Might not the question be: Who cracked the Latino working class code--Mamdani or Gallego or TRUMP? Seems like much of this argument would apply to him as well.
I have not been able to get your article on baseball and your connection to New Mexico out of my mind. I am a scientist in Los Alamos and have lived here for decades. I have visited Madrid many times and was very interested in your family's history. Recently, I researched a family with last name, Madrid who lived on the Texas Mexico border. From an email exchange I had with my friend who I was doing the research.
I looked over the email chain about the Rio Grande mailman at Redford. From your husband's email:
We were in Redford because of a college friend of my wife who had married a Hispanic man, and had moved to Redford. His mother was a most amazing individual, she had obtained a collection of books and had a lending library for the local children, both US and Mexican. She presented a presidential award (I don’t remember the name of the award or the president who presented it.
When I first read this, I did not research who my friend was referring. Is your friend Ruby, married to Enrique Madrid, Jr. whose mother was Lucia Rede Madrid? The family is very impressive in their love of community and the good that they have done. We could use more of this love today.
Sorry, for the disjointed paragraphs. The Madrid family at the Texas Mexico border had family in Albuquerque. I thought there was a chance that you are related.
I love your writing and your analysis. Your humanity also reminds me of Stuart Stevens, a man who
is a 7th generation Mississippian which is where I was born.
Since my dad came back from Vietnam wearing a Chicano Power button in his boonie hat, my political positions have always been somewhat polarizing and I was often told to go hard on issues and easy on people. I have no patience with politicians that take the easy neutral position. Especially when moral issues seem to be more important than everyday life issues. Another outstanding piece Carnal! God Bless!
It definitely depends on where you are. Mamdani would never fly in TX. But Talarico would. You are right- it’s populism, and it isn’t just Latino populism. Now the question is- can the populism under the Democratic tent stay sane and focused on working class voters? At least here in TX I think the answer is yes. They’ve already firmly planted the anti-establishment party flag. In my opinion the best candidate to elevate would be Talarico. He’s the freshest.
Would it be valid to argue that there is a destructive vs transformative populism, with the latter offering some constructive alternatives for the institutions being torn down? I’m not saying Mandan is doing this … just a general question.
I very much think there is but I haven’t seen it yet. I think Mamdani is largely offering very old solutions not something transformative…but I can be convinced otherwise.
I’ve only listened to Mamdani be interviewed by Tim Miller of the Bulwark, so I’m not an expert, but I was struck by him balancing a desire to reform the way government works in a non-partisan or centrist fashion (reducing the time to approve housing and transportation projects) with reducing costs to NYers by more lefty solutions (free bus routes and municipal grocery store pilot program) .
That balance of results focused reform and results focused evaluation of policies could produce the kind of transformation in quality of life that the old sewer socialists did a 100 years ago.
Great insight, thank you! Did Gallego have any proposals to address cost of living issues that involved taxing rich people? Seems like most centrist Dems shy away from anything that might offend big donors.
I have seen some articles on this, let me see if I can find what is touted by more progressive-leaning media outlets. See what you think of them. Wonder what Mike's take on these articles are based on his expertise.
Michael I looked at these articles but I don't see anything where Gallego actually asked rich folks to sacrifice anything. That is the true test of courage in the Democratic party IMO. Stopping Trump is of course important, but if we don't DO anything to help working class people materially, then the door is always open to the fascists who will be happy to show that the government can do something, even if what they are doing is awful....
To be more specific on Gallego, I do recall him running on the child tax credit, raising the minimum wage, and tackling corporate price gouging. He was initially a choice for progressives because Sinema voted against things like raising corporate taxes. Chuck Rocha led the campaign team in many regards, and Rebecca Katz, who later helped Mamdani’s campaign, also supported and led Gallego’s campaign strategy:
Thanks Michael! For more info on Abundance, check out Derek Thompson’s Substack. California has an onerous bureaucracy and it’s difficult to get things done. The main point of the Abundance agenda is for government to work better and faster so that citizens will have more faith in government to solve problems. The book has lots of examples.
This is a foundational problem with Democratic thinking. Working class people are looking for economic and growth opportunities more than taxing the rich as a way to accomplish the same goals. It’s curious, but not surprising, that that’s your solution. Sure that may (or may not be) something Americans would broadly support - myself included - but to think working class people are looking there as a solution to upward mobility and affordability doesn’t seem to match up. Affordability is overwhelmingly the priority of these voters.
