>> good evening and welcome to "MetroFocus."

Are Democrats taking voters in historically blue states like New York for granted?

he represents the largely working-class 43rd district in Southwest Brooklyn says yes.

In a recent op-ed for city and state he argues that it is a serious problem which urgent lead needs to be -- urgently needs to be corrected.

He wrote the piece not long after the caucus which made up nearly 70% of the entire body lost almost half of its members after the leaders asked them to sign a statement pledging to do everything possible to reduce the size and scope of the NYPD and Department of Corrections.

The council is one of the members that left the progressive Caucus and joins us now to talk about that incident, the op-ed and where Democrats go from here.

Councilmember Brendan, thank you for joining us.

>> thank you for having me again.

Rafael: councilmember, we will try to talk on all of the things you mentioned.

But I would like to begin with a couple of things you wrote in your op-ed that calmly attention.

You stay early in the peas for example that the Republican Party has perfected the art of getting people to vote against their own interests.

Can you give us some examples of that?

>> the first thing that comes to mind is union labor.

So much of what we take for granted now with the rights we have been afforded in the workplace other it is then 9-5 -- 9-5 workday or paid sick leave -- the things we take for granted would not of been possible without the struggle of organized labor which has always been a tenant of the Democratic Party.

I often think about the book "what is the matter with Kansas" at talked about this decades ago that the Republican Party has done a masterful job with concocting these endless and imaginary culture wars that have us does directed from what we should be worried about which is the fact that we should be fighting a class war instead of fighting each other over these culture wars.

I think organized labor is the biggest piece of that.

People voting against their own interests when they owe quality of life and the family they have been able to raise and the house they have been able to buy to organized labor which the Republican party has gone out of its way to the road and destroyed.

That is one of the glaring things that come to mind.

Rafael: you have run twice for a city Council in 2017 and 21 and you won both races but they have been close.

Then your first raise your Republican opponent got nearly 40% and in the second race 49%.

You believe that nearly half of the voters, were voting against their own interest in the 43rd district which is mostly working-class.

>> it is a good question.

Out here in southern Brooklyn ever since Donald Trump, Democrats do not win by landslides.

For us winning by a thousand votes would be a huge feet.

The work we do an margin of victory is thanks to constituent services and helping people with their daily issues they have in quality of life.

Unfortunately now, ever since Donald Trump, things have gotten so polarized and tribal that even that -- I will give you a for instance.

When I worked for my predecessor people used to come up to him and say, you are the only Democrat I vote for.

Whether it was real or not that is what they told him.

Now they are more likely to say to me, Justin, you helped me so many times and you have done this that or the other thing, but I cannot vote for you because you are a Democrat.

Things have become so tribal iced that people are seeing past where they are blinded by what they are seeing on Fox News or Newsmax or whatever these channels are and we are becoming cartoons, basically.

My day to day as a said out -- as a city councilman is helping people with their daily lives.

I don't get involved in foreign policy or what goes on in Washington but that does not matter anymore.

I am a Democrat and if you don't like Nancy Pelosi you are also not allowed to like your local Democrat.

Rafael: I am thinking though -- maybe that is the case but it is also the case, which I think is the gist of your article which is that maybe sometimes Democratic elected officials are unaware of what their constituents think is in their interests.

On the issue of crime and public safety which is the essence of your article, and in the article you argue that Democratic party is in denial about the impact that crime is having on voters.

You write "when some Democratic candidates were asked about top of mind issues for voters like crime and public safety, they also seemed dismissive of their concerns."

How so?

what are some of the colleagues of yours saying to their constituents that you deem dismissive?

>> a great question.

It is the crux of the op-ed I wrote.

The issue I am seeing is what I learned in my years in politics is that you cannot deny someone's reality.

You cannot tell someone they are not experiencing what they tell you they are experiencing.

That is number one.

When someone comes to you and says they are worried about crime, the rise in crime, it does not matter how they got to that point.

They feel a certain way.

You are never going to beat back someone's feeling by a mantra of data and statistics.

