our side quote, unquote got things wrong.

[00:29:37] Beth: [00:29:37] It's a learning process for sure. And I think that that relates to the very significant number of emails that we're getting. That sounds something like dear Sarah and Beth. My family is breaking my heart as we talk about COVID-19. And as we talk about systemic racism and policing, [00:30:00] my family is breaking my heart and I don't know what to do.

[00:30:02] Their minds are completely closed. My heart is completely open and it's maybe open in a way that it's never been before about the structural problems in this nation. And they are angry at me. They are telling me I'm being disrespectful because of my views. What do I do? That's what our inbox looks like by and large right now.

[00:30:25] And I think everything that you just said, Sarah helps as we think about both of those conversations. If you are a white person trying to talk to white family members about systemic racism, understanding everybody's at a different place in the process of learning. And one of the most impactful things that you can do is stay in that conversation with them.

[00:30:48] Not from a place of shaming, but from a place of trying to show them what your journey has been. You know, I used to think that too, about such and such monument. I [00:31:00] thought that that was a part of our history and that it's important to, you know, preserve our history and that taking something down just tries to pretend it never happened.

[00:31:09] And let me tell you about kind of how I have evolved on that. And I would love to hear your reaction. That's a conversation you can stay in. And I know that it's harder than it sounds when I roll it off the tongue like that. And again, it's not going to be one conversation. But I really believe in us, I believe in our ability to rally around the mask wearing and the covert protections.

[00:31:32] And I believe in our ability to work on each other about race in this country, I was in a meeting recently where someone said, if you, as a business or an organization are not talking about both pandemics together, if every agenda item is not through the lens of both COVID-19 and racism, you're missing it.

[00:31:54] And I thought that was just exactly the challenge that I needed to hear and the tangible [00:32:00] way to think about what we do next and how we keep these conversations. Rolling. It's

[00:32:04] Sarah: [00:32:04] so hard. I find myself doing it every time, whether I'm talking about mass wearing or Confederate monuments, like, let me give you an example with the conversation about systemic racism.

[00:32:18] And it's very difficult for me. To not get in a defensive posture when some of my conservative relatives point out the racist history of the democratic party. And then I think, what am I doing? Like this is you're right. There is some real racist history in the democratic party, and you can acknowledge that and not lose anything.

[00:32:46] And say, yeah, you're right. That is in the history of the party. And then the party made some big electoral sacrifices to move away from that in the seventies and eighties. And that's the history that matters to me now. And I think it's, [00:33:00] like I said, it's the same thing with COVID you're right. Some of that was confusing, but this is where we are now, because so much of this I think is a very.

[00:33:14] Painful move from individualism to the collective. And that is an exercise and the mind and the heart and the spirit that a lot of us don't have much experience with. It's hard, it's hard work, you know? Elizabeth sent us one of the organizations anti-vaxxer organization. That's just really going all in with the mask wearing and it's this video and it's all these people and it contains some of the buzzword body autonomy.

[00:33:58] It talks about, you [00:34:00] know, everybody has the right. To live with freedom and, you know, it's, it's sort of neutral. And then there's this part of the video that really struck me where it's one person after the other saying individual, individual, individual, individual. And I thought, man, we're just, we worship at that altar so much in this country that we have lost the ability to see the collective to fill the strength.

[00:34:30] Of the collective to understand that there is a we here. And I think in those moments with our family, if we fall back to that defensive weakness, if we feel like this is me against them, instead of remembering that there is a small collective there, that there's a family that we're talking about a big collective to invite that person.

[00:35:00] [00:34:59] Into the collective, instead of doing the ingroup outgroup, that's so easy in those moments and those debates and those conversations and those arguments that every human being wants to feel invited into something to feel heard, to not feel like they're being pushed out of the group. And I think this moment in American history, When we are waking up to the fact that there is a we, and that people in our group have been suffering tremendously.

[00:35:38] So many Americans are seeing that and remembering that that person is my fellow citizen. That person is my brother. That person is my sister. And the most important thing is not always. The expression of my opinion or my individual rights, or me, me, me, me, me, me, me, [00:36:00] me, me, but that's hard. And it's heartbreaking.

