We often recognize political turning points in hindsight, but erosion doesn’t happen overnight. It happens in small, quiet steps and over time the foundational truths of American democracy are worn down until the unimaginable becomes policy and the fringe becomes mainstream.
The rollback of Roe v. Wade, the push to end birthright citizenship, and the emerging push for unregulated artificial intelligence may initially seem like disconnected developments. Viewed together, however, they reflect a longstanding and deeply strategic effort to reshape public understanding, redefine constitutional norms and consolidate power by steadily redrawing the boundaries of what Americans accept as truth.
This strategy is not new. It became particularly visible in the 1960s, when political leaders responding to the civil rights movement adopted what came to be known as the Southern Strategy. Rhetoric around “law and order” and “states’ rights” was used to reframe racial opposition in a way that felt palatable to broader audiences. The power of this approach wasn’t just in what it opposed, but in how it gradually reshaped the narrative around who the government was for and what justice meant.
When Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973, Americans across the spectrum of beliefs came to accept legal abortion as a settled right. But over following decades, a movement to reverse Roe emerged with deep investment and deeper pockets. It was a sustained, institutional campaign involving legal foundations, media platforms, churches and political operatives. By the time Roe was overturned in 2022, the groundwork was quietly and methodically laid for years under the guise of increasing power to the states.
Today, we’re seeing birthright citizenship face similar pressure. Once widely accepted as a core principle of the 14th Amendment, it’s now being questioned at the highest levels. Proposals to end it would have seemed unfathomable not long ago, but now circulate freely in mainstream discourse. The goal is not necessarily to win the legal argument right away, but rather to shift the conversation, reframe the debate and chip away at what people once believed was unshakable.
Alongside these cultural and constitutional shifts, a new destabilizing force is emerging: AI deregulation. As artificial intelligence advances, the lack of reasonable federal guardrails creates fertile ground for misinformation, manipulation and rapid erosion of what’s left of a shared understanding of reality. When truth becomes impossible to verify and reality itself can be manufactured, those with influence and resources are best positioned to shape public perception.
If there’s a common thread across all of these issues, it’s that erosion happens slowly. And, it’s not always easy to see until something big gives way.
The challenge for those who want to protect democratic norms — regardless of party — is recognizing the need to act earlier, communicate more effectively and think beyond the next election cycle. In many cases, political leaders and movements committed to rights and pluralism have placed their faith in precedent, public opinion or institutional resilience. And while those forces matter, they clearly are not enough on their own.
Winning hearts and minds in today’s climate requires more than policy. It requires emotional resonance, cultural pervasiveness and consistent investment in “in-the-trenches” storytelling. The other side of the aisle has often been more consistent in these efforts not because of better ideas, but because of a more disciplined focus on building stacked influence over time across courts, media, education and regional politics.
Right now, investing in cultural infrastructure matters the most. Nurturing platforms, voices and institutions that can articulate shared democratic values clearly and repeatedly. Increasingly generationally divergent beliefs make it trickier, but there must be singular themes that any person can recall and take pride in. Birthright citizenship isn’t a legal doctrine, it’s the embodiment of America’s core idea that anyone born on our soil belongs here. Roe v. Wade isn’t about abortion, it’s about personal freedom and dignity. AI regulation isn’t about innovation versus bureaucracy, it’s about whether technology strengthens or undermines public trust.
This moment is about keeping the conversation focused on a core messaging strategy up and down the ticket and not veering away to the thousand other potential priorities. As an example, spend a few days in Texas and you’ll have seen dozens of billboards and commercials on repeat with the same slogans and celebrating shared mindset — a unified identity. If we want to protect hard-fought precedent, we must make the stakes of change feel broadly personal and identity changing for all, even in transactional disagreement. It must be pervasive, and not assumed.
This moment requires recognizing the pattern, understanding the strategy and executing something more effective in response. Yes policy, but also yes for oversimplified clarity, singular strategy, pervasive and unified messaging, and long game that does not change the next cycle. Is not defending our democracy and republic the very preservation of our Constitution?
