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.
Kerry is putting it away tonight.
Kerry is competent again, and Bush is uneven and has made some big mistakes. He really blew it on immigration, religion, and Social Security.
Looks like Kerry is now up in LV’s too in the WP poll, and gained a bit in LV’s in the ABC poll (the two polls use the same data, but interpret it differently based on their own formulas).
Lets hope Kerry can put it away tonight.
Alan,
This does not seem like a likely answer. The Republicans are certainly engaging in dirty tactics but it seems implausible they would tell Gallup what they are up to and the number of Dem votes they are trashing.
I have not seen a good answer to the question of why Gallup (and other polling orgs) are skewing their results so strongly to the Rs either in LV/RV or in party identification. So, anyone? Alan’s thought is maybe just too disgusting for me to want to believe. Also, the sheer amount of the skew is too large to be accounted for by dirty tricks in some swing states. Is Gallup hoping to scare Dems into fight harder? Do they want a close race to improve news ratings (my fave since news orgs buy the Gallup results)? Is Gallup hoping to get more Repubs into office by creating making them appear stronger than they really are?
I am surprised to see Alan Abromowitz stating that GOP turnout has exceded Democratic turnout in recent Presidential elections. I thought that Democratic voters had exceeded Republican voters by about 3 points in recent presidential races.
coldeye and gabby,
Marshall has followed up with this link to a report from Oregon, confirming what coldeye wrote:
http://www2.kval.com/x30530.xml?ParentPageID=x2649&ContentID=x47627&Layout=kval.xsl&AdGroupID=x30530
The head of the canvassing group used to be executive director of the Arizona state Republican party. Reports are that the GOP funded his group, though the Oregon state GOP denies that he worked for them. There’s a report that the same organization (Voters Outreach of America) is also active in West Virginia.
From a link posted on TPM:
Bush concedes PA?
http://www.pnionline.com/dnblog/extra/archives/001039.html
Those of us here in Pennsylvania may not have George W. Bush to kick around anymore — at least not in person. The New York Daily News — which
is traveling with the President in Arizona today — says that no Pennsylvania TV markets were in Bush’s top-ten spending list last month, and an aide has told the newspaper that no visits from W. to the Keystone State are in the works anytime soon.
Don’t be so quick to dismiss Gallup’s methodology on LV. After all, they probably know what the Republicans voter suppression strategies are. In term of voter turnout, this analysis is likely correct. However, many of the democaratic voters who turn out may end up not being able to vote, and many of those who do vote may not see their vote counted.
Gallup is probably relying on Republican inside information in coming up with its LV numbers.
News flash — the Chicago Tribune released separate polls today for the midwest battleground states (IA, MN, WI, OH). They show Kerry ahead of Bush by 2pts in OH and MN, and 4 pts in WI! He is behind by 2 pts in IA. Plus, there were 5-8% undecided in each state — that basically translates to an extra 2-4 points on Kerry’s side of the margin. Plus, these results are for LVs — can’t find RV results, but those are very likely even better, since Kerry has been stronger among RVs than LVs all season.
Only one set of polls, but still VERY encouraging — are the Cheeseheads finally coming home?!
Midwest Meg, I think Ruy has said the last week or so is the time when the LV is most useful, but only as the race actually closes.
Tony, that news is truly distressing. They’ve always engaged in dirty tricks, but this time the army of Bush brownshirts is a reflection of the men at the top. This time they flaunt the law in a cavalier fashion which reveals their true nature as anything but American.
Tony,
We’ve seen the same tactics here in Portland, OR. Groups collecting registrations and throwing out the Democrats.
Ruy-
Thanks for the RV data. I tried looking for RV info online yesterday and could only get LV.
Various-
This will be somewhat off topic, but speaks to some of the challenges we’ll face on election day.
I just got this from Josh Marshall’s http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com site. Apparently the GOP has paid some people to go get registration cards from potential voters, and then they tear up those who register Democratic. There’s some evidence of this from Las Vegas. This strikes me as the sort of dirty trick that could get very intense attention very quickly.
Marshall got the report from this site:
http://www.klas-tv.com/Global/story.asp?S=2421595&nav=168XRvNe
Here’s a quote from the article:
“We caught her taking Democrats out of my pile, handed them to her assistant and he ripped them up right in front of us. I grabbed some of them out of the garbage and she tells her assisatnt to get those from me,” said Eric Russell, former Voters Outreach employee.
Eric Russell managed to retrieve a pile of shredded paperwork including signed voter registration forms, all from Democrats. We took them to the Clark County Election Department and confirmed that they had not, in fact, been filed with the county as required by law.
In Ruy’s opinion, at what point in the campaign are LVs the more reliable polling group than RVs? Two weeks from election day? A week before?
Or does conventional wisdom not exactly apply in this election, which looks like it will draw a huge number of first-time or occasional voters?
Does anyone know whether the polls pick up or distinguish how many people voted early? I remember reading articles about several states where people could vote as early as the beginning of September. If that vote was heavy, when Bush had his huge bounce, it could matter. Is there any data?
Who actually performs this poll? Is it Zogby, who I respect? Interesting article on Zogby in new New Yorker.