Sarah Longwell takes the opposite view, effectively arguing that Hasan should be pushed outside the Democratic tent while leaning on all too familiar right-wing critiques rather than engaging directly with his broader commentary. The backlash to her position has been swift and lopsided, especially as Hasan Piker responded in real time on his HasanReacts YouTube feed, reframing the exchange for an audience far beyond traditional political media.

Evan and I use this moment to explore what it reveals about the shifting centers of power inside the Democratic coalition, and who actually holds the audience now.

Talked about in the show:

• “Is Hasan Piker Toxic…or Gettable” -The Bulwark, April 3, 2026

• “Tim Miller SHUTS DOWN Sarah Longwell Defending Hasan” -HasanAbi Reacts, April 3, 2026

Subscribe now

Share

Share Stew on This

Leave a comment

Thank you , , , , , , and many others for tuning into my live video with ! Join me for my next live video in the app.

Get more from Steward Beckham in the Substack app

Available for iOS and Android

Get the app

A reader, sharp and unflinchingly, offered a stark thesis: in American politics, a party often feels forced to choose. Court the White vote and risk losing the Black vote, or anchor yourself with Black voters and accept erosion elsewhere. It sounds cynical, but the data gives it teeth. Since the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, Democrats have rarely won a majority of White voters, a realignment that still hums beneath everything we see today.

That tension sits at the edge of this piece, one of the final notes, not the opening chord.

Along the way, I move through a series of fault lines, such as the Supreme Court’s ruling against conversion therapy, the widening shadow of the Iran conflict, and the slow, uneasy erosion of American soft power. And threading through it all is a question the Democratic Party can’t keep dodging: why, in moments of crisis, it still turns back toward the architects of Reaganism and the inheritors of Trumpism, rather than the voters who have carried the party since its coalition was remade in the upheavals of the 1960s, ’70s, and ’80s.

It’s not just a strategy problem.

It’s a story about memory, power, and who a party believes it actually belongs to.

Thank you , , , , , and many others for tuning into my live video! Join me for my next live video in the app.

Get more from Steward Beckham in the Substack app

Available for iOS and Android

Get the app

Subscribe now

Share Stew on This

Leave a comment

Here is Wehner’s article in The Atlantic (I read a large portion of the article without the paywall in this episode).

Drawing from history, lived experience, and the long arc of racial politics in America, we explore how hierarchy, exclusion, and respectability have always been entangled, and how today’s political discourse still gives those dynamics cover by insisting that Trump is the exception rather than the exposure.

I also draw on my November 12, 2025, article, which asks whether the media’s obsession with debating “true conservatism” amounted to wasted time. Time that could have been spent directly naming the threats to our rights, no matter how uncomfortable that truth might be for those who helped shape this moment.

Thank you , , , , , and many others for tuning into my live video! Join me for my next live video in the app.

Get more from Steward Beckham in the Substack app

Available for iOS and Android

Get the app

Share

Share Stew on This

Subscribe now

Leave a comment

Across Republican and Democratic administrations, American foreign policy has produced a sequence of disasters abroad. The anti-Trump conservative analysis attempts to reckon with these failed policies but often falls short of metabolizing the political impacts of neoconservative disasters past and present. The cardinal misstep – treating President Trump as a departure from American imperial tradition rather than another expression of it – continues to taint otherwise thoughtful review.

In a March 9 episode of the flagship Bulwark Podcast, Tim Miller and Sarah Longwell reveal some of the early political influences and cultural propaganda that shaped their worldviews – a self-examination we respect and admire. Credit where credit is due, yet Miller and Longwell still fail to appreciate some of the tectonic drivers of these policies – and more crucially, how unpopular policies have galvanized public opinion and redrawn the political landscape.

Steward Beckham and I took some time to dig deep into this episode, Sarah Longwell: No One Should Trust this Government, which exemplifies this anti-Trump conservative phenomenon when applied to the current war on Iran and Lebanon. Enjoy.

The next episode of Reality Checking The Bulwark will air today at 2 PM EST/11 PM PST on Substack Live!

