选民要求在中间选举中进行彻底改革。华盛顿已经假装这事儿从未发生。
Voters demanded sweeping change in the midterms. Washington is already pretending it never happened.
记得上周的选举吗？就在几天前的那场？那场被描述为美国政治巨地震的选举？
Remember last week’s election? The one just a few days ago? The one representing a massive earthquake in American politics?
总统不这么认为。国会山上的共和党也不这么认为。许多民主党人似乎也不这么认为。还有大量评论员也不这么认为。
Well, the president doesn’t. The GOP on Capitol Hill doesn’t. And many Democrats don’t seem to. And a whole bunch of pundits don’t.
尽管结果标志着自1970年代中期以来众议院选举中规模最大的政治转变，无数以“变革承诺”、谴责腐败领导人、腐败政治体制以及一场为富人谋取日益更多财富、而大多数社会民众则只分得更小一块蛋糕的经济为特征的候选人获胜，但我们仍在目睹史无前例且危险的否认主义。
Despite results that marked the biggest electoral shift in House races since the mid-1970s, with the victories of countless candidates whose message was a promise of change, a condemnation of corrupt leaders, a corrupt political system, and a rigged economy that offers ever greater riches for the rich and a smaller and smaller piece of the pie to most of society… despite all that, we are seeing denialism on an epic and dangerous scale.
特朗普提拔了他最糟糕的助手。包括国土安全部长马克韦恩·穆林、国防部长皮特·黑格斯和总检察长特德·布兰克在内的他的团队都承诺要更加努力。众议院共和党人选举了那个因大学摔跤丑闻而声名狼藉的呆板之辈吉姆·乔丹担任党魁——顺便一提，他们还阻止了对黑格斯的弹劾动议，尽管有充分证据表明他犯下了多项重大罪行和轻罪。而且，有11名民主党人缺席了投票——有些人似乎卡在了交通中。
Trump has elevated the worst of his aides. His team, including DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, and Attorney General Todd Blanche, have all promised to double down. Republicans in the House of Representatives have elected the troglodyte, college wrestling scandal-tarnished dimwit Jim Jordan to be their leader—and, for good measure, blocked an impeachment effort against Hegseth despite the strong case that he has committed manifold high crimes and misdemeanors. Oh, and 11 Democrats missed the vote—some of them apparently stuck in traffic.
大金主企业民主党人正竭力维持参议院和众议院的党团领导层。他们说想要打击腐败，但并未放弃从诸如以色列公共事务委员会（AIPAC）或科技行业特殊利益集团、阴暗的加密货币世界以及其他寡头宇宙的角落收取的特殊利益集团资金。
Big money corporate Dems are flexing their muscle to retain caucus leadership in the Senate and the House. They say they want to fight corruption, but don’t renounce the cash they take from special interest groups like AIPAC or from special interests in the tech sector, the shadowy world of crypto, or other corners of the plutocrativerse.
在媒体行业已成废墟的从业者，这些“说话的头”可靠地阅读那些服务于拥有职业权限的人的讲话要点。一位又一位的共和党人和温和派中道派拒绝承认，尽管民主党在众议院和参议院取得大胜，并在管辖美国人口75%的州长职位、州立法机构、法院以及关键公投中获胜的情况下，仍未获得“授权”。点击“”即表示您同意我们的使用条款和隐私政策。如果这不是授权，那又是什么？
Talking heads making a living in the smoldering ruins of what was once mainstream media are dependably reading talking points that serve those to whom access means their jobs. One by one, Republicans and GOP-lite centrists reject the idea that Democrats—despite massive wins in the House and Senate, winning control of governorships overseeing 75 percent of the U.S. population, victories in statehouses, victories in courts, victories in key referenda—won a “mandate.”By clicking “” you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. If that was not a mandate, what is?
他们说这仅仅是对特朗普的否定，而非对民主党政策的拥抱。真的？指出腐败并表示要消除、防范并对其负责，这不是政策吗？承诺从政治中清除大笔金钱，这不是政策吗？呼吁外交政策不因非法战争、额外司法处决、抛弃盟友以及支持战争罪犯而被玷污，这是否表明方向有明确改变？当大多数选民调查显示他们支持全民健康覆盖以及要求亿万富翁缴纳应有税款时，这又是什么？这正是获得选民大量支持的明确议程。
They say it was just a rejection of Trump, not an embrace of Democratic policies. Really? Calling out corruption and saying you are going to undo it, protect against it, and hold people accountable for it is not a policy? Promising to get big money out of politics is not a policy? Calling for foreign policy that is not debased by illegal wars, extra-judicial killings, rejecting our allies, and supporting war criminals does not suggest a clear change in direction? What about the fact that a significant majority of voters, when polled, seek health coverage for everyone and fairer taxes that require billionaires to pay their fair share? That is a clear agenda that received massive support from voters.
