Democrats’ Civil War Over Transgenderism Heats Up – The American Spectator | USA News and PoliticsThe American Spectator

One by one, Democrats are deciding that the jig is up and it’s time to join the side of the American people on transgenderism.

Massachusetts Rep. Seth Moulton said he doesn’t want to see his young daughters “getting run over” by a male athlete. California Gov. Gavin Newsom said that it is “deeply unfair” to have male athletes in women’s sports. (RELATED: Is the Transgender Movement Really Backing Down?)

And now, we also have Rahm Emanuel. The former ambassador to Japan and mayor of Chicago broke from transgender orthodoxy in perhaps the most blustery way possible. “Look,” he said, “in seventh grade, if I had known that I could have said the word ‘they’ and got in the girls’ bathroom, I would have done it.”

Those comments, which he made on the anti-woke-but-left-leaning Real Time With Bill Maher, followed earlier comments he made in which he said Democrats should be focused on improving educational outcomes rather than on bathrooms and locker rooms. (RELATED: Dissatisfied Democrats Voice Frustrations With Party Line on Transgender Issues)

Rahm Emanuel’s break from transgender orthodoxy is particularly notable for its boldness. He isn’t just walking back the idea of allowing biological boys in girls’ locker rooms, he is — through humor — questioning the whole ideology.

According to Politico’s Jonathan Martin, this is all part of an effort to set up a run for the presidency. Martin posited that Emanuel’s biggest liability in such an endeavor would be that he “reeks of yesterday.” But by bucking the Democratic consensus on unpopular areas with provocative and headline-making comments, Emanuel is hoping that he can break from the pack and distinguish himself as a leader of the party’s new direction. (RELATED: Five Quick Things: Welcome to the Briar Patch, Chuck Schumer)

Indeed, Emanuel has sought to push toward the center in a number of other ways in recent weeks, including on urban crime. He told Maher: “We’ve gone through five years where people became way too permissive as a culture — which is why everything is locked up at CVS and Walgreens, and that’s a disaster.”

Meanwhile, most of the Democratic Party is still tied in a knot over transgenderism, and they are too afraid to break free. This includes Maine Gov. Janet Mills, who recently doubled down on keeping men in women’s sports, and Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, who recently pledged to veto a bill that would nullify his executive order banning children from receiving therapy to help them accept their biological sex.

For years, Democrats have proclaimed that it is bigoted for anyone or any law to treat someone who identifies as transgender as anything less than a full and complete member of their opposite biological sex. Yet public opinion has shifted, with Americans now opposing the presence of men in women’s bathrooms, locker rooms, prisons, and sports teams. (Nearly 80 percent of Americans oppose allowing men in women’s sports, according to a recent New York Times poll.)

If Democrats back down, they will be endorsing actions they condemned as bigoted just months ago. They will also be crossing a big red line in the Democrats’ unofficial moral code by refuting the notion that transgender identities should be “affirmed” in every way by society.

Let’s step back and consider how Democrats got into this kerfuffle. The primary reason is that they have become stuck in the clutches of progressive advocacy organizations, think tanks, policy institutes, and lobbying groups.

A January tell-all by Vanity Fair on the collapse of the Democratic Party termed these organizations simply “the groups.” Many on the center-left, the essay asserted, believe “the groups” are “the reason why Democrats are now so nervous about breaking even slightly with the consensus of the party.”(RELATED: The Democratic Party Is Collapsing)

An essay in the Atlantic last month likewise laid the blame for the Democratic Party’s travails at the feet of “the groups.” The groups, it asserted, “have managed to amass enormous influence over the party” even though they “seldom have a broad base of support.” The Atlantic essay explained that the groups do so by “monopolizing the brand value of various causes,” including climate change, abortion, and racial justice. This means they are able to “define” what the Democratic Party’s policies should be on the issues, particularly through the dissemination of their ideas via progressive journalists.

Interestingly, the Atlantic takes the 2020 Democratic primary as the crux of the groups’ power. It explains: “The gigantic field of candidates slogged through a series of debates and interviews in which journalists asked if they would affirm various positions demanded by the groups.” For me, this brings to mind Planned Parenthood’s 2019 “forum on reproductive rights,” at which 16 Democratic presidential candidates came out to parrot exactly what the abortion advocacy group wanted to hear. Likewise, the LGBTQ-focused Human Rights Campaign hosted an October 2019 event for Democratic presidential candidates at which Kamala Harris introduced herself by saying, “My pronouns are she, her, and hers.”

The priorities of these activist groups simply do not represent those of the Democratic Party writ large. By recognizing this and breaking from the elite consensus — as Emanuel has now done on transgenderism — Democrats could theoretically give themselves a major political boost.

But “the groups” still have the Democratic Party in their clutches, and defying them presents major risks.

When Gavin Newsom came out to oppose men in women’s sports, the Human Rights Campaign released a statement suggesting that his comments “make it seem like Gov. Newsom believes our civil rights are up for grabs.” Two members of the state legislature additionally said they were “profoundly sickened and frustrated” by the governor’s comments.

Likewise, Emanuel’s comments invited a band of radicals to come forward and attack him.

“I cannot think of another Democrat more unsuited to the current political moment than Rahm Fcking Emanuel, whose only real political gift is alienating members of his party’s political base,” wrote Charles P. Pierce in Esquire.

The enduring influence of “the groups” can be seen in the fact that no Democrats have switched their stance on transgenderism beyond rhetoric. California continues to allow men in women’s sports, keeps men in women’s prisons, promises to shield children who identify as transgender from parents who oppose medical transition treatments, and bans schools from revealing a transgender identity to parents without a child’s permission. Likewise, no Democrats in the House or Senate joined Republicans in voting to ban men from women’s sports earlier this year. (RELATED: The Democratic Party Is Collapsing)

What seems certain is that the first Democrat who can successfully defy this elite class of ideologues — in reality, and not just rhetoric — without losing the party’s support stands a major chance of winning the nomination come 2028. Moulton, Newsom, and Emanuel are unlikely to be the only ones to try.

The Democratic presidential debate stage — which will feature candidates who choose to defy “the groups” and those who stick with them — is going to be fiery.

READ MORE from Ellie Gardey Holmes:

Melania Trump Finds Her Stride

With IVF Executive Order, Trump Bows to Radical Liberals

Starbucks Recognizes Sanity and Backs Away From DEI Policy