Previously on Stew On This:

In this episode of Reality Checking the Bulwark, Evan and I take apart Tim Miller’s Bulwark Podcast interview with Jonathan Chait, “The World’s Worst People,” as a case study in the limits of establishment anti-Trump commentary. Even as the episode focuses on Trump’s corruption, his diversions, and the growing Epstein scandal, it also falls back into a familiar genre: treating the left as a perpetual object of correction while imagining moderation as the natural center of political sanity. We use that tension to explore how The Bulwark can sound clear-eyed about Trump yet still reproduce the reactionary centrist reflex of disciplining the very constituencies that any durable anti-authoritarian coalition will need.

JOIN US NEXT TIME!

REALITY CHECKING THE BULWARK - EPISODE 5

March 15 at 2pm EST / 11am PST

Tune in on March 15 2pm EST

Previously on Stew On This:

Thank you , , , , , and many others for tuning into my live video with ! Join me for my next live video in the app.

Get more from Steward Beckham in the Substack app

Available for iOS and Android

Get the app

In this week’s episode we discussed a February 16 installment of the Mona Charen Show: The Real Conflict is Between Decent and Indecent (w/ David French). At stake is a larger question running through this series: are reactionary centrists accurately diagnosing the scale and nature of democratic strain, or applying failed frameworks built for a different political era?

JOIN US NEXT TIME!

Reality Checking the Bulwark - Episode 4

REALITY CHECKING THE BULWARK - EPISODE 4

Saturday, February 28 at 1pm EST / 10pm PST

Saturday February 28 at 1PM

Previously on Stew On This:

Leave a comment

Share

Share Stew on This

Thank you , , , , , and many others for tuning into my live video with ! Join me for my next live video in the app.

Get more from Steward Beckham in the Substack app

Available for iOS and Android

Get the app

In this week’s episode, we discussed:

• A January 7 episode of Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang’s Las Culturistas podcast, in which listeners were advised not to donate to Jasmine Crockett’s Senate primary campaign because “she can’t win,” according to Rogers. “Anytime a politician is making it about themselves, I’m already done,” Rogers said. “Don’t waste your money sending to Jasmine Crockett. Do not do it.”

• A January 13 episode of The Bulwark’s The Next Level Podcast – JD Vance Picked the Ugliest Fight on Purpose – in which Tim Miller led Jonathan V. Last and Sarah Longwell in an extreme critique of reactions to Rogers and Yang’s comments. Miller’s response to a cherry-picked (homophobic) response:

• Antifascist historian John Ganz

• Certain Thoughts roundtable post Jasmine Crockett: Everyone Weighs In

• American Nuremberg

Certain Thoughts

American Nuremberg

Nuremberg is a 434-person farming community split between Black Creek and North Union Townships, in the Pennsylvania counties of Schuylkill and Luzerne…

Read more

5 months ago · 182 likes · 1 comment · Evan Stern

JOIN US NEXT TIME!

Reality Checking the Bulwark - Episode 3

REALITY CHECKING THE BULWARK - EPISODE 3

Saturday, February 21 at 4pm EST / 1pm PST

Saturday, February 21 at 4 PM EST

Thank you , , , , , and many others for tuning into my live video with ! Join me for my next live video in the app.

PREVIOUSLY ON STEW ON THIS:

Share

Share Stew on This

Leave a comment

In this week’s episode, we discussed:

• All about “reactionary centrism,” David Roberts’s January 30 conversation with Michael Hobbes

• How Big Is MAGA, Really?, Mona Charen’s February 5 Bulwark post

• David French: Our State of National Shame, the February 6 Bulwark podcast with Tim Miller

• Law Enforcement Says ICE & DHS Are Making Policing Worse, a January 30 focus group analysis with Tim Miller and Sarah Longwell

• It Was All a Lie: How the Republican Party Became Donald Trump by Stuart Stevens (2020)

• It’s Even Worse Than It Looks: How the American Constitutional System Collided with the New Politics of Extremism by Norman Ornstein and Thomas Mann (published 2012, revised 2016)

• While Democrats Do The Fascists’ Dirty Work, Attacks on the Left Continue: If beating back authoritarianism is so important, why do so many politicians and pundits work to undermine the very groups leading the fight?

