David Leonhardt: Enough with the hot takes

The Jussie Smollett case is the latest reminder: Don’t be too eager to make pronouncements. View in [Browser]( | Add nytdirect@nytimes.com to your address book. [The New York Times]( [The New York Times]( Tuesday, February 19, 2019 [NYTimes.com/David-Leonhardt »]( [Op-Ed Columnist] Op-Ed Columnist “There’s no shame and much honor in the job of coming to judgments about news events,” my colleague [Frank Bruni]( wrote last month. “But we don’t have to rush there.” A week after that column ran, the actor Jussie Smollett reported being the victim of a racist, homophobic hate crime in Chicago. The reaction was widespread — and did not follow Frank’s advice. Among the many public responses were denunciations of the attacks from Kirsten Gillibrand, Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris and other Democratic presidential candidates. Harris called the incident “an attempted modern day lynching.” Now, however, things look a lot less clear, and those instant reactions are looking problematic. Several news organizations, including CNN, have reported that Chicago police are [investigating]( whether the attack was a hoax. Harris, while on her first campaign trip to New Hampshire yesterday, seemed to stumble when asked about the situation. “‘Which tweet? What tweet?’ Ms. Harris said in response to the question about her use of the ‘modern day lynching’ phrase,” as [Katharine Seelye]( of The Times reported. “After a moment, she said, ‘I think the facts are still unfolding and I’m very concerned’ about the initial allegation by Mr. Smollett. She said ‘there should be an investigation’ and declined to comment further until it was complete.” Her final instinct there was the best one. Making sweeping pronouncements about unverified criminal allegations isn’t a good idea — not now, not three weeks ago. It’s especially problematic with matters involving race, gender and sexuality, which ignite particular political passions. Everyone — and definitely anyone running for president — should know by now that it’s O.K. to wait before weighing in on a hot topic. As the most recent Democratic president [famously said]( “I like to know what I’m talking about before I speak.” For more on the Smollett case, [Noah Rothman]( has an Op-Ed in the Times. The bigger picture I think this story is worth mentioning because Harris is the closest thing right now to a Democratic front-runner. The launch of her campaign has been impressive, with large, excited crowds. She also seems (along with Beto O’Rourke) to have the clearest potential to knit together different Democratic Party constituencies in a primary, as [Nate Silver]( has explained. Still, Harris remains a relatively inexperienced politician for a presidential candidate. Not so long ago, she was the California attorney general, with little national exposure or scrutiny. If she has shown one weakness in the campaign so far, it’s been her overeagerness to please the more left-leaning parts of the Democratic base. She seems to have done so with the Smollett tweet. (Of course, it’s still possible Smollett’s original story will be vindicated.) Harris also showed an instinct to go strongly left in a televised town hall when she came out in favor of [the elimination of private health insurance]( before walking back her remark shortly thereafter. Given this eagerness, I was encouraged by her answer in New Hampshire yesterday when she was asked about Bernie Sanders: “I will tell you I am not a democratic socialist,” [she said](. Every successful presidential candidate of the past generation, and probably longer, has shown a willingness to appeal to swing voters by disappointing parts of their base. Donald Trump did it by talking about trade and Medicare as if he were a blue-collar Democrat. Barack Obama did it by saying, “There is not a liberal America and a conservative America.” George W. Bush did it with the term “compassionate conservative.” The 2020 Democratic candidates will need to find ways to do so, as well. ADVERTISEMENT If you enjoy this newsletter, forward it to friends! They can [sign up for themselves here]( — and they don’t need to be a Times subscriber. The newsletter is published every weekday, with help from my colleague Ian Prasad Philbrick. David’s Morning NYT Read [Betsy DeVos vs. Student Veterans]( By CARRIE WOFFORD AND JAMES SCHMELING The Department of Education secretary has been uniquely brazen, and unpatriotic, in her deregulation campaign. It’s time that she answered for her actions. The Full Opinion Report [Why Can’t Trump Build Anything?]( By PAUL KRUGMAN Infrastructure won’t happen until the Democrats regain control. [Europe to Mike Pence: No, Thank You]( By ROGER COHEN The Trump administration manages to turn Germans into Gaullists, ready to flirt with Russia and contemplate strategic independence. [A Nation of Weavers]( By DAVID BROOKS The social renaissance is happening from the ground up. [Why Trump’s Emergency Mess Means Danger for the Courts]( By ROBERT CHESNEY The president’s move has already been challenged in court. Win or lose, he is almost certainly forcing an alarming judicial precedent. [A Happy Marriage Between God and Budget Deficits]( By MOHAMMED HANIF What keeps Saudi Arabia and Pakistan together. [Jussie Smollett and a Perfect Crime]( By NOAH ROTHMAN An object lesson in what happens when people in positions of political and cultural authority indulge their biases by suspending disbelief. [The Creeping Liberalism in American Islam]( By MUSTAFA AKYOL Far from spreading Shariah, as Islamophobes have suggested, America’s Muslim clerics are focusing on a more familiar trend: youngsters blending into American life. [What’s Really in Your Index Fund?]( By ROBERT J. JACKSON JR. AND STEVEN DAVIDOFF SOLOMON Investors love index funds, but they may not be as transparent as they seem. [Russia Has a Case. So Does America. So Save the Nuclear Treaty.]( By THEODORE POSTOL Contention over the I.N.F. missile control treaty is complicated by suspicions on both sides that the other has broken its rules. [Athens in Pieces: In Aristotle’s Garden]( By SIMON CRITCHLEY It is unclear whether the Lyceum charged fees but, given its vast wealth, it probably didn’t need to. Sounds a little like Harvard, doesn’t it? [Jazz on the Edge of Change]( By DAVID SAGER Before 1919, the music was considered more novelty than art. Then a military band changed everything. [Progressives and Day Care for All]( Readers offer support, with a dissent. ADVERTISEMENT FEEDBACK and HELP If you have thoughts about this newsletter, email me at [leonhardt@nytimes.com](mailto:leonhardt@nytimes.com?subject=David%20Leonhardt%20Newsletter%20Feedback). If you have questions about your Times account, delivery problems or other non-journalistic issues, you can visit our [Help Page]( or [contact The Times](. FOLLOW OPINION [Facebook] [FACEBOOK]( [Twitter] [@nytopinion]( [Pinterest] [Pinterest]( Get more [NYTimes.com newsletters »](  | Get unlimited access to NYTimes.com and our NYTimes apps. [Subscribe »]( ABOUT THIS EMAIL You received this message because you signed up for NYTimes.com's David Leonhardt newsletter. [Unsubscribe]( | [Manage Subscriptions]( | [Change Your Email]( | [Privacy Policy]( | [Contact]( | [Advertise]( Copyright 2019 The New York Times Company 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018