The reaction among Democrats to Donald Trumpâs return to power has been significantly more subdued than what we saw in 2016 after the mogulâs first shocking electoral win. The old-school “resistance” is dead, and itâs not clear what will replace it. But Democratic elected officials are developing new strategies for dealing with the new realities in Washington. Here are five distinct approaches that have emerged, even before Trumpâs second administration has begun.
Some Democrats are so thoroughly impressed by the current power of the MAGA movement they are choosing to surrender to it in significant respects. The prime example is Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, the onetime fiery populist politician who is now becoming conspicuous in his desire to admit his partyâs weaknesses and snuggle up to the new regime. The freshman and one-time ally of Bernie Sanders has been drifting away from the left wing of his party for a good while, particularly via his vocally unconditional backing for Israel during its war in Gaza. But now heâs making news regularly for taking steps in Trumpâs direction.
Quite a few Democrats publicly expressed dismay over Joe Bidenâs pardon of his son Hunter, but Fetterman distinguished himself by calling for a corresponding pardon for Trump over his hush-money conviction in New York. Similarly, many Democrats have discussed ways to reach out to the voters they have lost to Trump. Fettermanâs approach was to join Trumpâs Truth Social platform, which is a fever swamp for the president-electâs most passionate supporters. Various Democrats are cautiously circling Elon Musk, Trumpâs new best friend and potential slayer of the civil-service system and the New DealâGreat Society legacy of federal programs. But Fetterman seems to want to become Muskâs buddy, too, exchanging compliments with him in a sort of weird courtship. Fetterman has also gone out of his way to exhibit openness to support for Trumpâs controversial Cabinet nominees even as nearly every other Senate Democrat takes the tack of forcing Republicans to take a stand on people like Pete Hegseth before weighing in themselves.
Itâs probably germane to Fettermanâs conduct that he will be up for reelection in 2028, a presidential-election year in a state Trump carried on November 5. Or maybe heâs just burnishing his credentials as the maverick who blew up the Senate dress code.
Other Democrats are being much more selectively friendly to Trump, searching for âcommon groundâ on issues where they believe he will be cross-pressured by his wealthy backers and more conventional Republicans. Like Fetterman, these Democrats â including Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren â tend to come from the progressive wing of the party and have longed chafed at the centrist economic policies advanced by Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and, to some extent, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. Theyâve talked about strategically encouraging Trumpâs âpopulistâ impulses on such issues as credit-card interest and big-tech regulation, partly as a matter of forcing the new president and his congressional allies to put up or shut up.
So the idea is to push off a discredited Democratic Establishment, at least on economic issues, and either accomplish things for working-class voters in alliance with Trump or prove the hollowness of his âpopulism.â
Colorado governor Jared Solis has offered a similar strategy of selective cooperation by praising the potential agenda of Trump HHS secretary nominee, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., as helpfully âshaking upâ the medical and scientific Establishment.
At the other end of the spectrum, some centrist Democrats are pushing off what they perceive as a discredited progressive ascendancy in the party, especially on culture-war issues and immigration. The most outspoken of them showed up at last weekâs annual meeting of the avowedly nonpartisan No Labels organization, which was otherwise dominated by Republicans seeking to demonstrate a bit of independence from the next administration. These include vocal critics of the 2024 Democratic message like House members Jared Golden, Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, Ritchie Torres, and Seth Moulton, along with wannabe 2025 New Jersey gubernatorial candidate Josh Gottheimer (his Virginia counterpart, Abigail Spanberger, wasnât at the No Labels confab but is similarly positioned ideologically).
From a strategic point of view, these militant centrists appear to envision a 2028 presidential campaign that will take back the voters Biden won in 2020 and Harris lost this year.
Weâre beginning to see the emergence of a faction of Democrats that is willing to cut policy or legislative deals with Team Trump in order to protect some vulnerable constituencies from MAGA wrath. This is particularly visible on the immigration front; some congressional Democrats are talking about cutting a deal to support some of Trumpâs agenda in exchange for continued protection from deportation of DREAMers. Politico reports:
“The prize that many Democrats would like to secure is protecting Dreamers â Americans who came with their families to the U.S. at a young age and have since been protected by the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program created by President Barack Obama in 2012.
“Trump himself expressed an openness to ‘do something about the Dreamers’ in a recent ‘Meet the Press’ interview. But he would almost certainly want significant policy concessions in return, including border security measures and changes to asylum law that Democrats have historically resisted.”
