Cory Booker's Two Faces
From an unearthly transformational performance to old-fashioned transactional panhandling, all in a day. Is this how to build a movement?
Last week, Senator Cory Booker did something extraordinary. And then his campaign team ruined it.
You already know about his 25-hour record-breaking speech, I’m sure. By leaning into one of the Senate’s most anachronistic rules, which allows any Senator to hold the floor as long as they keep speaking and don’t sit down, he forced us to pay attention. Trump and Musk have been “flooding the zone” with shit and, in response, Booker used the very outlandishness of a seemingly never-ending speech to flood the zone with light.
(You can read the full transcript of Booker’s speech here—the first part is starts about one-third of the way down—and part two is here, thanks to the Congressional Record.)
The communications scholar Barbara Leckie, writing in The Conversation, a Canadian publication, argues that Booker’s speech broke through because until this point, Democrats had not done anything to change “the form of their political practice nor the form of their communications in any significant way.” Instead of another tweet or an awkward TikTok video, Booker did the exact opposite with a 25-hour heartfelt act of personal endurance. She also highlights how much Booker emphasized themes of “we the people” and “stronger together” and asked “did you speak up” (mentioned 52 times) and “what can I do” (36 times). Unlike Republican Senator Ted Cruz, who also once gave a long filibuster, Booker didn’t once resort to reading Dr. Seuss—with the help of his staff he drew from a massive 1000-plus page binder of clippings, letters, statements from constituents and relevant poetry.
Ruth Ben-Ghiat, one of our leading scholars of authoritarianism, also praises Booker’s speech for “what it teaches us about resistance strategy.” She writes, “Booker modeled in miniature the resilience shown by U.S. civil rights protesters on the streets,” applauding how he boldly made use of tools and spaces at his disposal in a way that up until now his colleagues had avoided.
His words have resonated widely: you can see it in the many posters that people made quoting from his speech at Hands Off protests this past Saturday: “This is a moral moment; it’s not left or right, it’s right or wrong,” and “I'm not going to allow my inability to do everything undermine my ability to do something,” and “The power of the people is greater than the people in power.” (Never mind that the last phrase, which Booker used several times, is actually something said originally back in 2011 by Wael Ghonim, one of the organizers of the January 25, 2011 takeover of Tahrir Square that led to the downfall of Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak. Maybe we can get Booker to acknowledge that at some point.)
The wonder of what he did in those 25-hours makes what I write below that much more confounding. Over the years, I’ve had the chance to meet Cory a few times, once in his office when he was Mayor of Newark, twice when he spoke at Personal Democracy Forum in 2010 and in 2017, and once or twice at the PopTech conference, where he (like a younger John Fetterman) was a star attraction. He is as he appears: gracious, broad-humored, spiritual, well-intentioned and like many politicians, endowed with a big ego and sense of larger purpose. His political instincts have led him in some dumb directions (like a dalliance with billionaires Mark Zuckerberg and Bill Ackman early on in an ill-fated top-down effort to fix Newark’s schools and a more recent he-ought-to-have-known better dalliance with billionaire Sam Bankman-Fried) but also enabled him to work productively (across the aisle even!) on hard issues like criminal justice reform. The kind of grand gesture he made last week suits him well, down to the need to purify his body in advance by fasting for days beforehand and not even drinking water for the day prior.
But His Emails
What doesn’t suit him is what happened in the hours after he finished his speech. I don’t know if he even is aware of how quickly his team moved to monetize the moment, but the shift from transformational performance to transactional panhandling was depressing. With his campaign’s clear permission, dozens of politicians and political action committees sent out fundraising emails, purporting to be from him, using almost identical text and asking for a contribution that would be split 50-50 between his campaign account and each partner. Some used the subject line “I’m tired and a little hoarse, but I cannot stay silent.” Others went with “I spoke for over 25 hours straight on the Senate floor.” Below is a screenshot of more than 30 such emails that someone who works in the digital organizing industry forwarded to me (I’ve blocked out his name). In the comments, please chime in if you got one or more as well.