JOIN US NEXT TIME!

Reality Checking The Bulwark - Episode 2

REALITY CHECKING THE BULWARK - EPISODE 2

Saturday, February 14 at 2 PM EST / 11 AM PST

Tune in live: 2PM EST on February 14

Reality Checking The Bulwark

Share

Previously, on Stew On This:

Share

Share Stew on This

Leave a comment

Author’s Note: The piece I had intended to publish tonight, on the subject of Minneapolis in the broader context of American statehood and civic infrastructure, will instead be published on Monday. I want to give myself some time to marinate on the ideas and perspectives that I’m weighing. Here are some brief thoughts, really just me trying to work through my own thinking on the subject.

I have to say, I’ve been responding pretty viscerally to the constant refrain that “this isn’t the country I grew up in.” Not because I don’t understand the sentiment behind that statement, but because I think there’s often a failure to account for state-sponsored violence in minority communities, as well as the austerity that can set in as a result of losing funding and tax bases in these communities that become starved of life. Sometimes, my reaction to this statement is just one of frustration, because, quite frankly, this country has been recognizable to many Americans for quite some time.

But I want to get into why I have that reaction, because, quite frankly, this isn’t just a political argument but a personal one, and one that’s also generational. I didn’t grow up in the Cold War. I was born into a culture of ironic cynicism about anything that was branded as America, and I’ve seen the rollback of civil rights that was my only real attachment to the idea that America was worth believing in, in spite of everything that I experienced as a Black male growing up in Baltimore.

Now, with this Trumpian rollback, I’ve come to see America more like a well-marketed empire rather than a land of ideals. And I don’t mean that the rollback has caused me to see America this way. I mean that it has clarified this way of seeing America. It has made it harder to pretend that this has all been the truth all along.

So when people say, “this isn’t the country I recognize,” what I hear beneath that is, “this isn’t the country I was taught to recognize. Or even, “this isn’t the country I needed to recognize.” Not because those people are bad, but because the marketing has been so good that it feels like reality. And so, for those people who have bought into the ideals, this is a bad thing. It’s a bad thing because it may reveal something worse. That perhaps they’ve been dupes in a marketing scheme all along. Perhaps this has been a marketing scheme that has been manipulating people before them.

If you need a different way to say this, I think there’s a way to say this that doesn’t dismiss what other people have always had to deal with.

Maybe one can say: “I’m realizing I didn’t understand the country I grew up in.”

Or one can say: “I’m seeing what other people have been living with.”

Or even say: “I was protected from certain truths, and that protection is breaking down.”

That isn’t shame but the beginning of historical literacy.

The Vietnam Homecoming Parallel

A significant portion of my intellectual pursuits in my 20s (and now my early 30s) has been influenced by the study of media literacy, Cold War cultural production, the rise of the New Right politics, and the fall of New Deal and Great Society idealism. Naturally, this has led me to be interested in the rise of the Never Trump Republicans and the reactionary centrist liberals and how they have responded to this moment. Much of the time, this has led me to a place of disillusionment regarding the commentary of the former group in particular, not because I think they’re necessarily bad people, but because I think many of them can’t bring themselves to admit that maybe there never was a before that was particularly noble. That Trump is simply the next logical step in the progression of the excesses and blind spots that have long been part of the system.

Perhaps this has simply been the nation all along, and the legacies of racial segregation, the rise of wealth gaps, and the rise of capitalism need to be honed in on rather than the Cold War notion of a noble nation of good standing battling against the evil authoritarian regimes that have long been supported in the shadows by the power centers of the United States.

As I have been studying this group of Never Trump institutionalists (and, as a side note, I am also a part of this institutionalist tradition, and I also sadly believe in institutions), I think I have drawn some parallels with this group that are similar to the way I think Vietnam veterans who enlisted in the war felt as they came back to the United States from the disillusioning experience of the battlefield. An experience in which they realized that perhaps all of the late-40s through the early-60s anti-Soviet propaganda they had been sold on throughout their lives may have been, at least in part, propaganda.