On a broader front, the New York Times has found significant support among Democratic governors to selectively cooperate with the new administrationâs âmass deportationâ plans in exchange for concessions:
“In interviews, 11 Democratic governors, governors-elect and candidates for the office often expressed defiance toward Mr. Trumpâs expected immigration crackdown â but were also strikingly willing to highlight areas of potential cooperation.
“Several balanced messages of compassion for struggling migrants with a tough-on-crime tone. They said that they were willing to work with the Trump administration to deport people who had been convicted of serious crimes and that they wanted stricter border control, even as they vowed to defend migrant families and those fleeing violence in their home countries, as well as businesses that rely on immigrant labor.”
While the Democrats planning strategic cooperation with Trump are getting a lot of attention, itâs clear the bulk of elected officials and activists are more quietly waiting for the initial fallout from the new regime to develop while planning ahead for a Democratic comeback. This is particularly true among the House Democratic leadership, which hopes to exploit the extremely narrow Republican majority in the chamber (which will be exacerbated by vacancies for several months until Trump appointees can be replaced in special elections) on must-pass House votes going forward, while looking ahead with a plan to aggressively contest marginal Republican-held seats in the 2026 midterms. Historical precedents indicate very high odds that Democrats can flip the House in 2026, bringing a relatively quick end to any Republican legislative steamrolling on Trumpâs behalf and signaling good vibes for 2028.
phatcat… I share your view.. to win this election is quite a massive challenge. Bush has this place in such a mess that it will be hell to fix.
Kerry will age 15 years in the first four years, he will wish he had passed on this… but someone has to do it and Kerry raised his hand to do the job.. hence, he has to do it.
To leave it to Bush will mean that the deficit will reach figures that cant be counted… look what he achieved in four years. He will stay the course in Iraq and that will mean ever increasing disaster and growing hatred throughout the world… but bush really does deserve the opportunity to fix this crap he created. If people didnt matter, I would campaign for Bush… but alas, people matter to me… so I support Kerry.
standa has something…”What happened to Bush’s big lead ? ”
Repreat it over and over to everyone you know. This should be hammered over and over until the press picks it up and starts running with it.
tony –
9/11 doesn’t seem to have “stuck” on GWB, so why would something else stick on the next Prez?
Only one reason – because the rabid fascist (let’s just stop all the cutsie names like “freepers”) pundits and their slavering followers will howl and rant and rage nonstop if it happens.
We really are at a crossroads here. Four more years of Bush is a walk into a dark tunnel with no discernable exit. I will go through the next four years with dread in my heart in that case.
phatcat-
Amplifying two points here…
About the variability of polls. Some of it is that there are so *many* polls. Given that, it’s not surprising that some of them give you odd results.
About 2008. I’m inclined to think that you’re right. And that’s the one thing that makes me worry about a Kerry victory. Some true nastiness seems virtually certain to happen during the next presidential term. If Kerry is president, it will be stuck on him, and it’s likely that the media story line will be about how Democrats cause all the security problems. Yuck.
Legitimate polling companies are not in the business of trying to get a certain result. Its simply a matter of credibility – if your poll is accused of being biased, then it hurts your business. Remember, many of these polling companies are also market research companies, and their business depends on their reputation.
The reason why you get so many different results is that there are simply too many things that are difficult to control: response rates, sampling frames, non-response characteristics, etc. And its getting worse.
Seems to me you can get any result you want from polling 6-700 people. It just depends on how you define a “likely voter”.
There is no Kerry surge, just as there was no Bush surge. The political and media winds were blowing Kerry’s way in August, and now they’re blowing Bush’s way in September. But nothing has really changed fundamentally – the race is close nationally, there are only 10 or so state races truly in play (and you’re crazy if you think NY, NJ or IL are truly in trouble). Two months ago the punditry was all about how Bush was in big trouble, and now its the same for Kerry.
Stop the madness. Its close. It will be to the end.
But in the end, Kerry will win. I don’t envy him, quite honestly, because he’s going to inherit a terrible situation in Iraq and will get a lot of the blame when it blows up (and it will).
I’m of the mind that whichever party is not in power in 2008 is going to win.
What happened to Bush’s big lead ? Must have been a false perception.
According to the latest Harris Interactive poll Kerry secured 48 percent of the intended vote, compared with 47 percent for Bush.
