What the Democrats Do Now
Atlantic’s Lora Kelley asks “What Do Democrats Do Now?” Or sorta like that. Trump is such a great story teller and caster of false narratives. People were looking for what they thought would be solutions to what they perceive as issues during and coming out of the pandemic. Maybe a recession would have been better than commercially caused inflation and programs protecting them from a recession.
“The Biden administration passed $3 trillion of legislation aimed at revitalizing the American economy and fostering green, equitable, “middle-out” growth. It sent checks to voters, canceled student-loan debt, made direct deposits to parents, showered the country in tax credits, and financed the construction of roads, transmission lines, and bridges. Kamala Harris ran as Joe Biden’s successor in the midst of what some financial analysts described as the greatest economy ever, characterized by strong wage growth, low unemployment, falling inequality, and world-beating GDP.”
Who would have known? Apparently, the constituency did not know or thought it was not enough. Trump has a lot of things in store for the constituency who do not have the green stuff called money.
What the Democrats Do Now
“A few hours after Donald Trump was declared the winner of the presidential election, Senator Bernie Sanders released a fiery statement saying, in part, that “it should come as no great surprise that a Democratic Party which has abandoned working class people would find that the working class has abandoned them.” He concluded that those concerned about democracy need to have some “very serious political discussions.”
The statement drew both praise and pushback from others in his party. But the serious discussions Sanders warned about have indeed begun over the past week. Plenty of blame has been tossed around: Democrats have pointed to the economy, identity politics, Joe Biden, racism, sexism, elitism, Liz Cheney, the war in Gaza, and much more as factors in Trump’s resounding victory. Democrats will surely continue to dissect why voters moved to the right in almost every county, as one early analysis showed. Meanwhile, many Democrats are already sharing their vision for where the party should go next. Some are vowing to fight Trump at the state level, and others are pledging to find common ground with his administration. Those on the party’s left, including Sanders and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, seem to be using this moment to push the party to embrace more progressive policies that serve the working class.
And the soul-searching about how to change a party overrun by elitism has begun. Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut, in a long thread on X yesterday, outlined what he saw as the party’s major problems, which included fealty to a higher-income voter base and how the party “skips past the way people are feeling . . . and straight to uninspiring solutions . . . that do little to actually upset the status quo of who has power and who doesn’t.” Murphy’s prescriptions included: “Embrace populism. Build a big tent. Be less judgmental.” Representative Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, a car-repair-shop owner who won a very tight race against a MAGA Republican in Washington State, said,
“We need people who are driving trucks and changing diapers and turning wrenches to run for office.”
It’s not that lawyers should not be in Congress, she added, but “we need to change our idea of who is credentialed and capable of holding elected office.”
I think what Dems really need is to sell themselves and their actions better. The results now were better than 2008 when people went on unemployment for over a year.
Democrats can do little in the next two years, to override the devious ambitions of Donald Trump and his nearly complete control over the three branches of government. But, as my Grandma used to say, “Give them enough rope and they will hang themselves.” They have all the rope they need, so we will see.
Immediately, however, Democrats, Independents, and any others who care about democracy must focus on the concept of “Free & Fair Elections.” We have a chance to turn the tide in two years, but that concept is now fragile. Consider this:
OpenSecrets’ analysis of the most recent Federal Election Commission filings found that Harris’ campaign raised over $1 billion through mid-October, nearly three times the roughly $382 million the president-elect’s campaign raised during the same period.
So, how about these headlines:
– Trump Win Sparks Record $64 Billion Gain for World’s 10 Richest People
– Donald Trump’s Billion-Dollar Windfall After Election Is Just the Star
– Big money, big stakes: 5 things everyone should know about money in 2024 elections
– Trump’s win made Elon Musk $15 billion richer
Now, Trump is in bed with Musk (richest in the world @ $300+B) & Bezos, number 3 in the world ($226+B). So, if it costs say even $10B to win the 2026 mid-term, or whatever it may take… from Trump’s standpoint, “Who cares?”. Not to mention the inherent resources of an incumbent President. If they really want to retain their power, money is no object.
So what if he violates campaign finance laws? Isn’t he immune? If he isn’t immune, do we prosecute a sitting President voted in by a majority of the electorate? And, how long would that take? So what if Musk, or Bezo, or whoever violates campaign finance laws? Aren’t they immune via the Presidential pardon….
So, if it takes money and fair election laws to win elections, I’m not sure that Democrats can compete on the existing playing field. They need to laser-focus now on finding ways to somehow compete in the 2026 Midterm and overcome powerful odds against them going in.
That’s just one of my concerns…
@McJ,
What if Trump just cancels federal elections? What if Trump declares martial law and refuses to step down? Who will stop him? Can he be stopped, and by what mechanism?
Aside from my concern of literally buying the election, and yours of canceling the elections; these are the concerns Democrats must begin to address immediately and in response to the topic here, “What the Democrats do now.” Frankly, I’m not sure what can be done legally or otherwise, but I do know that the public at large needs a thorough and constant education on these potential realities. Democrats must dig deep in legal research and political strategy to begin NOW to address these concerns with every weapon available. Even political protests may be shut down by the Trump juggernaut.
@McJ,
“Even political protests may be shut down by the Trump juggernaut.”
Yep. I suspect that will be the pretense for declaring martial law and suspending the Constitution indefinitely. I hope our 40+ years as card-carrying ACLU members will pay off.