Propaganda that was good enough to get people on board.

Propaganda that was good enough to leave people psychologically adrift, as the story they had been sold on had no way of surviving the test of reality.

Or perhaps the homesteaders of the late-19th century, who were sold on the idea of fertile rains and plentiful land, only to find a crusty, drought-ridden corner of the country, as the speculators had bought all of the good land, while the promise of the rains was merely a good piece of propaganda sold to the downtrodden and naive.

And thus, we have a group of people who grew up in a similar type of propaganda, which sold them Cold War triumphalism, sold them on the United States as a benevolent empire, and sold them on the idea of the pain of the American empire as something that occurred in some other place, rather than within the continental United States. And thus, we have this reaction, which I am working through, as perhaps this is all untrue, perhaps I am merely young, perhaps I merely never saw the blinding lights of the decades before I was born, or even within my single digits.

So that’s what I wanted to share with you all as I prepare this essay for Monday.

Is the American dream and democracy simply the result of good marketing for the age of mass media and industrial revolutions?

Are Americans simply marks of a really good story with policy and generational tales of imagined racial, gender, and religious hierarchies that keep the labor force divided and compliant?

I know it’s a dark picture, and it’s not the happiest place on earth (there’s a marketing machine for that if that’s what you’re looking for). I’m just being brutally honest about what shouldn’t be disillusioning, but clarifying times.

Share

Share Stew on This

Leave a comment

In this video, I talk through a shift I didn’t expect to make: going from “vote blue no matter who” in 2020 (and grudgingly into 2024) to rejecting automatic loyalty now. I use the Greenland news cycle, and the wider slide from soft power to coercion, as a case study in how Trumpism isn’t an aberration so much as a mask-off sequel that reveals the machinery behind the monster. My argument is that a reactionary centrist/consultant class keeps demanding fear-based loyalty while punching left and reinforcing right-wing frames, leaving them incapable of naming the system that produces Trumpism, or stopping it from delegitimizing their own legacies. If Democrats want votes, they need to earn them with accountability and material commitments, not nostalgia for “normal.”

Read today’s edition:

Share

Leave a comment

After a deadly ICE shooting in Minneapolis, Democratic strategists are urging caution over calls to abolish ICE. But what does it say about our politics when the phrase itself sparks more debate than the violence that provoked it?

In this video, I break down the centrist logic behind the backlash to “Abolish ICE,” the recent polling that complicates that narrative, and the deeper failure of imagination plaguing a political class more afraid of bad optics than bad policy.

This isn’t just about slogans. It’s about whether we can name injustice when we see it, and whether a coalition that depends on marginalized voters is willing to center their voices, or just manage their rage.

Share

Share Stew on This

Leave a comment

In this short video, I talk through what’s happening in Iran right now, and the uncomfortable conversation many of us in the U.S. are avoiding. Hundreds may have been killed amid mass protests, internet blackouts, and a collapsing economy. This isn’t abstract geopolitics; it’s people bleeding in the streets. I wrestle with how to hold two truths at once: America’s long history of foreign policy blowback, and the intellectual dishonesty of pretending U.S. pressure never matters simply because we don’t like who’s in office. This isn’t about praising or excusing anyone. It’s about refusing to flatten reality, resisting moral laziness, and remembering that acknowledging outcomes is not the same as worshiping power, especially when real lives are at stake.

A paid subscription gets you:

• Full access to the archives

• The ability to comment and join the conversation

• Stew’d Over, and other bonus daily newsletters!

• Live Ask Me Anything sessions with paid readers

This independent work is sustained by readers who want more than headlines and hot takes.

Share

Leave a comment

Thoughtful discussion from and on political violence. I appreciate how seriously they wrestle with the moral implications of normalization.

I left thinking the analysis gets stronger when marginalized perspectives and shared history are centered. Political violence in the U.S. isn’t new, and that history changes what feels shocking, and why.