Also more Americans must be waking up to the FACT that George W. Bush is a FAILURE, has NOT earned our TRUST, and should be FIRED.
The Kerry surge is very real and perfectly timed.
And the the debates will put Kerry on top for a victory on Nov 2.
Let’s not forget what ACTUALLY happened in FL. Gore did win there and it’s only because of the repubs dirty tricks and stopping the recount that made it possible for Bush to *get appointed by the supreme court*. What a disgrace for the supposed model of democracy for the rest of the world.
Let’s do everything in our power to make sure it doesn’t happen again. If you see anything fishy going on at your polling place Nov. 2nd report it. Volunteer to be an election judge to keep and eye on things from the inside. It wouldn’t hurt to bring a camera to the polls either, I did to my primary and got a picture of a poster that our Sec. of State (a fan of Katherine Harris) wanted posted that would have been discriminatory if enforced (luckily it wasn’t).
Here’s a great analysis of Harris’ dirty tricks in FL:
http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=122&row=1
C’mon, guys, wait for the debates. A week is a lifetime in politics.
Gallup in mid September had Gore ahead 51 – 42. Two weeks later it had Bush ahead 50 – 42. At this point in 1980 Gallup reported Carter 44, Regan 40.
Besides, an administration report our today predicted a high likelyhood of civil war next year in Iraq. As you may have seen recently, the “liberal” (my ass) press has NOT been reporting how we have been losing control in Iraq (since ceding Fallujah, we have lost control of Ramadi, Samarra, etc.) Please recall that Richard Nixon won by a landslide in 1972, therefore destroying the democratic party forever and assuring perpetual dominance of the republican party, as we all know.
Can you say “Bush Impeachment”?
sorry Tim1965 you just don’t “Get It” so here’s my Reality Check post again for your edification đ
FACT: Many Americans are not that bright and are primarily persuaded by the gross image manipulation and false perceptions of Bushco.
FACT: There was plenty of gross image manipulation and false perceptions in 2000 and Gore/Leiberman almost beat Bush/Cheney
FACT: But in 2000 Bush/Cheney did not have a ABYSMAL performance record on the economy, jobs, healthcare, education, the environment, Iraq to be measured against.
FACT: Bush has been misleading the public, distorting fact, contriving false realities, and making excuses on virtually every major issue.
FACT: Bushco is relying almost 100% on gross image manipulation and false perceptions, and little on their abysmal and factual track record, to win in 2004.
Are more than 50% of Americans that stupid and gullable ?
I find it hard to believe that more than 50% of Americans cannot see that George W. Bush is a FAILURE, has NOT earned our TRUST, and should be FIRED.
Kerry/Edwards have a much better plan for America and Americans and should win on Nov 2.
Wow… Kerry is up by six in New York. Can’t wait for Ruy’s explanation on this one.
Seems like you dems have lots of faith in polls when they are favorable. Now that things have gone south — they’re “bullshit.”
4 more years.
The new Harris Interactive national poll has Kerry up by one point. It also shows 51% don’t believe Bush deserves re-election:
http://online.wsj.com/public/article/0,,SB109526872487418642,00.html?mod=todays%5Ffree%5Ffeature
Standa,
“Almost beat Bush/Cheney”? As I remember, that result was an almost inconceivable upset. A sitting vp coming off 8 years of peace and prosperity knocked off because voters just didn’t like him.
They don’t like Kerry either. You guys are pinning all your hopes on the debates but the result will be the same. The more voters see Kerry, the more they dislike him.
C’mon, even partisan Dems don’t really like Kerry.
4 More Years!
I think everyone should be leery of the Survey USA polls coming out of Florida, New Jersey, Illinois and Nevada.
1) The poll sample is a little low. Good margin-of-error would argue for 1,000 respondents in the sample, and Survey USA often opts for just over 700.
2) I’m not seeing anything in Survey USA’s data which help me judge the reliability of the poll. What’s the R-to-D ratio of respondents? Is the poll being weighted to meet socio-demographic trends in the population? What’s the response-rate? Does the response-rate break down geographically or socio-economically? Not a clue.
3) A big problem for me, at this juncture, is that Survey USA is surveying likely voters — a subsample that is unlikely to give an accurate picture of the true state of the electorate at this point in time.
