In this year’s NBA playoffs, fans saw the Philadelphia 76ers’ championship aspirations evaporate in an embarrassing second-round loss in part because their star point guard, Ben Simmons, repeatedly refused to even attempt a shot in the fourth quarter.
Simmons, the first overall pick in the 2016 draft, is a great defensive player and er and has been a three-time All Star. However his inability to make a jump shot, or even attempt a jump shot, has clearly held his team back.
What makes that maddening, not just for Sixers fans but for NBA observers at large, is that Simmons has always had this weakness in his game. But instead of working on it and developing a shot, Simmons has been stubborn and seems to have decided he’d rather the blame and fail playing his way, than grow his game so his team can succeed.
Life offers plenty of examples of this kind of thing: people deciding they’d rather refuse to change or hold tightly to ill-advised beliefs than succeed.
I’d argue we have a prime example of this currently happening here, with California Republican activists — and unfortunately their stubbornness has the potential for far more harm than the dashed aspirations of an NBA team.
After mounting a recall attempt that was handily defeated by Gov. Gavin Newsom and seeing their favorite replacement candidate receive an icy reception from anyone outside of the Republican base, you would think that Republican activists would recognize that their only chance of winning statewide office rests in getting away from Trumpian politics and conspiracy mongering.
That doesn’t appear to be their approach, though.
Before ballots were even counted, Republican frontrunner Larry Elder and former President Donald Trump pushed unfounded conspiracies that the gubernatorial recall election was rigged. In fact Elder’s team promoted a website calling for voters to demand the California legislature investigate “the twisted results of the 2021 recall election of Gov. Gavin Newsom” — all before ballot counts were even being reported.
Days after the recall results were revealed and Newsom clearly won, The Transparency Foundation — led by conservative radio host Carl DeMaio — quickly ed the fray, pushing the same narrative. They sent an email blast stating the group was looking into an “extensive voter fraud effort” and asked for tips about potential incidents.
Of course, they also requested donations to their investigation.
Although there were a few voting issues on Election Day, claims of widespread voter fraud were unfounded.
One polling place was closed because of a threat of wildfire. And there were reports in one Los Angeles neighborhood of some people showing up to vote and being told they had already voted, but that was caused by faulty equipment that made it look as though people who came to vote in-person early had already checked in, according to county registrars. However they were still able to cast a provisional ballot, which the registrar will use until voter eligibility is sorted.
Agence -Presse, an international news outlet based in Paris, also did a fact check on many other baseless claims and conspiracies floating around about the recall election and found them all to be false.
A Republican has not won statewide office in California since 2006. And if Republicans continue to lean into the Trump brand of politics, it’s pretty clear that won’t change anytime soon.
So why stick with it and take this conspiracy-mongering approach?
I asked Jack Pitney, professor of political science at Claremont McKenna College, that very question. Pitney is a lifelong conservative who has worked on multiple Republican presidential campaigns but left the party the day Trump was elected.
He noted that Elder, the top Republican candidate, got only 27% of the total California vote — if you count the many voters who skipped the second question on the ballot, effectively rejecting all the replacement candidates.
“That showing reconfirms that a hard-right candidate has practically no chance of winning statewide in California,” Pitney said.
Still, there are some small enclaves where those candidates can win, he added.
Sure, a Trumpian candidate may be able to pick up a congressional seat or legislative district here or there, but they won’t be able to actually do much of anything to help their residents or voters statewide, on a large scale.
To me that seems like a bizarre tactic — to prioritize hustling for dollars and feeding a vocal minority over actually trying to influence public policy.
Pitney said that approach doesn’t have a direct practical impact on public policy, but that’s not really the point.
“Political activity is a way of affecting emotions, not impacting public policy,” he said, adding it also can with some donors. “Proponents would prefer to energize a shrinking base than build a majority coalition.”
That somewhat explains the desire of DeMaio and other Republican activists to keep pushing these unfounded narratives and extreme beliefs that ultimately lead to rejection from most California voters.
But it’s still deeply troubling.
I say that not only because of the potential threat it poses to our democratic institutions and democratic process, but also because, in the long run, it typically hurts states when there is only one competitive political party.
“One party control usually ends badly, whether it’s a Republican or Democrat,” Pitney said. “That leads the dominant party to be overconfident, sloppy on both ethics and policy.”