此外，党建派和温和派似乎想要淡化一个事实：他们赢得选举的公式——与右翼极端分子妥协、向斯蒂芬·米勒等人争取两党合作，而后者给人一种想要监禁和驱逐任何批评特朗普或非白人的人的感觉——的事实。我们一直被告知，为了在摇摆州获胜，民主党必须收起尾巴，假装自己是Turning Point选民，并且会更愿意让更多人获得医疗补助。我们被告知，与右派保持对抗或指责他们支持美国历史上最腐败的总统和最道德破产的政策是最好的。
Further, establishment Democrats and moderates seem to want to minimize the fact that their formula for winning—compromising with right-wing extremists, seeking bipartisanship from guys like Stephen Miller, who gives off the vibe that he wants to jail and deport anyone critical of Trump or non-white—was rejected. We were always told by them that, to win in purple states, Dems had to tuck their tails between their legs and pretend they were Turning Point voters who also would like a few more people to get Medicaid coverage. We were told that it is best not to be confrontational with the right, or to call them out for their support of the most corrupt president and the most morally bankrupt policies in American history.
但事实并非如此。真正的进步派民主党人在从缅因州到密歇根州、南卡罗来纳州、俄亥俄州、乔治亚州、德克萨斯州、密西西比州以及整个中西部和大平原州，直至西海岸的紫色和红色州份取得了重大胜利。其他人如当选参议员詹姆斯·塔拉里科（James Talarico）和亚当·汉密尔顿（Adam Hamilton），在拒绝共和党人宣传的漫画式民主党文化刻板印象的同时，呼吁强力拒绝特朗普、腐败，恢复关键的社会服务，修复经济中破损的环节，结束非法战争并抵制国际上的怪物。
But that’s not what happened. Progressive Democrats—real progressives—won big victories in purple and red states from Maine to Michigan to South Carolina to Ohio to Georgia to Texas to Mississippi and on throughout the Midwest and Plains states and onto the West Coast. Others like Senators-elect James Talarico and Adam Hamilton, while rejecting the cartoonish cultural caricatures of Democrats promoted by Republicans, called for a strong rejection of Trump, corruption, the restoration of vital social services, fixing what is broken in the economy and ending illegal wars and the embrace of monsters internationally. (In other words, an agenda that, if taken big point by big point, would be defined as progressive by the standards of the past decade.)
（换句话说，这一议程如果逐点拆解，按照过去十年的标准将被定义为进步派。）正如密歇根州民主党参议员埃莉萨·斯洛特金（Elissa Slotkin）所言，选民在乎的不是旧有类别是否适用，而是候选人是否支持“战斗或逃跑”。换言之，她是一位所谓的温和派，却认识到即便在像密歇根这样的大紫州，民众也已厌倦现状，要求变革，要求一个把他们需求放在首位的新政治议程。
As Senator Elissa Slotkin, a Democrat from Michigan, put it, what mattered to voters was not whether old categories applied but rather whether candidates supported “fight or flight.”In other words, she’s a so-called moderate who recognized that, even in a purple state like Michigan, people were fed up and demanded change, a new political agenda that would put their needs first.
这也是她与伯尼·桑德斯（Bernie Sanders）一起拒绝查克·舒默（Chuck Schumer）加冕为参议院多数党领袖的原因，并呼吁候选人提出真正硬核的计划，以显示他们对变革的承诺。
That is why she joined Bernie Sanders in rejecting the idea of the coronation of Chuck Schumer as Senate Majority Leader, and called for candidates to present a real hard plan that would reveal just how they were committed to change.
选举前，人们说这将是一场变革选举。选举后，显而易见这是一场变革选举。这当然对那些从现状中获利的人构成威胁。正如亨利·基辛格曾说，惯性是华盛顿最强大的力量，这对惯性本身也是威胁。它也威胁到既得利益的特朗普支持者和受既得权力资助的民主党人，这些人希望保持舒适的既得地位。
Before the election, people said it would be a change election. In the wake of the election, it became clear that it was a CHANGE!!! election. This is, of course, a threat to those who profit from the status quo. It is a threat to the inertia that is, as Henry Kissinger once said, the most powerful force in Washington. It is a threat to both Trumpists and Dems sponsored by entrenched powers that want to stay comfortably entrenched.
但这正是事实。这是人们所要求的。这是新一代选民以及那些被这位总统、这届政府、其所属政党以及当前美国体制所伤害的人所要求的。他们将继续要求这些，尽管那些处于权力位置的人尖叫、踢腿、撒谎，对正在发生的事情进行歪曲。
But it is what happened. It is what the people want. It is what a new generation of voters and those who have been abused by this president, this administration, their party, and the current system in the U.S. demand. And it is what they will continue to demand even as those in positions of power scream and kick and lie about what is happening.
现在轮到政治领袖决定他们是否愿意成为这场变革的推动者，还是成为历史的受害者，因看不清那显而易见、无可辩驳且，我愿补充一句，光辉的事实而被抛弃。
It is now up to political leaders to determine whether they are willing to become agents of this change or whether they wish to become victims of history, cast aside because they could not see what was screamingly, unmistakably and, I might add, gloriously obvious.