Sarah McBride has broken a barrier – and it’s not the one you think
The second Trump administration has opened a unique avenue for Democratic Party.
We’re starting to get our footing here. For those who look forward to reading and are thrown by my scattered posting schedule – I’ve been away since Friday and am currently writing this from the airport, where inspiration strikes alongside overpriced and questionable tuna sandwiches. The plan, as of now, will be 2-3 pieces a week – 1 of which being a larger, slightly more human-interest focused, and the others being shorter form, political commentary. Larger plans for this newsletter are in the works, but much of that will have to wait until after the holidays when I have a better picture of my spring schedule.
One leading player in the headlines this week has been Sarah McBride, the recently elected Democratic representative from Delaware who will be the first transgender member of the United States Congress.
Controversy about the transgender community has had a grip on the news in the last decade, and much of that is the fault of the Democratic Party. Their infatuation with identity and “breaking barriers” has alienated many members of their own party (me included), not to mention the independent voters who just elected a Republican trifecta. Identity politics have led to poorly focused hiring & nomination processes that prioritized elements of identity over other qualifications, and a misguided Democratic platform that misses the day-to-day issues that affect most Americans.
The response to the election (only a little more than 2 weeks ago!) from the Democratic Party has been an encouraging one. Top strategists, lawmakers, and advisors have been quick to diagnose why their party lost – and for the most part, they’ve hit the nail on the head. But a diagnosis is much easier than a prognosis. The classic question of “Where do we go from here?” is complicated by deep party division and competing ideologies.
Sarah McBride just kickstarted what I believe will be the Democratic Party’s path to a prosperous midterm election and landslide 2028 victory. Amid a Republican outcry over McBride’s potential use of a women’s restroom, led by Representative Nancy Mace (R-SC) and supported by Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA), McBride issued a masterclass reply that should be used as a case study for future Democratic messaging.
“I’m not here to fight about bathrooms, I’m here to fight for Delawareans and to bring down costs facing families. Like all members, I will follow the rules as outlined by Speaker Johnson, even if I disagree with them. This effort to distract from the real issues facing this country hasn’t distracted me over the last several days.”
Sarah McBride has singlehandedly painted an incredible picture: a transgender Democratic representative who doesn’t care which bathroom she uses, while a Republican-majority house (helmed by a Speaker who has introduced a senseless ban1) sits privy to things like this ridiculous video, one of 326 bathroom-related tweets posted by Rep. Mace in 72 hours. Which party is obsessed with bathrooms now?
For what it’s worth, I find this bathroom debate ludicrous. I just spent a week in Santa Fe visiting my cousin at college, and the bathrooms at her school were unisex. So was the bathroom in the Santa Fe airport, as a matter of fact, as well as every single bathroom in the restaurants and museums I visited. If strangers in an airport can share a bathroom with members of the opposite sex, so can our national representatives. (That’s not to mention the fact that every office has a private bathroom, and there are a few gender-neutral bathrooms on Capitol Hill too.) And, if my representative was really that irked by someone else’s presence in a bathroom, I’d probably vote for a new representative. Someone irritated by another person’s bathroom use should be nowhere near matters of domestic security, foreign policy, and the national economy.2
But this argument has not worked – not all arguments do. The Republican Party is good at recognizing this and changing their platform, whether it’s their case for Matt Gaetz as Attorney General (who has withdrawn his name as of about six hours ago), immigrants eating pets in Springfield, Ohio (which disappeared from MAGA messaging after nearly-universal outcry), or the abortion debate, where Republicans have generally shifted away from their earlier advocacy for a national abortion ban. As the Republican party shifts towards retribution politics and reversing Biden-Harris policies and actions, they leave a vacuum for Democrats to occupy—a vacuum that prioritizes pragmatic problem-solving over ideological squabbles. There is no shame in changing a platform so it can better align with the desires of the people. Voters care about what affects them directly, not about performative outrage over who uses which bathroom.
Sarah McBride just shattered the ultimate glass ceiling for the Democratic Party: a representative belonging to a marginalized group who resigns themselves to the rules and gives clashes on identity a backseat to the issues that are affecting the day-to-day life of their constituents.
Through all the noise, the real path to success for the Democratic Party is deceptively simple: focus on the issues that voters feel every day. Fight the fights that matter to the constituents. And let the Sarah McBrides of the world set the example for what modern Democratic leadership can and should be.
Yes, this is senseless. I get that’s a subjective comment, but I also can understand the point that I do a lot to normalize certain types of bigotry in this newsletter. If Republican representatives are so concerned about women’s safety in bathrooms, they’d be concerned about the straight white men who disproportionately make women far more uncomfortable in their bathrooms than transgender women do. And, they wouldn’t consider cabinet nominees like Pete Hegseth, let alone Matt Gaetz. Not to mention nominating and electing Donald Trump, who has been publicly accused by no less than 26 women of sexual harassment.
I rarely paraphrase Hillary Clinton, but she deserves some credit here:
You seem like a smart and thoughtful young man. What bothered me is that you used the example of unisex public bathrooms to dismiss women’s concerns about sharing public restrooms with males. That’s a bit sexist and lacking in empathy (which will NOT help the Dems in 2026).
I do not agree with keeping Ms. McBride out of the women’s restroom in the Capitol building, but since she has her own bathroom, and since there are unisex bathrooms in the capitol, she’s right not to make a fuss. Good for her. Move on.
Nice piece again Lax. The chaos isn't about unisex bathrooms. It's about women's bathrooms. Unisex bathrooms that I've seen throughout our country are usually single occupant only so who can have an issue with that. For what it's worth, I've heard about issues like this in the work place for years. A similar issue came up in a JP Morgan area I'm familiar with years ago. Women at JP Morgan did not feel comfortable with a biological man, who identified as a woman, using their bathroom. They had no problem working with the person and treating the person with respect as a co-worker. However, they drew the line on the bathroom issue and a separate bathroom was created for the man who had transitioned to being a woman. BTW: Most people I know have no problem with transgender people. The issue goes too far though when transgender men to women are allowed to compete as a female in women's sports. Yes; it doesn't impact many, but it is grossly unfair to biologically born women. Lia Thomas (the U Penn swimmer), boys who were aloud to compete as girls in CT track & field, recent volleyball controversy at San Jose State, etc. To quote; Dave Chapelle >. If LeBron James decided to be a woman and competed in the WNBA, he would probably score 840 pts in his first game. He then goes on to say you wouldn't have a WNBA if we were all equal. That is where progressive Democrats have no common sense.