Annie Tsai is chief operating officer at Interact (tryinteract.com), early stage investor and advisor with The House Fund (thehouse.fund), and a member of the San Mateo County Housing and Community Development Committee. Find Annie on X @meannie.
Annie Tsai is chief operating officer at Interact (tryinteract.com), early stage investor and advisor with The House Fund (thehouse.fund), and a member of the San Mateo County Housing and Community Development Committee. Find Annie on Twitter @meannie.
(14) comments
Thank you for this very thoughtful and on point opinion piece.
Thanks for your column today, Ms. Tsai. I’m sure that folks (at least in generations past) who have taken high school or college government classes know that decisions, such as those affecting Roe v. Wade or birthright citizenship can be changed, depending upon how the Supreme Court interprets the intent of the US Constitution. For instance, Roe v. Wade was bound to be overturned because the Constitution makes no mention of abortion and as such, should be relegated to States. As for birthright citizenship, there are many valid arguments that the 14th Amendment has been corrupted to include anyone born in the US. As for AI “deregulation” is there truly a way to regulate AI? The genie is out of the bottle. I’d say that as always, we should rely on something that is tried and true throughout our lifetimes…maybe not so much now, but it’s called common sense. Is there a test for common sense? If not, maybe AI can develop one.
And speaking of changes, I’m amazed that Democrats continue to push allowing biological men to compete against biological women. Obviously, common sense on the Democrat side of the aisle appears to be lacking since their stance doesn’t appear to be winning hearts or minds. Another reason Trump won – his common sense approach in protecting women and women’s sports. The bigger question is whether we should look forward to Democrats attempting to rescind the right of women to vote.
Biological men and women compete all the time in monopoly, scrabble, The Game of Life, Risk, Jumanji, Jeopardi, Wheel of Fortune, Family Feud, Match Game, Jenga, Mikado, Chess, Backgammon, domino. And they have been competing for decades and centuries before your guys found issue with that and were claiming to solve a problem that didn't really exist.
So, when Steph Curry retires, he can identify as a WNBA player and join Caitlin Clark and Angel Reese in the paint, correct?
That is exactly the point I'm making here. If King James finally retires and comes back as Queen Jamie to play another 10 years and finally have a 100 point Wilt Chamberlain type game WE ALL will shout "That is unfair!".
According to data from NCAA, IOC, FIFA, UEFA, NBA, MLS, NFL, MLB, NHL, or their female counterpart leagues where an athlete had a gender transition to win unfair medals.
If you are aware of any of those please name the nincompoop who goes through a gender transformation, when getting Performance Enhancing Drugs is so much cheaper, less obvious, and even way more effective.
Let's discuss that poor sucker who doesn't understand PEDs and how they work.
PS.: Then again Sports is really just about entertainment. So if King James decides to come back as Queen Jamie I bet we would all be watching that.
Gerd
The point is... the problem does exist. I'm sure you're familiar with the situation in Maine. Two years ago, a biological male competing against other boys placed 5th in pole vaulting competition. This year, that same biological male competing against girls placed 1st. Who created this problem? It wasn't the folks who want to see girls' sports protected. When Laurel Libby, a Republican state representative in Maine called for fairness in girls' sports on social media, the Democratic Party controlled state legislature censured Libby and blocked her from voting on the floor. The AP reported today that the US Supreme Court ordered Maine to restore Libby's voting privileges. The problem is real.
So, instead of a male athlete competing against females, you're suggesting that same male athlete stay in his lane and use PEDs? Cheating is cheating.
BTW... I don't watch King James now and I can assure you I wouldn't watch Queen Jamie either.
Again we agree. Cheating is cheating and we all see it when it really happens.
According to anonymous surveys:
- 10-20% of student athletes take PEDs. That is unfair, that is real cheating. So where is the real outrage and the real enforcement?