J.P.
I believe the issue is more the public not knowing than anything else. Biden pulled off a rescue greater than what occurred in 2008, We dodged a bullet and Biden did little to brag about it.
The other issue being; “what does the American public have against intelligent and capable women?” First Clinton, who did better than Trump but lost due to the Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, the family dog, etc. vote in three states which added to the Electoral vote (if I remember the latter correctly). Then we have the loss to Trump by a woman of color who bested him in a debate and which he refused to debate her again.
We already knew the public did not like intelligent and assertive women. Did skin color or origins become another factor?
Biden relinquishing the attempt to run again was a factor. What puzzles me is his knowing how Trump works in public and lies. He really has no defining knowledge. He does tell stories and bullies.
Going back to the beginning, why didn’t Biden talk about his last 4 years in saving all f America and not just banks and Wall Street which was the prime thrust in 2008. The critters were given unemployment till Repubs said “no more freebies for you” while they rescued more banks.
As I pointed out to Paddy, we had another bank blowup recently. All due to loosening the restrictions on banks from $50 billion to $250 billion. Trumpie’s plan and not a peep from Dems or Biden.
Successful rescue by Biden of main street. Failure of banks due to loosening of Dodd Frank, etc by Trump. And little said by Dems.
Forgot one and that was people voting against their best interests in order to get even. There is a price to pay for that and Dearborn Michigan will pay it.
I have seen right wing finance commenters claiming the “economic data is wrong the economy is much worse” …
Stop with the wild rumors about the devil you thought was Trump, it is economics!
paddy:
It is apparent you missed the last sentence of that post which was written by me and not a part of the article.
Biden was a survivor of the 2008 recession/depression brought on by some serious gambling on Wall Street with little equity in it on the part of the gamblers. So little equity it forced Main Street to rescue their asses and take the consequences of that rescue in which many of the Wall Street clan did not have to be a part of then. Brief run down:
– In 2010, U.S. lawmakers passed the Dodd-Frank Act, which sought to reduce risk in the banking system.
– In 2018, Congress and the Donald Trump administration scaled back many of the legislation’s provisions, viewing them as too onerous on small and midsize banks.
– The collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and other regional lenders in 2023 spurred renewed debate over Dodd-Frank among regulators, the private sector, and Congress.
The 2018 rollback got rid of the $50 billion threshold, which many banks had argued was needlessly encumbering them. Instead, among many other changes, the rollback law made the enhanced regulations standard only for banks with at least $250 billion in assets – only about a dozen banks at the time.
The facts on Trump’s 2018 loosening of regulations on banks like SVB
The devil would know better than to be so bold.
At least at the presidential level, Democrats don’t need to do much of anything in particular for the next 4 years. Bill makes a convincing case the the economy was plenty good enough to have won. Biden and then Harris had plenty of resources to conduct a winning campaign. But for different reasons both were bad candidates. Biden was far too noticeably slipping and Harris doesn’t seem to have anything like the candidate talents that Clinton (Bill, that is), Obama and Trump have shown. It was like they were in a 10 foot hole in July and turned to a candidate with a 5 foot ceiling….she got them closer, but elections aren’t horseshoes or atom bombs. Next one they can run a wide-open primary and pick a better candidate. Also they will be mostly off the hook for the lawfare blowback. They might never acknowledge it, but those cases helped Trump. I don’t see 2024 as a huge repudiation of Democrats. The near static results in the House are not typical of elections with major swings in sentiment. Basically Trump was a better candidate than Harris, who, in turn, was an improvement over 2024’s version of Biden. In 2028 neither Trump nor Biden will be running and Harris would have to improve a lot to have a chance at the nomination.
Eric:
Once I see al the voting numbers, I will offer an opinion.
Okay. I’d think hard about the McDonald’s campaign event. Trump was the star of his campaign in a way Harris wasn’t. That helped him. A Barnum, but an authentic Barnum. Trump vibes > Harris vibes, no matter what most of the media tried to say.
I also don’t think that there needs to be a lot of soul searching by Democrats. Biden won 306 electoral votes in 2020, Trump won 312 this time. In 2017, there were 52 Republican Senators, now there will be 53 next year. The Republicans had about 240 House members in 2017, next year they will have maybe 225.
Biden was personally unpopular and so was Harris. If the Democrats stay together, they may be able to take back the House in 26 and pick up a couple of Senate seats. And 2028 will be an open Presidential election, so expect lots of interest in both parties.
@Jim,
“And 2028 will be an open Presidential election, so expect lots of interest in both parties.”
I wish I shared your (and other posters’) confidence. Sadly, I won’t be surprised if Trump declares martial law, suspends the Constitution and puts elections on hold indefinitely. And short of a military coup, I don’t see what could stop him.
Congress, the military, and the courts could stop him. You’re questioning whether or not they will. If he tries it, I think they will. We’ll have to wait and see.
@Jack,
Speaking of the military, Fox media personality Pete Hegseth will be Sec Def. Trump will be purging the ranks of anyone who might be deemed to be disloyal to him.
SCOTUS won’t stop him.
For the next two years, Congress is Republican. In two years, it will be too late.
But while I admire your optimism, I’m afraid your confidence in the rule of law is misplaced.
As I suggested elsewhere in response to Joel, inflation (prices) beat them this time. The hardships that the Republican trifecta is about to inflict on the country will likely defeat them next time. No excuses will be allowed.