Kirsten Gillibrand as Presidential candidate

Kirsten Gillibrand's national political visibility got an obvious boost from her taking the initiative to pressure Al Franken to resign over vague allegations of sexual misconduct on the level of rudeness, most of them from anonymous sources, as of this writing and at the time of Franken's resignation speech in the Senate.

In announcing her demand that Franken resign in a Facebook post of 12/06/2017, she included this remarkable statement:

While it’s true that his behavior is not the same as the criminal conduct alleged against Roy Moore, or Harvey Weinstein, or President Trump, it is still unquestionably wrong, and should not be tolerated by those of us who are privileged to work in public service.

As the mother of two young boys, we owe it to our sons and daughters to not equivocate, but to offer clarity. We should not have to be explaining the gradations between sexual assault, harassment and unwelcome groping. And what message do we send to our sons and daughters when we accept gradations of crossing the line? None of it is ok and none of it should be tolerated. [my emphasis]

It's quite a double message to acknowledge that the vague and publicly unproven claims against Franken are not "criminal conduct" but then immediately after to insist that in public life and in private standards ("our sons and daughters") we should not "accept gradations of crossing the line" among "sexual assault, harassment and unwelcome groping."

That a reckless and foolish standard. For law, for private life, for business, for public life. Telling a dirty joke in the office may deserve a reminder from the boss not to be vulgar. But to be a good reason to fire someone, much less imprison them, it would need to be an exceptionally dirty joke.

And, yes, to be clear, I'm being sarcastic on the last point, although there might be circumstances - doing so in front of a customer, or a junior executive inserting one into a presentation to the company board of directors, in which a single instance might be justifiable. But by the Gillibrand Standard, we should accept no "gradations" of seriousness of an offence among "sexual assault, harassment and unwelcome groping." We should assume that an attempted kiss, one of the sins of which Franken is accused, also fits in that category of the Gillibrand standard, since it was the Franken case that was the occasion of her statement.

As a practical matter, the Republicans will look at the Democratic Senate revolt against Franken as a sign of weakness, including Franken's decision to resign while denying the accuracy of the charges. Republicans are very adapt at using these kinds of claims against Democratic opponents, or "weaponizing" them as the pundits now say.

Also as a practical matter, Gillibrand's initiative removes Franken as a potential competitor for the Presidential nomination in 2020. Other potential/likely Democratic Presidential candidates that joined in the call for Franken's resignation before he publicly declared his intention to do so were Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.

But Gillibrand was the one whose leadership on the matter earned her a couple of valuable puff pieces in the days since. The New York Times reported the same day as her Facebook post: Shane Goldmacher, On Sexual Misconduct, Gillibrand Keeps Herself at the Fore New York Times 12/06/2017. The flattering graphic below accompanied Politico's story on her:

Her earlier use of the Roy Moore scandal to score points with Democrats suspicious of Clinton paved the way for her Franken publicity bonanza: Jennifer Steinhauer, Bill Clinton Should Have Resigned Over Lewinsky Affair, Kirsten Gillibrand Says New York Times 11/16/2017. Politics is politics, and her positions on that issue and Franken have been politically beneficial to her in the short term. When even a Gillibrand Presidential candidacy can survive the incredibly low barrier set by the Gillibrand Standard remains to be seen. If there's a photo of her from some time in her life playfully pinching somebody on the butt, that could be embarrassing.

Now Trump has decided to make her the same kind of target he made Hillary Clinton:

Gillibrand responded:

You cannot silence me or the millions of women who have gotten off the sidelines to speak out about the unfitness and shame you have brought to the Oval Office. https://t.co/UbQZqubXZv

— Kirsten Gillibrand (@SenGillibrand) December 12, 2017

Now she is getting even more attention as a defender of women, with headlines like this from Yahoo News today:

The Morning Zoo crowd came down hard on Trump, Mika On President Donald Trump: That Tweet Said So Much About His Character Morning Joe/MSNBC 12/12/2017:

This MSNBC segment also gives some possible other angles on this and the kind of comma-dancing that may go on around it, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand: President Donald Trump's Attack A 'Sexist Smear' 12/12/2017:

I won't try to predict how this will play out. I will say that Trump's base doesn't care about sexual harassment and assault charges against him. And the Franken case gives good reason to worry that Democrats will not be able to outplay the Republicans on the politics of this. To the extent that Democratic responses to this and future Trump outbursts on the subject comes off to Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters as, "You can't criticize me because I'm a girl," that will not be good for the Democrats.

Trump operates as a professional wrestler. He portrays a theatrical image of toughness with blowhard nonsense like this. But it has so far worked remarkably well for him politically. And Trump's professional wrestling instinct may be telling him Kirsten Gillibrand would be a useful foil for him.

The Democrats need to use their advantage on the sexual harassment issue without forgetting that Republicans can do the same. And the radical difference between how the parties' respective voting bases regarding the issue. And that makes it more complicated for the Democrats. Because the Democratic base has a lot of people, male and female, who are more inclined toward "believe the evidence" than simply "believe women." Especially ones who remember the Clinton pseudoscandals of the 1990s. And a lot of the Democratic base will not feel the least bit comfortable with the Gillibrand Standard of treating "sexual assault, harassment and unwelcome groping" as a set of equivalent sins.

And even in the midst of justifiable outrage about Trump's obviously sexist and sleazy tweet above, it can also be read and understood by the Republican base as a swipe at political corruption. It's a joke to think of Trump as an opponent of corruption. But the effect of political symbolism is not purely a matter of logical reflection. John Marshall has an insightful take on the corruption angle of the tweet and how Trump more generally works the issue, The Only Honor Is Corruption TPM 12/12/2017.

And that was the approach that White House publicity hack Sarah Huckabee Sanders took in her daily briefing today, beginning just after 21:30 (PBS Newshour 12/12/2017). She returns to it later in the press conference and works it hard:

Also, am I the only one to think that Trump's reference to Sen. Schumer in that tweet was a bit of anti-Semitism? Sarah Huckabee Sanders referred to Gillibrand as a "puppet" of Schumers, "puppet-master" being a long-time feature of anti-Semitic propaganda.