Listen To This Story

With the economy limping along and prices on the rise, Republicans hope that “crime” will be the central theme in next year’s midterms. Even though they are led by the most lawless president in US history, it is a great issue for them. Understandably, Americans are afraid of being victims and, even though solid statistics indicate that violent crime is down, anecdotal evidence can be used to great effect to make ill-informed citizens believe the opposite.  

In addition, even though red states actually lead the way in violent crime rates, the public perception is that crime is running rampant in large cities run by Democrats. And, since “inner cities” is code for “Black,” being against crime allows Republicans to be wink-wink racist.

We are seeing the same thing play out with “criminal illegal immigrants.” Undocumented migrants commit far fewer crimes than people born in the US, but clever right-wing propaganda has made them all out to be vicious killers. 

Finally, “fighting crime” in blue cities serves as a great excuse for Donald Trump’s authoritarian power grabs. After all, he can claim that he just wants Americans to feel safe (while he and his media allies are doing the opposite with their rhetoric).  

Now, before we go further, let’s get one thing out of the way: We are not justifying crime or saying it is not a problem in our society.

It is, in fact, a big problem.

About 20,000 Americans are murdered each year. The US homicide rate of about 6 per 100,000 is a multiple of that of its peer nations. In other words, as an American, you are about three times as likely to be murdered as a Canadian and 25 times as likely as someone living in Japan.

Since Black Americans, especially young men, are much more likely to kill and be killed (Black males from 15–45 are more than 10 times more likely to die in a homicide than the average American, and 250 times as likely as a random Japanese person), conservatives would love to make this entirely about race.

Obviously, it’s a lot more complicated than that. 

For example, drowning the country in firearms is a huge factor, as is hegemonic masculinity. In addition, inequality plays a major role, especially in cities, where the gap between haves and have-nots is extreme and growing. Similarly, a lack of opportunity breeds crime. 

Finally, violence begets violence. Even if Trump may not consider domestic violence a crime (and you should really watch this clip), children that are abused or neglected are much more likely to become violent criminals as adults.

It doesn’t help that the US justice system is truly awful. While cops have access to military-style weapons, they lack training to use them properly.

Furthermore, the system is based on punishment and not rehabilitation, which is why the US has one of the highest incarceration rates among all countries. Conservatives call that being tough on crime. But incarceration as a primary strategy does not address any of the underlying causes of crime — such as poverty, economic and racial inequality, and mental illness — nor does it seem to prevent future criminal activity. 

In other words, like most issues, this one is highly complex. 

But that doesn’t stop right-wing news outlets from doing their best to make this about race by using individual crimes to create a narrative in which the perpetrator is almost always either a Black male or an illegal immigrant, and the victim is generally white (and preferably a pretty white woman).

We’re seeing this play out right now with the relentless coverage of the story of a Ukrainian woman who was killed by a mentally ill serial criminal in Charlotte, NC. 

With their audiences sufficiently scared and outraged, Republicans can then swoop in and offer a simple “solution” to an incredibly difficult problem. In this case, as in most such cases, their solution is more cops and more guns. 

To be fair, “defund the police,” a solution touted in some progressive circles, is an equally foolish strategy. What needs to be done is to reallocate the available money and train cops better while focusing on eliminating the root causes that lead people to commit crimes. 

But that’s a topic for another time. 

It should also be noted that conservatives don’t actually want to be tough on all crime, and they only support the rule of law when it suits them. 

Obviously, the best example of this is that they have no problem with being led by (and making excuses for) a convicted felon with a history of sexual assault and fraud.

And their full-throated support for law enforcement only goes so far. 

Here is Border Czar Tom Homan threatening anybody who so much as touches one of those masked federal agents who abduct people off the streets while refusing to identify themselves or producing a warrant. 

“You put hands on an ICE officer — you’re going to jail,” Homan said on Fox News. “You make a threat, either online or in person — you’re going to jail.”

And what about the agents who use excessive force? As far as we can tell, even though there are many recorded instances of this happening, no ICE agents seem to get in trouble for this. We even checked with ICE and haven’t heard back. 

So, if you are keeping track, this administration wants to make attacks by sub (the sandwiches, not the underwater vessels) a felony, but roughing up suspected immigrants who have committed no crime is fine. 