You can watch here:

The Bulwark

Tim & JVL: America Used to Know This Was Wrong

Tim Miller and JVL give their takes on the shocking Minneapolis ICE killing of Renee Good, the federal government’s handling of state-sanctioned violence, and what it reveals about America’s culture of death…

Listen now

3 months ago · 901 likes · 408 comments · Tim Miller and Jonathan V. Last

Share

Share Stew on This

Leave a comment

A paid subscription gets you:

• Full access to the archives

• The ability to comment and join the conversation

• Stew’d Over, and other bonus daily newsletters!

• Live Ask Me Anything sessions with paid readers

This independent work is sustained by readers who want more than headlines and hot takes.

This video is a clear-eyed, historically grounded meditation on how moments of political theater became templates for a broader centrist habit of disciplining dissent rather than confronting power. I move from the 1990s to the present to show how moral condemnation, when selectively deployed, has often served to reassure anxious majorities while leaving structural violence intact, and how that logic echoes in today’s debates over immigration, policing, and political “extremism.” The through-line is narrative: how America repeatedly chooses stability, tone policing, and symbolic order over an uncomfortable truth, even when the consequences grow more dangerous. It’s part history lesson, part warning flare, and part invitation to stop mistaking rhetorical balance for justice.

You can read the full article here:

A paid subscription gets you:

• Full access to the archives

• The ability to comment and join the conversation

• Stew’d Over, and other bonus daily newsletters!

• Live Ask Me Anything sessions with paid readers

This independent work is sustained by readers who want more than headlines and hot takes.

Leave a comment

Share

Share Stew on This

After reviewing the available footage and statements from the scene, I believe a serious argument can be made that this shooting constitutes criminally reckless, if not murderous, conduct.

The woman was given conflicting commands by multiple armed agents. Video shows the shooter positioned beside the vehicle, not in its path, as she attempted to pull away. That context matters. When the state deploys armed force into civilian spaces, confusion created by officers is not an excuse; it is a liability.

This is a tragic moment, but it is not an isolated one. What we are witnessing is the outcome of years of racialized political rhetoric metastasizing into policy: the normalization of militarized immigration enforcement as a public spectacle. That posture, armed agents conducting ideological theater in residential neighborhoods, would have deeply alarmed the framers, who were explicitly hostile to standing armies operating among civilians.

The 2024 election mattered because it marked the collapse of a center-right governing consensus and its replacement with a politics openly driven by racial fear. The strategy of chasing that shift instead of confronting it failed electorally, and the cost is now being paid in blood.

Donald Trump returned to power by embracing grievance politics rooted in racial and gender animus, and his administration is now pursuing a performative deportation agenda designed to project images of fear and dominance.

Today demonstrates the truth of such politics: while it targets communities of color rhetorically, it endangers everyone in practice.

Share

Share Stew on This

Leave a comment

My initial reaction to the ICE shooting is that we have an agency with a supersized budget bigger than national militaries around the world, while the administration tries to hire as many people as possible to reach an impossible deportation goal. There is bound to be a gap in expertise when it comes to properly carrying a firearm in public. Also, take the masks off; there needs to be public accountability.

A paid subscription gets you:

• Full access to the archives

• The ability to comment and join the conversation

• Stew’d Over, and other bonus daily newsletters!

• Live Ask Me Anything sessions with paid readers!

This independent work is sustained by readers who want more than headlines and hot takes.

Share

Share Stew on This

Leave a comment

In this video, I reflect on watching January 6 and the bone-deep insecurity it stirred as a Black person in a nation historically prone to turning mob violence on those who demand rights. That fear intensifies as the event is memory-holed and quietly reenshrined into power.

A paid subscription gets you:

• Full access to the archives

• The ability to comment and join the conversation

• Stew’d Over, and other bonus daily newsletters!

• Live Ask Me Anything sessions with paid readers — coming soon!

This independent work is sustained by readers who want more than headlines and hot takes. Offer ends tonight!

30% Off Stew On This for 1 Year

Share

Share Stew on This

Leave a comment