Opinion: Democrats Are Calling Trump and Vance ‘Weird.’ Let’s Do the Same for Car Dependency.

Calling out “weird” behavior is a tactic that's been used in politics recently to make opponents’ ideas seem off-putting. But this strategy isn’t just for presidential elections — we can use it to make our streets safer and more welcoming, too.

Since the start of Kamala Harris’ presidential campaign, Democratic officials have drawn attention to the “weird platforms” of Donald Trump and his vice presidential pick, JD Vance. By pointing out how sound strange and out of touch these views are, candidates hope to make voters more likely to stick with what feels “normal” and safe.

The ongoing conservative culture war to eliminate Pride displays at Target and books with LGBTQ+ characters from libraries is another good example. Politicians who take the extreme position against basic human expression and equality claim to represent a “Silent Majority” — though polling shows they are too extreme for most Americans; when facing elections against more moderate candidates, extreme conservatives tend to lose. The “weird” label can break down that presumed power even sooner, by stressing that their positions don’t represent most people’s views. 

Let’s apply this strategy to transportation.

Today, people see car dependency as the “normal” way to get around. Most people assume there are no meaningful ways to avoid driving — and, crucially, they stigmatize people who do anyway. Because of aesthetic and behavioral stereotypes, those who bike or take transit are often labeled “weird.” Drivers might honk aggressively at cyclists for “slowing down traffic” or complain about pedestrians crossing the street outside designated crosswalks. It’s frustrating and makes traveling harder.

But what if we flip the script? What if we make it “weird” to create obstacles for people who want to get around without a car? 

Imagine a world where it is strange and out of touch to park in bike lanes, ignore pedestrian signals, text while driving, or shame transit riders. Imagine a world where mobility justice is the norm — ensuring everyone cycling, walking, and taking transit could do so with dignity and safety — and car dependency is the “weird” choice.

To start, we need to build collective power. That means voting for candidates who support bike lanes and transit services. It also means connecting with our neighbors, no matter how they get around, and equipping them with the tools to organize for better transportation.

Second, we can use media strategically. Collaborating with local news outlets, leveraging social media, and organizing community events can spread public awareness, shift the narrative, and make mobility justice the new “normal.”

This strategy allows us to share our personal stories and broader visions for a better community while pushing back against harmful, “weird” behavior. For example, in my city — Cambridge, Massachusetts — a notable politician sued to remove bike lanes. Highlighting how “weird” it is to be against safer streets, even in the courtroom, could be effective.

Of course, it is most effective when we ensure people agree with our position. Critically, we must be careful not to alienate the public and push our transportation advocacy further into the fringe by leaning too hard into trolling or combativeness. Instead, we should offer an authentic perspective on inclusive transportation. 

Luckily, we’ve seen lots of support for mobility justice in Cambridge. People want to bike more and appreciate the vibrant urban culture around our city. Despite some City Council members seeking to delay bike lane construction, thousands of residents have spoken up, emailed, signed petitions, and elected supportive leaders.

Because of long-term organizing and wins for street safety, we flipped the script — the “normal” view is that these street improvements are good and that we should encourage them. When we challenged the cars-only mindset, we made that approach seem “weird” and out of touch. There’s plenty of opportunity in other regions, too.

Opponents of street safety worry about this shift. At a Cambridge City Council meeting in March, one Councillor accused cycling advocates of “shaming” people who drive (we aren’t). She also said maintaining a car is “challenging” for most (it is, which is why we need better options). Another Councillor questioned whether bike lanes hurt emergency response times (they don’t). 

These claims suggest they think their view is the majority, but we know better. 

We all want to get around safely and comfortably without feeling like an oddity. And we can change narratives and networks to make a more inclusive environment for all of us — not the approach where the poor have cars, but where the rich use public transportation. 

There is power in calling out harmful and unappealing positions as “weird.” Redefining what is considered “normal” and building collective power can shift the narrative and make our streets safer and more connected. It takes effort, but winning is possible — and for our future, it’s essential.