I'm happy to serve as a foil here Mike, but I mean taxing the rich with specific policy goals, not as an end in itself. If you look at affordability, healthcare and higher ed are two areas where taxing the rich could lead to real gains in affordability. If there are other ways of achieving universal healthcare and free (or much lower cost) higher ed without taxing the rich, that'd be great too. As far as housing goes, supply seems to be the main stumbling block and the "abundance" agenda of permit reform etc may be the best way to go. What policies do you think Dems should pursue to make life more affordable that don't involve taxing rich people? Because we have super low unemployment right now, and still over half of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck.
California just did yesterday what they should’ve done twenty years ago - get rid of CEQA. They had to wait until it’s a political crisis because black and brown working class people isn’t a crisis to them.
Read Ezra Klein ‘Abundance’. That’s the Democrats problems with working class people. Their policies aren’t working and they keep doubling down with more taxes, more beauracracy, more layers…it’s out of control. Voters are rejecting it
Thanks Mike for your insight. Curious what California's state government is like generally. Is it accurate to say California has a corporate welfare apparatus that lures big companies to the state, especially Silicon Valley companies, or am I missing something there?
I only ask as a Rhode Islander because I know in my State House, Democrats here have passed tax cuts for the wealthy (2006), pushed a record amount of deregulation (2018), and has a government that is still kinda secretive and nontransparent under single-party leadership. We're still near the bottom of the nation for business climate and economic growth. New York deregulated the energy sector under Governor Andrew Cuomo. Illinois did deregulation under then-Governor Rod Blagojevich. Many of these states also give expensive incentives to large corporations to create jobs and strive to cut "bureaucratic red tape" in their words (which are not effective at least in RI). I suppose if we had this debate in the 1970s and 1980s, maybe the Abundance point would carry more weight, but it almost feels like Democrats have been deregulating and giving out handouts to large corporations for some time on the federal and state levels. Unless there's more to Abundance than just deregulation.
It also appears that people like Bernie Sanders and Zohran Mamdani don't adhere to the abundance talk as much as they do discuss the concentration of wealth and ownership with the rise of "oligarchy." Does that sound like a fair assessment on your end, or does that sound confusing or misconstrued?
Doesn’t this echo across the country?
https://youtu.be/yfxvHqTCy2w
Might not the question be: Who cracked the Latino working class code--Mamdani or Gallego or TRUMP? Seems like much of this argument would apply to him as well.
I have not been able to get your article on baseball and your connection to New Mexico out of my mind. I am a scientist in Los Alamos and have lived here for decades. I have visited Madrid many times and was very interested in your family's history. Recently, I researched a family with last name, Madrid who lived on the Texas Mexico border. From an email exchange I had with my friend who I was doing the research.
I looked over the email chain about the Rio Grande mailman at Redford. From your husband's email:
We were in Redford because of a college friend of my wife who had married a Hispanic man, and had moved to Redford. His mother was a most amazing individual, she had obtained a collection of books and had a lending library for the local children, both US and Mexican. She presented a presidential award (I don’t remember the name of the award or the president who presented it.
When I first read this, I did not research who my friend was referring. Is your friend Ruby, married to Enrique Madrid, Jr. whose mother was Lucia Rede Madrid? The family is very impressive in their love of community and the good that they have done. We could use more of this love today.
https://primaelisa.wordpress.com/tag/enrique-madrid-jr/
Sorry, for the disjointed paragraphs. The Madrid family at the Texas Mexico border had family in Albuquerque. I thought there was a chance that you are related.
I love your writing and your analysis. Your humanity also reminds me of Stuart Stevens, a man who
is a 7th generation Mississippian which is where I was born.
S
S
This is so kind and so thoughtful. Thank you 🙏🏼 let me research a bit more and see what I can find. Truly appreciate this
Since my dad came back from Vietnam wearing a Chicano Power button in his boonie hat, my political positions have always been somewhat polarizing and I was often told to go hard on issues and easy on people. I have no patience with politicians that take the easy neutral position. Especially when moral issues seem to be more important than everyday life issues. Another outstanding piece Carnal! God Bless!
It definitely depends on where you are. Mamdani would never fly in TX. But Talarico would. You are right- it’s populism, and it isn’t just Latino populism. Now the question is- can the populism under the Democratic tent stay sane and focused on working class voters? At least here in TX I think the answer is yes. They’ve already firmly planted the anti-establishment party flag. In my opinion the best candidate to elevate would be Talarico. He’s the freshest.
https://www.tpr.org/government-politics/2025-06-29/who-will-texas-democrats-pick-to-be-their-nominee-to-run-for-u-s-senator
Would it be valid to argue that there is a destructive vs transformative populism, with the latter offering some constructive alternatives for the institutions being torn down? I’m not saying Mandan is doing this … just a general question.
I forgot, this is a great piece. Thank you
I very much think there is but I haven’t seen it yet. I think Mamdani is largely offering very old solutions not something transformative…but I can be convinced otherwise.
