Trump’s first victory galvanized a divided and dispirited Democratic coalition. The “Resistance” was a historic counter-mobilization that pressured Congress to save the Affordable Care Act, raised the alarm about the danger of Trump, and won almost every election of consequence… until last month.

The 2016 election felt like a glitch in the space-time continuum. Democrats convinced themselves that Trump’s victory was an accident borne of Jim Comey’s Clinton investigation, Russian interference, Facebook’s dangerous disinformation, and Hilary Clinton’s decision not to campaign in Wisconsin. 2024 feels much different — and worse. Trump gained among groups that were core to the Democratic base. There are no easy answers to this problem.

It’s only been a few weeks, but clearly the Democratic response to the second Trump presidency will contrast greatly with the first. Currently, there is scant evidence of the massive counter-mobilization that defined the “Resistance.” There are no plans for a massive march on Washington tied to Trump’s inauguration. Tens of thousands of people won’t flock to airports at a moment’s notice to protest a Trump executive order.

Understandable anger, frustration, and fear are pulsing through the Democratic Party. People — myself very much included — feel shellshocked by the result, even though it was foreseeable and predicted by many. People wonder what the next four years will look like and how each of us should respond.

While we are licking our wounds and looking for answers, Trump is speeding to implement his agenda and install political cronies in powerful and consequential positions. On Saturday, the mounting danger was brought home by the announcement that Trump planned to nominate noted conspiracy theorist Kash Patel as FBI director. This story on Patel from The Atlantic’s Elaina Plott Calabro is worth a read.

While we are still figuring out the bigger questions as a party, Democrats need to begin organizing our opposition to Trump before it’s too late. I don’t have all (or most of) the answers, but I have some initial thoughts on what the Resistance 2.0 should look like.

1. Don’t Use the Term Resistance

Let's be honest; the term “Resistance” is cringe-inducing. The term was adopted by the people who flocked online to talk about politics in the immediate aftermath of Trump’s win. As noted, the “Resistance” had an incredible record of success. However, branding ourselves as the “Resistance” defined us as Trump’s opposition. Our purpose as a party was to oppose Trump at all costs. This mentality impacted every message and strategic decision. It’s how we thought of ourselves — and in the end, it’s how voters thought of us too. To them, we didn’t stand for anything other than being anti-Trump. That approach can work when Trump is polling at 41%. It works less well when he is at 47%.

2. Beating Trump Is No Longer Our Goal

Resistance 1.0 was designed to help us survive four years of Trump until we had the opportunity to beat him in the 2020 election (Mission accomplished, sorta).

But here’s the thing — Donald Trump is never running for President again. Trump has dominated American politics for nearly a decade. He ran for President three consecutive times and was the central figure in every intervening midterm election. Most discourse revolved around him, and he single-handedly drove discussion. Republicans emulated him and Democrats were disgusted by him. I have been writing, podcasting, and posting about him for so long that I hardly remember what it’s like to focus on Republicans who aren’t Trump.

But how do we really know he’s not running for President again? Never say never to anything involving Trump. If he could actually force his way onto the ballot again, we have bigger problems than my messaging advice. And in general, it’s a bad idea to orient your strategy around the least likely, worst-case outcomes.

Opposing Trump is crucial. Still, we have to stand for something bigger than opposition. Our messaging cannot be so Trump-centric. We must discuss the Republican Party writ large. Trump spent the last eight years attacking Democrats for being out-of-touch elitists who are soft on crime and immigration. We were talking about Trump. He was talking about Democrats. We paid the price.

3. The Dem Brand Has Degraded

It’s unfair. The Biden Administration and the Democrats in Congress passed a series of consequential pieces of legislation. Countless Democrats put forward countless policy proposals. But voters only heard about Trump. Our strategy overly focused on Donald Trump in a media ecosystem that already prioritizes Trump-related content. This is a problematic incentive structure — wanna get attention, engagement, booked on cable? You better talk about Trump. Wanna feel like an unnoticed tree falling in the woods? Talk about anything else.

The Democratic Party brand was a blank canvas for too many voters; and Donald Trump, with an assist from a powerful Right Wing media operation, filled in the details. According to Gallup polling, the Democratic Party has its lowest favorability rating in 30 years.

It’s not an accident that the Senate candidate who ran furthest ahead of Kamala Harris was Dan Osborn of Nebraska — someone who held most of the party’s popular positions on economic issues and abortion, but ran instead as an Independent.

I say all of this not to make you (even more) depressed by the current state of affairs, but to lay out the work we need to do. Our task is two-fold: rebuild our brand and define the Republican Party. There will be opportunities galore in the coming months and years, but for now, feel free to revel in the idea that Donald Trump is the lamest of ducks and we don’t have to talk about him 24-7 anymore. We have more pressing priorities.

Share