4) Survey USA’s data often seem out of line with most other polling data. For example, most other polls show Kerry ahead by 2-3 points in New Jersey — alarming, given the state’s strongly pro-Dem leanings. But still, Kerry is ahead. Similarly, most other polls show Bush ahead by 1-2 points in Florida, but Survey USA shows Bush blowing Kerry out and widening his lead over time. Do all the due-diligence you want, and still Survey USA’s data is off the norm most other polls are showing.
I, too, want to see an analysis of what the f**k is going on in New Jersey. Why is the race so tight there? What’s going on? Did the beheading of that New Jerseyean a couple months ago really roil state politics that much? (It can’t be McGreevey; almost every poll shows his support very high, and general support for Dems in general and particular Democratic candidates remain largely unchanged pre- and post-outing.)
It’s not “what’s wrong with Kansas.” It’s “what’s wrong with New Jersey”!
Jim, while there is a measure of truth in what you say many Americans are not that bright I cannot agree that more than 50% are primarily persuaded by the gross image manipulation of Bushco.
I think you’re selling more Americans short who actually see through the Bushco ruse
FACT: There was plenty of image manipulation in 2000 and Gore/Leiberman almost beat Bush/Cheney
FACT: In 2000 Bush/Cheney did not have a ABYSMAL performance record on the economy, jobs, healthcare, education, the environment, Iraq to be measured against.
The Net Net: George W. Bush is a FAILURE, has NOT earned our TRUST, and should be FIRED.
Forget the bullshit polls… Kerry/Edwards win on Nov 2.
what about florida……..
what are the voter distribution of the counties in
florida most impacted by hurricanes?
i belive that orlando(orange) , palm beach county , escambia(pensacola) are republican counties and that turnout willl be depressed due to the preoccupation of rebuilding.
thoughts from the experts?
The Annenberg survey gives 20 direct comparative impression questions. Counting All Voters (not just persuadables), Bush improved his margin over Kerry in 19 categories from August to September. [The 20th category, “Stubborn”, is equivocal.]
Alternative analysis: Bush swept August persuadables into September committeds, while Kerry leaked committeds into the persuadable compartment.
The residual September persuadables think more like Kerry, but don’t want Kerry.
Ruy, I got a call yesterday from a GOP pollster. I asked how they got their list. I’m not registered as a Republican…but officially as an Independent. He admitted he had a lot of independents on his list to call. I aggreed to listen to his questions. He then asked if I was pro-life, pro-2nd amnedment, and if I was voting for Bush.
Obviously, they’re trying to call and reach undecided independents through these “polls” (shades of South Carolina primary in 2000). I added this to the string to show people that THEY are mobilizing grass roots efforts on emotion-based topics. When I fired back questions about the actual facts and Bush’s record, he couldn’t answer my questions and he went away sputtering like a Model A.
We can take them out by POUNDING the facts of Bush’s record and dispelling the myth he is “virtuous,” “decisive,” & “humble.”
WE can demand that the media (via email, phone calls, etc.) report all the story and stop the meme that Kerry is sliding.
They WANT us to believe Kerry is doomed. We can win. We have to push hard…all of us. GET INVOLVED.
How hilarious that a guy with the handle “BJ Clinton” would talk about someone else being a fag.
My usual rule of thumb is: the more a conservative talks about Bill Clinton’s penis, the more he dreams about touching it himself.
There are so many closet gay right wingers it would make your head spin. They hate Clinton for the same reason they hated JFK: They want him.
Jim: I think you are dead wrong about the American people not being bright enough to see what Bush has done. They see plenty. I personally have talked to many, many people who usually do not vote but want to vote this year because of their disgust for Bush. The problem is their follow-thru. The problem is that some of them are not motivated enough to get out to the polls to vote. That is why I have been suggesting absentee ballots for anyone I fear will not be motivated enough to get to the polls on Nov. 2. Anyone can vote absentee ballot in Ohio and many Ohioans do not realize that. You have to put down a reason but they do not check and they do not care what your reason is. I was told this directly by my local Board of Elections. If you arrange for someone to receive an absentee ballot, then you can check up on them and make sure they send it in. I truly believe Ohio will not be in the Bush column this year.
“BJ Clinton”: I’ve got a special message, just for you: Go *uck yourself.
Standa,
FACT: The facts don’t matter. If they did, Bush would be at about 10% in the polls.
FACT: The American people, as a whole, are not that bright. They’re not persuaded by facts. They are persuaded by image manipulation, which the Bushies are geniuses at.