[00:36:05] And that work within a collective group is I think something we're all pretty rusty at right now. And so I think it just giving grace to yourself and to the other person. And as much as you can constantly. Reminding yourself that there's a, we hear. And the, we is sometimes heartbreaking, often heartbreaking allowing for that heartbreak and allowing for that discomfort, just like you said, and remembering that that's what happens when it's a collection of human beings.

[00:36:47] Beth: [00:36:47] I agree with you. And I also have a little bit of a different perspective to add. Which is that if we really cared about the individual in the kind of language that [00:37:00] we use, we wouldn't have a lot of the problems that we have because we don't care about the individual in the way that many of the problematic aspects of our society function.

[00:37:11] Our prisons would not be overflowing if we really valued the individual, the way that we say we do. We really wouldn't have the COVID-19 issues that we have. If we really valued the individual, the way we say we do, we got a message after one of our recent episodes where I described my experience as a new lawyer and just that sense of I'm always about to lose everything.

[00:37:32] And the listener said, you know, that's my experience as a black woman, except the stakes are way higher and I can't quit. Hmm. Every single day, I have that feeling and the pressure around it increases, and I can't walk away from it. Now, if we really valued the individual, the way we say we do that would not be her experience.

[00:37:52] Because we would value her individuality as much as we valued mine. And we would value both of ours as much as we valued [00:38:00] white guy who graduated from Harvard and is the third person in his family to do so. Right. If we really valued individualism, the way we say we do, we would be a lot further along on some of these issues as well.

[00:38:11] It is that balance of individual and collective.  that we're bad at some of our problems come from valuing the collective, but the collective being a really small subset of the actual collective. I want to offer that slant on this take, because as you're having conversations in your families, they're going to be lots of different ways to talk about this.

[00:38:32] And there isn't a bad way to talk about it, as long as you keep talking. And I know some of you are tired of talking, but I want to go back to that listeners message and recognize that some of us can quit talking and others of us can't stop being people who are harmed by the things we're talking about.

[00:38:50] And that's what keeps me motivated to keep pushing forward and to keep trying different angles and different paths to inspire people around me to come around in these issues.

[00:38:59] Sarah: [00:38:59] I mean, I think what it [00:39:00] is though, is that. The individual is always yourself. The collective is an invitation to realize that no individual has rights.

[00:39:08] If every individual that doesn't have rights like that, you know, it seems saying like, it's, it's such a subtle shift, but I think it's really important because this emphasis on individual rights is just me. It's just my individual rights. There's never an invitation to consider someone else because you have to have that collective saying yes, but individual doesn't just mean you individual means what are the individual rights of someone in prison?

[00:39:35] What are the individual rights of someone walking home from a gas station that gets nine one, one called on them? Like, I think it's just that individuality. There's no container. Of the collective outright. You hear people talk about individual rights as if they are an Island existing completely and totally separate from the government.

[00:39:57] It's so crazy [00:40:00] making some times to hear people talk about their individual rights. I think that's why you see so much conversation in memes and tweeting about masking and to comparison to seatbelts, right? It says, how dare you ask me to wear a mask as if you don't have to put on a seatbelt? Like it's just, you know, there's no wider vision that individuals exist inside a collective that agreement that my rights only exist inside a group where we've decided that everyone's rights matter and that the power of the state comes from that agreement.

[00:40:41] Is, it's just really lacking. And so

[00:40:44] Beth: [00:40:44] much of that is a conversation about trust is you started this discussion and I think that's a good segue to talking more about elections. We wanted to follow up a little bit on Tuesday's primary in Kentucky, because there has been so much interest in it. And also about some of the polling that's coming [00:41:00] out in the, the different approaches the parties are taking to conventions.

[00:41:10] Here's what I recognize about trust. As I think about Tuesday's primary in Kentucky as a Kentucky Inn, I fundamentally have more trust in the people running our elections right now than I have had previously. And I fundamentally believe, especially that our governor. Is not only opposed to voter suppression, but is actively fighting voter suppression.

[00:41:39] And so when I look at what happened on Tuesday in Kentucky, and when I read all of the memes and tweets and Instagram posts about how horrible everything was in Kentucky, I just saw it differently. You know, I, I saw having only one location open. [00:42:00] In some of our counties as the result of a much larger effort to try to figure out how we could get most people to vote before Tuesday and how those who voted on Tuesday could do so safely and how we could safely staff that.

