The reaction among Democrats to Donald Trump’s return to power has been significantly more subdued than what we saw in 2016 after the mogul’s first shocking electoral win. The old-school “resistance” is dead, and it’s 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 Trump’s 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 party’s 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 he’s making news regularly for taking steps in Trump’s direction.
Quite a few Democrats publicly expressed dismay over Joe Biden’s 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. Fetterman’s approach was to join Trump’s Truth Social platform, which is a fever swamp for the president-elect’s most passionate supporters. Various Democrats are cautiously circling Elon Musk, Trump’s new best friend and potential slayer of the civil-service system and the New Deal–Great Society legacy of federal programs. But Fetterman seems to want to become Musk’s 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 Trump’s 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.
It’s probably germane to Fetterman’s conduct that he will be up for reelection in 2028, a presidential-election year in a state Trump carried on November 5. Or maybe he’s 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 “common ground” on issues where they believe he will be cross-pressured by his wealthy backers and more conventional Republicans. Like Fetterman, these Democrats — including Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren — 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. They’ve talked about strategically encouraging Trump’s “populist” 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 “populism.”
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 “shaking up” 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 week’s 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, wasn’t 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.
We’re 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 Trump’s agenda in exchange for continued protection from deportation of DREAMers. Politico reports:
“The prize that many Democrats would like to secure is protecting Dreamers — 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 administration’s “mass deportation” plans in exchange for concessions:
“In interviews, 11 Democratic governors, governors-elect and candidates for the office often expressed defiance toward Mr. Trump’s expected immigration crackdown — 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, it’s 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 Trump’s behalf and signaling good vibes for 2028.
“Liar, Krugman of NYT, blasts McCain With the Truth”
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/12/01115/6334/278/595686
Republicans Hijacked 911, by Keith Olberman, Courage to Speak Truth!
http://www.jedreport.com/2008/09/special-commen…
How many more Journalists & Reporters will show courage and begin to do their duty and Inform the public as to truth and falsity? We should never again be lied into a False & Phony war by a President you want to have a beer with! Republicans strong on National Security? I don’t think so, after all 911 happened on their watch, but they have been allowed to distort the facts and public perception that it is the Democrats who are weak on national security! They have failed to properly enact the 911 Commissions recommendations which would make us a lot safer! Politicans who willfully and intentionally lie to the public are engaged in a betrayal of the public trust and such distortion should be deemed unethical and in some cases, criminal! We need a Media to be the third-wheel of democracy again and not a parrot of those who are corrupt, unless they are corrupt too!
Republicans are just as dismal on economics. It is an outrage or should be that the government can give millions of dollars to CEO’s from the failed Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac and yet, cannot give a second stimulus check to American citizens in these hard economic times? Republicans say No to a second stimulus while the Democrats say Yes to a second stimulus! Is the Republican Congress working for CEO’s or are they working for you, the people? We need a Government and a Congress to work for the People, not lie to the people, not bail out their own special interest groups and leave the people hanging. We need a government to put the burden of taxes on the rich where they belong and stop putting the tax burdens on the middle class and poor, those who can least afford it. We need a government who will put money into education and make that a national priority again, both lower and higher education and give more Pell Grants and less loans so that young people can once again achieve a higher education, get a good job and lift everybody up out of poverty. We need action and not more spin, talk and lies. We need a Congress who will vote Yes to bridges, roads, schools, health care. Who will invest in America and not in Iraq and in themselves and their special interest groups. America is dying. We need Change!
And we need to play just as dirty in order to win, or we will fall back into out usual form..that of losers.
The moment McCain clearly pulled into the lead in the Republican primaries last winter there were three predictions that could be made with absolute certainty.
1. That McCain’s unique biography would have tremendous appeal for those voters who didn’t know his history and choose their candidate based on personality rather than positions on major issues.
2. That, if a “high road” campaign did not seem to be doing the job by summer, Bush-Rove operatives would be called in to run a nasty, “swift-boat” style media campaign for the fall.
3. That religious and cultural conservatives would be extremely unhappy and unenthusiastic with McCain as the candidate but – recognizing the huge threat posed by Democratic victory – – would somehow rationalize a way to actively support him after the conventions.
Seen in this light, the only real surprises in this campaign have been (1) that Obama actually proved himself to be extraordinarily compelling and attractive as a candidate and orator – much more than anyone anticipated last February – and (2) that John McCain found a Vice-Presidential choice who is every bit as “rock star” mediagenic and attractive to her natural conservative audience as Obama is to his.
Now sure, it would have been lovely if McCain had continued to run a lackluster campaign, chose a conventional and very boring vice-president, refused to go nasty and negative and continued to reject the religious and cultural conservatives as “agents of intolerance” – but was there really any reason to think this would actually happen?
Not a chance. After a very slow start, the Republicans are just reverting back to form – avoiding the issues, blatantly lying about their opponents, appealing to “Us vs. Them” rhetoric and stereotypes.
Let’s face it, aren’t these the tactics and isn’t this the battle we knew we’d be in from the very beginning.
Yeah it’s ugly, but it isn’t a surprise.