Reality Check….forget the polls and proceed to Nov 2.
FACT: Gore/Leiberman almost beat Bush/Cheney in 2000 winning the popular vote by 583,000. It came down to Florida…we know the story.
FACT: Bush has been misleading the public, distorting fact, contriving false realities, and making excuses on virtually every major issue.
FACT: Bush’s performance on the economy, jobs, healthcare, education, the environment, Iraq and more has been POOR to ABYSMAL.
I find it hard to believe that more Americans cannot see that George W. Bush is a FAILURE, has NOT earned our TRUST, and should be FIRED.
How can Kerry/Edwards lose since they have a much better plan for America and Americans ?
With all due respect, you fail to point out that while it is true that GWB’s support has softened among swing voters according to Annenberg, it may reflect a number of the prior undecideds coalescing around the President – Thereby making those swinge voerts still skeptical about GWB a larger portion of the remaining sample.
I’ve read your anlaysis of the various polls over the past few days, and cannnot help but notice that while you have highlighted Kerry’s lead to traditonal Dem states such as MN and MI, I see nothing from you regarding the following results:
FLA – (SUSA) GWB 51; Kerry 45
PA – (Wash Post/ABC) GWB 49, Kerry 46
NJ – (SUSA) GWB 49, Kerry 45
NY – (Quinnipiac) Kerry 47, GWB 41
IL – (SUSA) Kerry 49, GWB 45
OH – (SV) GWB 52, Kerry 40
WIS – (USAToday/Gallop) GWB 52, Kerry 44
MN – (USAToday/Gallop) GWB 44, Kerry 44
NV – (SUSA) GWB 51, Kerry 47
Please note that Kerry was up in NY by 26 points a few weeks ago, and was ahead in IL, MN, and NJ, by margins ranging from 10 to 25 points in various polls prior to the RNC. If Kerry has to fight for NJ, NY, MN and IL, he is in big trouble IMO
“The Dems will lose NJ because they got rolled by a fag (in a nice role reversal).”
Know what, BJ? We don’t mind your politics. But why don’t you just keep that sort of posts over at freerepublic. There are some decent places left on the web, you know.
2 New Polls out
Democracy Corps Bush 49, Kerry 48
Harris Interactive Kerry 48, Bush 47
I think it’s pretty clear it’s a tossup and whatever bounce Bush got has dissapated.
Delilah,
The Dems will lose NJ because they got rolled by a fag (in a nice role reversal). Their failure to boot McGreevey on principle, preferring to acquiese to his bookmarker protection of the seat for the party has disillusioned the moderates. Lot of Catholics in Jersey.
Dan Rather has hurt Kerry in the same way.
I guess it’s the law of unintended consequences at work. Or maybe just bad Karma.
Next time, do the right thing and voter support will follow.
My love to H-town
4 More Years!
Nah… Brian let the freepers froth.
Even if the polls are correct (and we’ve heard conflicting evidence about SUSA polls), those numbers will not hold. They will normalize very shortly.
That said, I have questions about all the polls myself… so many seem counter-intuitive.
I had the same question as “accomodatingly” plus others. The category of “persuadables” is extremely slippery methodologically and they did not make clear precisely how those voters were culled out from the general pool. I would assume that in a responsible survey they would have determined a solid bloc of ‘certain’ Bush voters and
‘certain’ or committed Kerry voters and then checked to see how that had changed, then checked overall leanings and then compared an apples to apples study of the “persuadables”. There’s no way of determining exactly what they did from their website. Please explain.
(I was always weak in methodology in my Sociology work)
CLOUDY
Ruy,
As soon as humanly possible, could you analyze the new SUSA poll results from NJ and IL?
I have no doubt that Kerry is going to win both states unless Bush wins in an epic lanslide, but it would be nice to hear some expert analyses on the polls. Perhaps some of the douchebags at freerepublic.com could read it and come back down to earth.
Regards,
Brian
I’d like to believe you. One problem with this argument: are the “persuadables” the same individual respondents in both samples, or are they different sets of undecided voters (as seems more likely)? If the latter, the survey certainly shows that we can still win, but it’s not necessarily good news: if undecideds predisposed to Bush in August became committed Bush voters after the RNC, while soft Kerry voters became undecideds, then Kerry’s ratings among “persuadable” voters went up between August and September, but only because he lost ground.