[00:42:18] And again, I do not think it was ideal. But I also don't think it was the catastrophe that it was being described as, because I have that trust in my officials here. And I think that's the breakdown at the national level. As you watch the hearing unfold about attorney general bar in his approach to the justice department and, and the information coming out from the national government about coronavirus.

[00:42:40] I fundamentally lack trust in the federal government. And that, that is a big problem. You know, you can, you can really. Handle some bad outcomes from your own government, some mistakes, some information that has had to evolve some non-ideal circumstances when you trust the [00:43:00] intention. And when you don't trust the intention, you cannot

[00:43:03] Sarah: [00:43:03] well, and I think there's just a level of catastrophizing.

[00:43:08] Is that a verb? I'm gonna make it one. I like it coming from the media. That is a thread throughout all of these as well. And I think the common denominator when you are, you know, catastrophizing about the Kentucky election or trying to tell a national story about geographical surges with regards to COVID-19 or relevant to the electorial news and the polling around 2020.

[00:43:46] If you're trying to tell a story about national polls in 2016, to me, the common thread is you're trying to tell a national story, which I [00:44:00] get it. That's your job without reporters based in the places of the country that are an essential component of that national story. If you don't have reporters on the ground in Kentucky, if you don't have reporters on the ground in West Texas, to say, we need to talk about how we're playing the story about New York city in West Texas.

[00:44:25] If you don't have reporters on the ground in Michigan and Wisconsin saying something else is going on here, then the story cannot contain the nuance. It needs to build trust. With your national audience, as opposed to undermine it.

[00:44:45] Beth: [00:44:45] And let's be clear in Kentucky's primary on Tuesday. I don't think anybody had an incentive to suppress voters of any category.

[00:44:57] You know, I read a lot of theorizing about Mitch McConnell's [00:45:00] influence here. Mitch McConnell. Is I think going to be just fine in his own mind, running against whomever Democrats nominate to run against him. But if your theory is that Mitch McConnell was trying to suppress votes for Charles Booker. I promise you that he will happily run against someone who's been endorsed by Alexandria, Ocasio, Cortez, no disrespect to the candidate or to the representative, but.

[00:45:25] Mitch McConnell will do just fine running. Like he, there was just no incentive on anyone's part to keep people from voting on Tuesday. And if you watched the months of bipartisan public work to get to this primary, I just think you have to see it through a different lens. And it was really frustrating to watch this national freak out, play out.

[00:45:51] That seemed so disconnected. To what actually has unfolded here in Kentucky. Again, there are legitimate criticisms, [00:46:00] but it is not Georgia. You know, the context is completely different. Sarah, I want to know your reaction as a person who does not like polling. I want to know your reaction to the many, many headlines.

[00:46:16] As we sat down to record today, talking about how. Very happy. The Biden team must be with the way polling is shaping up right now.

[00:46:24] Sarah: [00:46:24] I mean, I don't like polling unless I liked the pole lane.

[00:46:30] Beth: [00:46:30] Well, that sums it up. Everybody.

[00:46:32] Sarah: [00:46:32] No, actually the most interesting thing I read about polling recently was the New York times did an analysis about like national pollsters and really trying, you know, in the past four years, I've really tried to dissect what happened in 2016 and that. They realized they under sampled non college educated whites in Wisconsin and Michigan, but they're sort of defensive about the national polling cause they're like, well, it was right.

[00:46:51] She did win the popular vote by about what we thought she would, you know, for better or for worse. All of us are very [00:47:00] interested in swing voters in Wisconsin and Michigan. And the only reason that I don't hate these particular polling is not just because Biden is. Steamrolling him, which makes me happy.

[00:47:15] But because I feel like there's, this it's like the opposite of what happened in 2016. Like now people are like, well, he'll win no matter what. And I'm like, that's, isn't, there's no reflection that that's the reality. And so I really liked this polling just cause it helps me like shake loose my super cynical, progressive friends that just believe no matter what.

[00:47:37] Trump is going to win. When I think I just want to scream. Like he barely won the first time, just because they got it wrong. Doesn't change the facts on the ground of that. He didn't win by that much. And he only won in certain places and it is important to pay attention to what's going on in those places.

