Did Booker's Speech Matter?
A story of smart reader pushback and an old open mind
This newsletter is free. Subscribe to get more. Or level up to a paid subscription for the daily “Morning Read-In,” where I curate the most compelling stories on politics, culture, communications and life. Today’s MRI inspired this post.
Cory Booker’s 25-hour Senate filibuster put me in the unusual position of agreeing with conservatives like Meghan McCain, who called it a “stupid publicity stunt,” and John Podhoretz, who wondered why liberals were going ga-ga over a talkathon. “He’s not doing anything,” Podhoretz snarked on X, '“but staying awake.”
I don’t have anything against Booker. And I support meaningful resistance to large swaths of President Trump’s agenda that are anti-democratic or tilted toward wealthy Americans at the expense of the poor and working poor.
The key word here is “meaningful.”
Reading coverage of Booker’s protest early this morning, I wrote a note to my paid subscribers via the daily “Morning Read-In” at Convulsions.
I hate to burst the Booker bubble but I can hardly think of a more suitable metaphor for the Democratic Party’s fecklessness than a long speech. Words. Lots and lots of words designed not to persuade voters to move from MAGA to Democrat but, literally, meant to just fill up time.
He was playing to a narrow audience confirming their biases, narrowing their appeal.
My impressively engaged and informed paid-subscriber audience wasted no time pushing back.
First, came Mike’s Substack:
Disagree Ron. I think that Booker’s filibuster was actually an important moment because of it's symbolic act of standing up to this corruption. Democrats in Congress have been too timid. We need many more acts of opposition and Booker's were forceful, factual and called out Trump and his illegal violations of the rule of law. If it can rally Americans to "hit the streets in protest" then then these words will have impact. It sure beats sitting home doing nothing. Bernie and AOC have rallied many to action. This is a fight for democracy and we need all hands on deck in many forums.
Followed by another regular at Convulsions, Susan MacNeil, PhD:
Plus, 400 million tuned in on TikTok! That’s huge. As well as the Wisconsin win. We had a good day. The lawlessness of this regime has been exposed a bit more. It hurts my brain to think about what they are getting away with.
The good doctor was referring to the Democratic victory over an Elon Musk-backed state Supreme Court candidate in Wisconsin on Tuesday night, another sign that Trump and his GOP allies are facing political headwinds less than 100 days into his presidency.
I replied: “Wait. Are you two telling me that I’m not always right? Gotta check my biases? The Booker Bubble lives!” To be honest, I wasn’t conceding the argument, just making room for a good debate.
It worked. Jeanne Jax piped up:
What was so refreshing about Cory Booker's filibuster is that for one day the narrative was driven by a Democrat. I was moved by his sincere effort and the stories he told about the suffering people have endured over the last 72 days. The line between cynicism and skepticism is the willingness to be open to new information. I'm skeptical as to whether Senator Booker's efforts will move the needle but never cynical.
And then, like a knife through my writerly heart, echoed david Maraniss — the Pulitzer Prize-winner journalist and biographer whose name has long resided on my list of Top 10 most admired authors, thinkers, and people. He. Said. I. Was. Wrong.
It was more than words. Words were secondary. His determination and persistence were inspirational. People need inspiration in troubled times. And it resonated mightily on social media.
Every bit of criticism was polite and well considered. Mike even tried to let me down softly:
Ron you force me out of the bubble and inspire me to challenge my biases. I'm actually a moderate that leans left, but sometimes I allow myself to be influenced the by far left "groupthink" and before I know it I have become numb to a reasoned analysis of the issue at hand. You keep me humble and this forum allows dissent.
And Bob found himself in unusual agreement with me:
You nailed it—Cory Booker’s 25-hour Senate gabfest was all about Cory Booker’s big dreams … Booker’s not out to unite; he’s out to shine, betting this hero act will catapult him to the White House—or at least a guest spot on late-night TV. We both see the game: it’s politics with a capital P, and Booker’s just filibustering his way to the next audition, probably practicing his presidential wave in the mirror!
So did the debate change my mind?
Yes — in that I wasn’t sure when I launched Substack on January 2 whether an online community could be built around bipartisan shaming and civil debate. While it happens every day in the MRI, today it was more pronounced.
Yes — in that I now see how my reductive argument dismissed the power of giving partisans the fight they want and the hope they need.
Yes — in that talking for 25 hours is better than doing nothing for 25 years. If I’m going to argue that the White House Press corps should boycott briefings to draw attention to Trump’s First Amendment attacks, why would I so smugly dismiss Booker’s performative protest?
No — in that, unlike most liberals, I still don’t see the New Jersey senator as heroic or brave or effective at curbing Trump. But he did manage to stay awake.
Paid subscribers get daily access to The Morning Read-In, where today I curated the most interesting stories on politics, culture, communications, and life: In addition to Booker’s protest, the stories included:
Hillary Clintons emails vs. Michael Waltz’ Gmails.
What Tuesday’s elections say about 2026.
TV anchors setting sail for Substack
The 91 million Americans who say they can’t afford medical care.
Convulsions hitting #61 on the Substack rising political leader board.
While most of my newsletters are free, the daily MRI is not. Please subscribe, and get twice as much content that is available under the free plan.
If you’re a die-hard free subscriber, please let me know what I can do to get you to level up.
I absolutely disagree with you. I think it was meaningful, particularly what he was saying was passionate and true and it got people’s attention, which is extremely important.
Ron, Any time a man (or woman) stands up and speaks the truth to power it is a significant moment. When a man speaks, passionately and honestly, for 25 hours on the travesties of the current administration, it far more than significant. It's the start of a shift in how we talk about what is happening to our country right now.