No victim of a crime wants to hear about how New York City is safer than it was in the 70's and 80's.

No one who was just mugged on the street or witnessed a crime wants to hear that.

While it may be drew and while the data and statistics may say a certain thing, we have to talk about how people feel.

It is important you don't lean into the historic area -- hysteria.

You have to take people seriously.

Denying peoples reality or telling them they are silly that they should not feel that way because the statistics say something else, that is not a winning strategy.

Democrats have to take people seriously.

If they come to us with concerns we have to number one take the concerns seriously and work to address those concerns.

Telling people they are silly to file certain way or they should not feel a certain way because the data test something else is not a winning strategy.

Rafael: that was in the introduction earlier this year.

It lost nearly half of its members, 15 after its leaders asked the Caucus members to sign a statement saying to do everything we can to reduce the size and scope of the NYPD and a Robin of corrections.

You were one of the 15 who left the progressive caucus.

To what extent did that or does that incident reflect the problems you annunciate -- in NCAA in your op-ed -- enunciate in your op-ed?

and to what extent was that the motivation for you to write your piece?

>> it was a coincidence.

I had already written a piece when the progressive caucus decided to pass around this pledge they wanted folks to take.

It became a bit of a Rorschach test for people.

As a public official public safety will be my top priority.

Any elected official has a number one priority of public safety.

That does not -- in my area we have more cops on patrol than ever before but you also have to address the root causes of crime and you have to talk about access to jobs and health care and affordable housing and education.

And take a holistic look.

But to put a dollar figure on reimagining public safety I think is shortsighted.

There is no dollar figure that you can defund the police department that will allow you to reimagine public safety.

I think it is about taking a holistic approach.

I would agree the scope of the police department needs to be changed.

Police officers signed up to catch bad guys.

Not to be mental health officials or deal with people dealing with homelessness.

They signed up to keep people safe and catch bad guys.

And most cops would agree with that.

When you talk about the scope of the police department I would agree that we need to let cops do the job they signed up to do but when you talk about defunding the police or abolishing the police department, it is a crazy notion and not something I think most New Yorkers or Americans agree with.

Rafael: because of the redistricting that took place last year, all 51 seats are on the ballot this year.

Rather than two years from now which would ordinarily be the case.

I saw an argument in a couple of pieces I read.

Some of the members of the progressive caucus who left the caucus separated themselves from it and its continued demand to defund or reduce funding for the NYPD because the election is happening this year and because they sense that New York voters are moving to the center have not the right on the issue of crime.

>> it was a can one sentence -- it was a coincidence of timing.

I did not wake up and decide to leave the progressive caucus because of an election coming out.

I decided to leave because of the pledge.

That is when those of us that love decided to make that decision.

For me it was not a strategic decision.

I make -- I made two pledges, an oath to serve my constituents and I took a pledge to love my wife in sickness and in health.

Those are the only pledges I will take.

The timing was about when they asked us to take the pledge.

It was not that we woke up, those of us that have an election and decided to leave the caucus.

Rafael: what concrete must that -- what concretely must Democrats do to stop taking voters for granted?

>> the Republican party is a complete circus.

A disaster.

My point is that even so, even if it is a dumpster fire on wheels, that is not enough.

The Democrats cannot say -- they are crazy and we are not them.

That is not a platform.

Emma Kratz have to be grounded on a platform that means voters where they are at and talks to them about the things that they care about, quality of life issues, public schools, Universal Health care, job creation, raising wages, union jobs.

Universal Health care.

Love these issues we have -- all of these issues we have to be eloquent and talk to people in a way we are not talking down to them.

We have to talk to them in a way that shows we are taking their concerns seriously.

And meeting them with solutions.

I think that would work not just in New York but across the country.

Rafael: are you optimistic that the Democrats here and everywhere will take that lesson?

>> I hope so.

I think it is the winning lesson.

I think you will see across the country that people want to hear what the Democrats are doing to make their lives better.

If we can verbalize that I think we can win some elections.

Rafael: councilmember Brennan, thank you for joining us.

Good luck to you.

>> thank you so much.

♪