The senders included: The Democratic National Committee, the Democratic Lieutenant Governors Association, Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, 314 Action Fund, Democrats Win Seats PAC, Giffords PAC, Congressional Black Caucus PAC, Forward Majority Action, Progressive Majority PAC, Blue Wave America, Congressional Progressive Caucus PAC, Voter Protection Project, End Citizens United, Their Future PAC, Fight for Progress PAC, Blue Amp Action PAC, Heartland Patriots (the superPAC of failed 2024 Missouri Senate candidate Lucas Kunce), Will of the People PAC (the superPAC of failed 2024 Maryland Senate candidate Will Jawando), Governor Kathy Hochul (D-NY), Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA), Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA), Sen. Michael Bennet (D-CO), Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ), Rep. Josh Harder (D-CA), Rep. Laura Gillen (D-CA), Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-CA), Rep. Brittany Pettersen (D-CO), Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-CA), Rep. Nikema Williams (D-GA), Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-CA), and Rep. Pat Ryan (D-NY).
The language of each email varied slightly but, in every case, ended with, “If you’re willing and able, support our movement for justice, opportunity, and freedom by splitting a donation between me and _____.”
In exactly zero of these emails, Booker and his partners called on people to go demonstrate at one of the Hands Off rallies that were happening a few days later and which were, in actual fact, the most concrete form of movement-building they could have pushed attention to. I’ve asked around and so far found only two examples of congressional Democrats who did send such emails out to their lists before April 5: Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) and Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI). Why do so few Democrats do this?
So much for building a “movement for justice, opportunity and freedom.” Actually, I should rephrase that, because all the groups and pols who took Booker’s campaign team up on their offer of a split fundraising email definitely are part of a movement for opportunity. Many of the people exploiting their lists don’t even have an election any time soon: Schumer and Bennet aren’t up again until 2028; Schiff, Whitehouse, and Kaine not until 2030. Nikema Williams won her House seat in 2024 with 86% of the vote.
Now, you might argue that actually what was important here is that a lot of these groups and incumbents tapped their lists to help Booker, who does face reelection in 2026. As of the end of last year, he had $11.2 million in cash on hand. But he and his partners didn’t need to take the smarmy path to padding his bank account; I’m sure that without sending even one of those thousands or millions of emails, money would have flowed his way out of appreciation for what he did. But then a lot of other PACs and fundraising consultants wouldn’t have gotten a share, would they?
Let’s not forget: It costs money to build an actual Defiance, and if you’re going to make a big show in the well of the Senate, the least you could do is steer resources to the frontlines rather than an election more than a year away. I don’t know what it cost Indivisible and its main partner groups to put on the big DC rally Saturday or the main satellite rallies in cities like Boston, Philadelphia, Chicago and Los Angeles, but I’m sure it was at least hundreds of thousands of dollars. Every dollar that these PACs and politicians raised could be going to actual organizing that we desperately need to do now. And there is no way that local groups are anywhere close to the resources they need.
A small example: I was on a Zoom call yesterday with organizers from the New York Immigrant Coalition, a network of 200 groups that is fighting an uphill battle in this purportedly blue state to get Albany to pass bills like the NY For All Act, which would strengthen local protections for immigrants. The coalition is targeting many Democratic legislators who have yet to support the bill, but when I asked if our local Indivisible group could get access to VAN or a similar voter targeting tool so we could more efficiently reach out to people on our mailing list who are constituents of key office-holders, I was told that the coalition didn’t have the money for such a tool and was relying on old fashioned hand-annotated spreadsheets.
Judging from this revealing exchange on Bluesky, a typical PAC (in this case Blue Amp Action) raised a little more than $4000 for Booker from mining its list for him while taking in $3600 for itself. (Those amounts alone would pay for a month or two of VAN, if I’m not mistaken.) Last cycle, Blue Amp says it raised $1.8 million overall, of which $1.1 million went appears to have gone to Blue Amp Action LLC, a private entity that does not have to disclose who it employs or how it pays its staff or owners. The group says that a larger percentage of all the money it raises goes to candidates but good luck trying to get to the bottom of the paper trail.
So while Booker’s act of endurance and vision might have been transformative, the follow through was the same old transactional politics. “I can’t allow this body to continue without doing something different,” Booker declared in the first minutes of his speech. For 25 hours he lived up to that goal. And then he didn’t.
What should he do? Write a big check to the Movement Voter Project, which does fund frontline work. For starters.