I’ve only listened to Mamdani be interviewed by Tim Miller of the Bulwark, so I’m not an expert, but I was struck by him balancing a desire to reform the way government works in a non-partisan or centrist fashion (reducing the time to approve housing and transportation projects) with reducing costs to NYers by more lefty solutions (free bus routes and municipal grocery store pilot program) .
That balance of results focused reform and results focused evaluation of policies could produce the kind of transformation in quality of life that the old sewer socialists did a 100 years ago.
Great insight, thank you! Did Gallego have any proposals to address cost of living issues that involved taxing rich people? Seems like most centrist Dems shy away from anything that might offend big donors.
I have seen some articles on this, let me see if I can find what is touted by more progressive-leaning media outlets. See what you think of them. Wonder what Mike's take on these articles are based on his expertise.
https://prospect.org/politics/democrats-rediscover-populism-not-a-moment-too-soon/
https://prospect.org/politics/2024-11-22-frontline-democrats-won-with-progressive-populist-messages/
Michael I looked at these articles but I don't see anything where Gallego actually asked rich folks to sacrifice anything. That is the true test of courage in the Democratic party IMO. Stopping Trump is of course important, but if we don't DO anything to help working class people materially, then the door is always open to the fascists who will be happy to show that the government can do something, even if what they are doing is awful....
To be more specific on Gallego, I do recall him running on the child tax credit, raising the minimum wage, and tackling corporate price gouging. He was initially a choice for progressives because Sinema voted against things like raising corporate taxes. Chuck Rocha led the campaign team in many regards, and Rebecca Katz, who later helped Mamdani’s campaign, also supported and led Gallego’s campaign strategy:
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/20/us/politics/ruben-gallego-arizona-latino-voters-democrats.html
Thanks Michael! For more info on Abundance, check out Derek Thompson’s Substack. California has an onerous bureaucracy and it’s difficult to get things done. The main point of the Abundance agenda is for government to work better and faster so that citizens will have more faith in government to solve problems. The book has lots of examples.
This is a foundational problem with Democratic thinking. Working class people are looking for economic and growth opportunities more than taxing the rich as a way to accomplish the same goals. It’s curious, but not surprising, that that’s your solution. Sure that may (or may not be) something Americans would broadly support - myself included - but to think working class people are looking there as a solution to upward mobility and affordability doesn’t seem to match up. Affordability is overwhelmingly the priority of these voters.
I'm happy to serve as a foil here Mike, but I mean taxing the rich with specific policy goals, not as an end in itself. If you look at affordability, healthcare and higher ed are two areas where taxing the rich could lead to real gains in affordability. If there are other ways of achieving universal healthcare and free (or much lower cost) higher ed without taxing the rich, that'd be great too. As far as housing goes, supply seems to be the main stumbling block and the "abundance" agenda of permit reform etc may be the best way to go. What policies do you think Dems should pursue to make life more affordable that don't involve taxing rich people? Because we have super low unemployment right now, and still over half of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck.
California just did yesterday what they should’ve done twenty years ago - get rid of CEQA. They had to wait until it’s a political crisis because black and brown working class people isn’t a crisis to them.
Read Ezra Klein ‘Abundance’. That’s the Democrats problems with working class people. Their policies aren’t working and they keep doubling down with more taxes, more beauracracy, more layers…it’s out of control. Voters are rejecting it
Thanks Mike for your insight. Curious what California's state government is like generally. Is it accurate to say California has a corporate welfare apparatus that lures big companies to the state, especially Silicon Valley companies, or am I missing something there?
I only ask as a Rhode Islander because I know in my State House, Democrats here have passed tax cuts for the wealthy (2006), pushed a record amount of deregulation (2018), and has a government that is still kinda secretive and nontransparent under single-party leadership. We're still near the bottom of the nation for business climate and economic growth. New York deregulated the energy sector under Governor Andrew Cuomo. Illinois did deregulation under then-Governor Rod Blagojevich. Many of these states also give expensive incentives to large corporations to create jobs and strive to cut "bureaucratic red tape" in their words (which are not effective at least in RI). I suppose if we had this debate in the 1970s and 1980s, maybe the Abundance point would carry more weight, but it almost feels like Democrats have been deregulating and giving out handouts to large corporations for some time on the federal and state levels. Unless there's more to Abundance than just deregulation.
It also appears that people like Bernie Sanders and Zohran Mamdani don't adhere to the abundance talk as much as they do discuss the concentration of wealth and ownership with the rise of "oligarchy." Does that sound like a fair assessment on your end, or does that sound confusing or misconstrued?
Interesting thank you 🙏