There are all kinds of lessons we want to pass on to our kids when it comes to competition, chief among them how to lose well and how to win well. Sometimes winners learn that they should be extra gracious, even if they don’t feel very gracious about the long-term benefits of taking the high road.
This is especially true for governing in a polarized climate. As for losers, not looking bitter is usually a sign of losers hoping for a future.
Of course, these basic rules of political etiquette are ones that Donald Trump rarely follows. Of course, the president-elect showed a little more grace after winning this In the election, partly because of this, he won more decisively than in 2016. Throw in his very narrow popular vote advantage and he feels good. And he – his claim to the campaign and to working-class voters from all walks of life – proved true. He’s amassing political capital, and his victory allows him to raise more money…if he wants to.
And I really have a question about how he plans to conduct this presidency. How much of his presidency will focus on revenge, how much on reform, how much on self-enrichment, and how much on building power for himself or his movement?
Given his choices for Cabinet and other positions so far, he appears to be more bent on revenge than reform.
On some level, I buy into the notion that one man’s revenge is another man’s “reform,” so I’m sure Trump can claim to be appointing reformers. Still, the fireman who burned down the building will not be mistaken for the reformist architect. Perhaps the arsonist could have argued that he could not have shared his vision if he had not first set fire to the existing location.
Ultimately, what matters is whether these people can govern as reformers or simply become conduits for Trump’s revenge. And it’s hard not to see all this as revenge rather than reform — from creation list of generals to be fired danger cleaning up the non-political federal workforce — It’s hard not to see this as anything other than a vindictive Cabinet of Ministers.
And politically, it doesn’t make much sense.
Let’s say he’s in control of the left and “owning the libs” by agreeing with his choices to run the Senate: former Rep. Matt Gaetz to run the Justice Department, former Fox host Pete Hegsett to run the Defense Department, Robert F. Kennedy. ” was successful. Jr. will lead the Department of Health and Human Services, and former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard will become director of national intelligence. What will this do for him and his constituents in the long run? If the reason for electing these people is purely revenge, and they are implementing what Trump’s identity wants, is that really going to help him accomplish any actual agenda? If he picks all these first fights with the biggest and most important parts of the government, the mess that ensues is “change can be painful, let’s be patient,” just “instability is painful and we need it.” some balance to calm the waters”? Don’t believe me—just rewind the tape to Trump’s last term.
And what bothers me more than anything else is this question: Why is he so intent on picking the most controversial flame he can think of for every post? Why does he want everyone in the Cabinet armed with sledgehammers? Is he so angry with the so-called deep state? Is he sure the government set him up because of Russia or the various civil and criminal cases he’s facing? Or is he sure he knows everything the government does is problematic and is afraid of it?
Are both answers satisfactory to the average voter?
Either Trump is right and the government is armed to stop him, or the government is right, Trump is a unique threat and he is trying to weaken the parts of the government that trust him the most, namely the military and federal law enforcement. .
Here’s the political problem Trump has created for himself: He now owns the entire bureaucracy. There is no fantasy or mythical “deep state” to blame for failing to deliver on its promises. He’s appointing people he says share his vision — so there’s no excuse for being pushed out by the old establishment wing of the GOP (like what happened in his first term).
This time, he must deliver, and his ability to deliver depends on whether he can bring together a stable set of political actors to not only do his bidding, but somehow deliver on his promises. Trumpism for the first time.
If the next six months at the Pentagon are more about what bathrooms people can or can’t use and who can or can’t defend the country, trust me if you’re watching (and watching). Rap Nancy Mace’s final performance (You can see how quickly Hegseth could try to start a culture war inside the Pentagon, and all the evidence suggests that’s his mission), Trump will find himself taking on more. More heat for the controversial defense chief pick than his actual pick.
There are many potential landmines that Trump and the newly empowered GOP must avoid. One misreads their mandate on the cultural front.
Culturally, they don’t like being told how to behave, as many voters seem to be saying in their own voices. There is fierce libertarianism in this country, and it can appear “left” or “right” depending on the party in power. If Republicans go from preaching against “DEI” to essentially enforcing their own culture, mandating Bible study in public schools (see Oklahoma), or using gender stereotypes rather than pure merit to decide whether someone belongs on the front lines, then the belief that they would commit the same sin they accused Coastal elites of committing, of “imposing their culture” on a public that disagreed with their every point.
“Live and let live” will always be a more comfortable place for a diverse, multi-ethnic democracy than trying to impose one set of values on another.
And that’s the very risk that Trump has already invited by deciding to pick the most controversial firearm he can find in some of these key positions. If his choices lead to instability, the public will reject this administration sooner than he thinks.
Trump and the GOP have already misread his so-called mandate that he was elected. though his personal unpopularity. That is, he was not actively elected by the voters who caught him on the sidelines; he was chosen because of who he was no.
It wasn’t a decision voters made because they liked Trump. Rather, they made the decision because they didn’t think the Biden-Harris administration understood how they were living their lives. Does Trump get it? Maybe not, but he sure knew how to channel their frustration into a get-out-the-vote message, and he certainly exposed Democrats as having no clue how the working class is faring in this economy.
But these moments, which are the peak of political capital, pass and when they go, they go. Just ask President Joe Biden.
Biden saw any political capital he had built up early in his presidency completely disappear during the botched withdrawal from Afghanistan, even within a year. The remarkable thing about that moment is that Biden never recovered from the August 2021 debacle in his approval ratings.
I’ve long wondered why voters abandoned Biden so quickly and why he didn’t get the benefit of the doubt. My conclusion is that voters were never sold on Biden as president. He was elected because of who he is (Trump) rather than because of who he is (Barack Obama’s vice president).
Make no mistake, after the chaos of Covid, the electorate just wanted calm and stability – not some massive ideological shift in philosophy, but a break from the instability that Trump has brought. I think Biden lost a lot of ground with the botched retreat because those crucial voters thought he might be as unstable or arguably incompetent (or potentially so) as the previous occupant of the Oval Office.
If Biden had won his 2020 Democratic primary the old-fashioned way—instead of putting the primary campaign on hold because of the virus, going through the primaries, making his case, establishing his political identity, instead of how he won—maybe the public would give him some grace for his first big mistake. . But that didn’t happen, and the lack of connective tissue between Biden and the voters served him poorly once his administration was judged on its merits.
Every political party sees its tenure in power come to an end over the same issue: overreach. Whether it’s excessive cultural norms, government breakdown (ie, “reform”), or simply misreading the electorate itself, there’s no better recipe for political failure than partisan overreach. And there is no better cure for a losing political party than the ability to fight back the excesses of the party in power.
The question is whether Trump and his GOP understand how they won. If they don’t accept that they win because of who they are no not because of who they are, but because they will see their support erode as quickly for them as it did for Biden. Right now, Trump is on the verge of overreaching, and he’s not even sworn in yet.
If the first thing out of the box in January is a mass deportation plan that looks as shaky and unstable as the first round of appointments, not only will Trump not have a honeymoon, but he could see a newly aligned GOP. controlled Congress will run for the hills — if his approval rating drops as low as it did by the end of Biden’s first year.