[00:47:53] And there is room for movement. You know, some of this is just, we hear this from our listeners and it's so hard to convey to people that [00:48:00] like people's politics change people's opinions about Donald Trump change. Not everybody was woke up on 2016 either. He's the devil or he's an angel. And, you know, I thought that for a long time and seeing sort of the rolling tides of realization that have swept across the electorate over the last four years, it's just really important to always remind people that there is room for change in everyone's minds.

[00:48:28] And if this polling helps remind people of that then great.

[00:48:33] Beth: [00:48:33] I'm really interested in the different approaches the Republicans and Democrats are taking to their conventions coming up. I think it's such a good encapsulation of where these parties are headed, headed into this election. So if you've not been following these stories, I can't imagine why there's nothing else to pay attention to.

[00:48:51] Um, here's what's going on. Republicans have moved out of North Carolina. Because North Carolina would not accommodate the kind of [00:49:00] scenario that they want, which is basically a big Raleigh for the president to give his speech lots and lots of people, cheering, crowd, good optics, et cetera. So they're going to do that in Jacksonville, Florida.

[00:49:12] There are some serious anxiety there about what the president wants to do and have their business conducted in North Carolina. The DNC is saying, Hey, don't come to our convention. Everybody just don't come. They've moved to a very small location. A thousand people or less will be there. And I hope it's a lot less, a thousand people in a room still makes me nervous, especially for the very long days.

[00:49:39] Those conventions take you. If you've never been to one of the conventions before, I hope you go sometime, I feel like every American needs to go to one of the major party conventions in a presidential year. It's just. Fascinating to watch, but you are sitting. Very close to other people for a very long time at the conventions.

[00:49:57] So anyway, the Democrats are saying, don't come [00:50:00] and they're planning for delegates to participate remotely. They're planning locations all over the country for people to participate in some kind of in person gathering. It sounds like, but they're really trying to say, like, let's just embrace this for what it is instead of doing a scaled down version of what we envisioned before.

[00:50:19] Let's try something that has elements of what we've done before, but that also has some things that feel really new and that kind of meet the moment. And I think it's a good dichotomy.

[00:50:29] Sarah: [00:50:29] There was this story that went out and I think it was John Thune. Mitch McConnell is second in command at majority whip over in the Senate.

[00:50:37] And he was like, I just think these soft numbers with independence show that the president really needs to shift strategies. And I thought. Do you think that he has a strategy that you think elaborate can change its spots? Like I just thought it was so entertaining that he thought Donald [00:51:00] Trump really was keyed in to poll numbers and would just dramatically shift his tone and approach based on anything he's seen over the last four years.

[00:51:14] I just thought, I mean, and again, this convention is a perfect reflection of that course. He's not going to shift strategies. Foun, come on.

[00:51:22] Beth: [00:51:22] I read those remarks to you and thought, this is what you say about a first-time candidate, not somebody who has watched govern for four years.

[00:51:29] Sarah: [00:51:29] We've

[00:51:30] Beth: [00:51:30] watched that movie before, Oh, now he's going to be really presidential and it lasts for 30 hot seconds and he's back to who he is and people know that now.

[00:51:39] So what is the point?

[00:51:41] Sarah: [00:51:41] We don't even get those stories anymore.

[00:51:43] Beth: [00:51:43] Yeah. W what's the point of those comments from Senator Thune? Like that's the most useless thing I can think of to say in a situation like

[00:51:51] Sarah: [00:51:51] this? Well, we've taken a wide and winding road through this episode of Pantsuit Politics is that's our way.

[00:51:58] Um, but we thank you for [00:52:00] joining us and we did want to share that I am now. Posting the audio from my morning news brace on Instagram, on Patreon. So if you've been on the fence about joining Patreon, you're not on social media, but you've kind of wanted to experience the news brief. There's a new vehicle for which you can do that now.

[00:52:19] So just wanted to put that out there again. Thank you for joining us for another episode, we will see you back here on Tuesday and until then, keep it nuanced ya'll.

 

Domestic policyAlise NappCOVID- 19, pandemic, Elijah McClain, conventionsComment