And, of course, this zero-tolerance thing doesn’t apply to seeking justice for the cops who were assaulted on January 6 while they were defending democracy. If you harmed them, you get a pardon and possibly some money. 

In spite of their glaring hypocrisy, crime is a good issue for Republicans. In fact, it may be the only one. 

And that takes us back to why the GOP hopes to make this a top election issue… but only on their terms.

Specifically, that means convincing the American people that Democrats are pro-crime. 

We’ll let our favorite white nationalist ghoul, White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, explain what that looks like (and imagine this being said in his shrieking voice): 

The Democrat Party at every level — judges, politicians, academics, nonprofits — is organized around the defense and protection of the criminal, the monstrous and the depraved. The more vile the threat, the more vociferously the Democrat Party works to protect and enable it.

If you think that sounds nuts, then you are absolutely correct. 

For one thing, violent crime rates nationwide are down significantly and have reached the lowest levels in 20 years. 

But, as we noted, no Republican these days will allow facts to get in the way of a simple message like: Democrats love criminals, which is why they reject the gracious offer of anti-crime President Trump to send in the troops and secure their cities.

For Democrats, things are vastly more complicated. 

First of all, they need to acknowledge that crime is a real problem that has to be addressed. This isn’t something they can afford to sweep under the rug like high prices and mass immigration during the Biden administration. 

Whether the concerns of Americans over violent crime are justified or not, they are real to voters. Democrats must have a plan on how to alleviate them. 

And those plans have to include support for law enforcement. 

“Defund the police” was a short-sighted and losing message, and Democrats continue to pay for it. Condemning the excesses of ICE (and other federal agencies) and urging much-needed reforms is fine, but Democrats have to back the good cops in their communities. 

Next, they have to point out that, regrettably, crime is just a part of life. And, yes, perhaps having a heavy military presence in a city will make subway rides safer, but it does so at the expense of freedom. There is a reason why governors in red states with higher crime rates than California, Illinois, or New York are not falling all over themselves to beg Trump to also send troops into their cities and towns.

Free societies have to find a balance between preventing crime and maintaining liberties. For example, the sexual abuse of children would likely decrease if a National Guard platoon were placed in every Christian youth group, but that would make the US a police state, which is probably a term Democrats should start using (“We say ‘yes’ to police, but ‘no’ to Trump’s police state”).

For example, the official crime rate in 1930s Germany dropped when Hitler seized power, but that’s because he put jack-booted thugs on the street and gave every city block a Nazi warden to keep an eye on things; meanwhile, of course, the real crimes were committed by the government itself, which soon began imprisoning and killing millions of people. 

Democrats also have to explain why crime is higher in cities. More people means more friction. For example, you probably don’t experience a lot of road rage as the only driver for miles on a country road in Montana. But try keeping your calm in rush hour when you have to get home for dinner and the tenth car just cut in front of you.

This is also the place where Democrats should stress the importance of combating economic injustice. This is a message that will make sense to Americans struggling to pay their bills: If billionaires start paying their fair share and everybody else has more income and, eventually, wealth as a result, crime is going to go down. 

Finally, Democrats have to keep highlighting the incredible hypocrisy of Republicans on this issue. They don’t want a rule of law; they just want to rule. And we know this because they are breaking the law all the time to amass more power. 

All of this is much more complicated than saying: “Crime is bad, Democrats want crime, Democrats are bad.”

For now, Democrats better figure out fast how they will react to Trump’s military takeover of blue cities without looking like a party that wants to protect criminals.

In Illinois, which is likely the president’s next target, Gov. JB Pritzker (D) is choosing a combative approach. Meanwhile, in Washington, DC, Mayor Muriel Bowser (D) is trying appeasement. 

It’s pretty clear what Democratic voters want: They want fighters. 

However, and this is something Pritzker must understand, Democratic leaders have to offer an alternative to Trump’s plan of ordering in the National Guard and hordes of masked ICE agents . 

To keep the Republican attacks from landing, Democrats must demonstrate that they are making an effort to further reduce violent crime in their cities and states (including, perhaps, by asking the federal government for specific resources — but on their terms and not the president’s). It’s just not enough to keep repeating: “What Trump is doing is bad.”

Of course, going beyond negative rhetoric on such a complicated issue is easier said than done, which is why coming up with a strategy right now must be their top priority.