In a Similar Vein
—Vu Le writes in his NonProfitAF blog that “with everything being on fire right now with nonprofits being attacked by Trump, Republicans, and fascist tech bros, I am hearing a lot of frustration from nonprofits on the frontlines regarding the inactions of [the big national organizations representing the nonprofit field]. With a few exceptions—notably the National Council of Nonprofits (NCN), who has been decisive and effective, working with Democracy Forward to immediately sue to stop the executive order that would have frozen federal funds for thousands of organizations, and filing several more lawsuits against the administration since then—most people in our sector have no idea what our handful of national organizations are doing to fight against this regime and advance our sector.” He goes further, urging foundations to vastly up their giving from the minimum requirement of donating 5% of their endowment a year, writing, “We need 15% or 25%, 50% or whatever is needed to stop the US from turning into a dictatorship.”
—Democrats donors keep lighting their money on fire hoping that longshot candidates can somehow unseat Republican incumbents in super-safe red districts, and on top of that, some 20-something Democratic political consultants in Florida figured out how to make a ton of money in the process, as Shane Goldmacher reports for The New York Times.
—Did you know that some very prominent Democratic lawyers, including recent second gentleman Doug Emhoff, are partners at major law firms that have bent the knee to the White House? Lauren Egan has the details in The Bulwark.
—Democratic Senators are now starting to place holds on more of Trump’s nominees, and in some cases saying they will hold up hundreds of them. This is great, because even if the GOP has the votes to confirm each one, they have to use up valuable time along the way. What changed? Could it be millions of people in the streets?
—Speaking of which, I’m hearing that people are worrying and spreading rumors about the Orange Pinhead declaring martial law on April 20. Anything is possible but I’m with my friend L.A. Kauffman here, who in their notes on the April 5 Hands Off mobilization writes that: “A massive decentralized movement like this -- everywhere all at once, with everybody pitching in -- is extremely difficult for any regime, even the most autocratic, to derail. There are too many leaders, coordinating in too many different ways, for a movement like this to be easily neutralized.” Don’t let your fears get the best of you!
—Instead of using a new-fangled and potentially insecure app to track ICE, immigrant communities and their allies are doing the more obvious thing, using social media and private chat groups to try to keep safe, Tatum Hunter reports for The Washington Post (gift link).
This Will Not End Well
—Wired Magazine, which continues to do some of the best coverage of DOGE’s dodginess, reports that the so-called agency is planning to stage a hackathon in DC next week aimed at creating a single “mega API” for accessing IRS data. This builds on an earlier report, also by Makena Kelly, titled “DOGE Plans to Rebuild SSA Code Base in Months, Risking Benefits and System Collapse.”
—Related: “We are severely under-prepared for the way AI will be deployed—in government as well as the private sector—to replace workers,” Catherine Bracy writes on LinkedIn.
—Corrective: Justin Hendrix of TechPolicy.Press just moderated a great conversation about DOGE and the United States of AI with Eryk Salvaggio, Rebecca Williams, Emily Tavoulareas and Matthew Kirschenbaum. Listen or read here.
I both agree with you, and believe we are asking too much from the individuals who have already stepped up — and building a habit of complaining about them instead of organizing ourselves.
Of course the Democratic Party is institutional and bureaucratic. Of course it tries to monetize: we can volunteer, they can't. When I was younger, not-corrupt politicians trying their best would have been seen as a miracle.
We need our own lists. We need to have organizations that could have asked Cory Booker for what they needed, and are able to deliver votes, not complained afterwards.
What can each of us be doing in our neighborhoods? How do we stop asking the Democratic politicians who are already in the crossfire to build the movement we should build?
Where is my action-kit that I can take to my communities (I dance, I go to vegetarian events, to the protest) and be really prepared to mobilize the people in those communities who want to mobilize and are waiting for the politicians to lead?
I went to my protest: no one got my name. No one gave me a list of two dozen ways I could help after the protest. No one trained me in communications so I can talk to conservatives back home. No one connected me to my neighbors.
I think Booker did his job and deserves celebration. What can I do besides complain? Anyone out there feel the same way I do and want to put somewhat serious time together on something more creative than giving Movement Voter Project another $50 (which yes is great) — what would neighborhood organizing at protests look like, that gave everybody involved a clear path to find and take on their piece of the puzzle so the politicians aren't the only movement leaders?
I got a text asking for money from Cory Booker the next day. I hit reply -- useless, I know -- and wrote: "Ask me for anything besides money! To go to a protest, join a zoom meeting, write my representatives, anything!