- 30-50% of student athletes have been victims of harassment by coaches, administrators, boosters. That is highly unfair to those girls. So where is the outrage? where is the real enforcement?
- Heck when the guy sitting in the white house right now bragged about how he walked into dressing rooms of biological females and what he did their, the GOP called it "typical locker room talk". I'm sure you and TBot were outraged by this unfair power move ...
On top of that XX% of games, competitions and tournaments are now in danger of being thrown because of sports betting and gambling. That is unfair to those who want to win. Where is the outrage, where is the enforcement?
The Republican Governor who is now running the NCAA says 10 out 500,000 student athletes are transgender and he doesn't know of any problems. Neither does the IOC, FIFA, UEFA, NBA, or any of the others.
But with all the other problems looming, the GOP is focusing on and bullying a few teens. And bullying some teens is neither 'Grand Old ...' nor is it making anything great again. It's purely a political sideshow ... and yes, both parties are loving it.
eGerd – TBot here. I’ll take your point and raise you everyone who is retired or couldn’t make it to the NBA stage. Eventually, we can redefine the “W” to not represent Women, but Wannabe. BTW, are you sure anybody needs to go through a physical gender transition? I believe a mental claim of a gender transition is enough.
TBot, I believe each professional - and often privately run - league has their own set of rules. Not sure if there is anyone of those that would allow 'claim of daily mood' enough to let King James participate in the WNBA. And in term of the government we are all created equal anyways so we could argue that student athletics in public schools is discriminatory and should be shut down completely and replaced with simple PE, yoga, stretching, ...
That would allow public schools to focus on education rather than betting, gambling, boosters, PEDs, harassment, government waste, administrator overgrowth,... and all the other negatives associated with student athletics these days.
Ray having been through it I can tell you this poster is not worth debating on this issue. Name a logical fallacy: red herring, straw man etc. and he/she will engage in it. Pretty soon it will come back to bike lanes.
Anything else I would say would probably violate DJ's commenting policies so I will leave it at that. I recommend ignoring.
Hey, Michelle
The left... the folks who claim to follow the science... sure have missed it on this one. Gerd is Exhibit No. 1
I have coached high school boys and high school girls. Anyone with that kind of experience knows biological males should not compete against girls.
Have a great week!
Thank you so much for this segue MichKost. You make a good point that we must point out how totally unfair it is that the political Left and especially San Mateo Democrats do not care about the plight of the biological females who want to bicycle more but are afraid of angry, testosterone filled males in oversized cars. [Source: Mineta Transportation Institute, San Jose]
We should all be glad that the GOP and MAGA are so much more in tune with the biological females these days.
eGerd – TBot here. I don’t recall seeing athletic competitions based on board games on ESPN or other sports networks. I know and you know that if these games were turned into athletic competitions, we know who would win. If you’ve got a Y (as in chromosome), you’re a guy. Apparently, you guys found issue with that and are claiming if you’re a Y, you can claim to be a girl. Meanwhile, us guys and girls have lowered the cost of eggs, secured the border, kept inflation nearly nonexistent and apparently, caused no effect due to tariffs. For everyone. You’re welcome. BTW, how about Menlo Park residents attempting to add a ballot measure to save parking garages from being demolished? And I hear the central bike lane on Valencia in SF is being removed.
The Menlo Park ballot is about replacing and outdoor parking (lot) with indoor parking (garages) and housing - it sounds like there would be more housing and parking in the end than now. But details aren't really clear.
I'm usually going to MP by bicycle - I don't have to care.
SF isn't re-moving bike lanes, they are just moving them where they think they belong
SF tested something on Valencia to appease businesses and parkers by moving the bike lanes to the center. Now the businesses don't like that anymore, because now the cyclists are just riding by and don't come into stores and restaurants anymore.
I was fine with the center bike lanes, but it was apparently too new and too complicated for CA drivers.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.