Contrary to the protestations of the mainstream media, President Trump does not pose a radical and unprecedented threat to democracy. In reality, he ran a quite moderate campaign. Rather than fully endorsing conservative principles (or prosecuting his opponent) the president occupied the middle ground that Democrats abandoned. On the economy, immigration, and social issues, he articulated many popular and common-sense positions.
Democrats realized their mistake only later in the campaign when they began to feign moderation. Thus Kamala Harris ran ads featuring Trump’s border wall and pledged to spend hundreds of millions on extending it. Previously, the former vice president supported decriminalizing border crossings and called the wall a “medieval vanity project.” She also supported transgender mutilation surgeries for prisoners and illegal immigrants. Later, in the 2024 campaign, she suddenly became coy on the issue, merely stating that she would “follow the law.” Her brief flirt with sanity was too little too late.
Indeed, the recent election should serve as a wake-up call for Democrats to attempt a reclamation of the middle ground they lost to President Trump. Given their coterie of high-paid consultants, one would think this is exactly what they would do.
Nevertheless, it appears that Democrats are inseparable from their radical left-wing base. They cannot fathom that Americans genuinely prefer moderation to a woke revolution.
This inability to read the political current was put on full display during Governor Tim Walz’s recent appearance on MSNBC. Responding to President Trump’s brief freeze of federal funding, Walz warned his audience “This is real…They’re talking about defunding the police.” He then urged his viewers to ignore distractions like whether Elon Musk gave a Nazi salute because “of course he did.” Walz also expressed concern for the federal employees who may be fired. Never mentioned was the fact that according to a recent audit, only 6 percent of federal employees work full-time in an office.
In many ways, Tim Walz represents the heart of the Democratic Party. He pontificates, endorses absurd positions in the name of compassion, and repeats media talking points. He finds fear-mongering about President Trump much easier than providing a feasible alternative.
The delirium among Democrats is also apparent to those who tune into major news outlets. The highlight of CNN is now watching conservative Scott Jennings destroy his counterparts as they discuss policy. During the presidential campaign, for example Jim Acosta pointed to Trump’s “dehumanizing” rhetoric surrounding immigrants. Jennings responded by asking “Would you say it is more or less dehumanizing than murdering and raping someone?” On every major issue it seems that the left is more worried about hurting people’s feelings than delivering results.
Ultimately, there are two scenarios for a future Democratic victory. First, President Trump may misread his mandate and go too far. If this occurs voters may punish incumbents by voting them out of office. This would merely represent a dissatisfaction with Republican governance rather than an approval of Democratic principles. Second, Democrats could undertake a systematic renewal of their party by adopting common-sense immigration policies and abandoning their radicalism on social issues.
The second scenario occurred with the election of former President Bill Clinton in 1992. He made overtures to Republicans and rejected many aspects of the traditional Democratic Party. In his 1996 State of the Union Address, for example, Clinton declared that “the era of big government is over.” He also acknowledged the coming of “the era of balanced budgets and smaller government.”
Democrats would do well to follow Clinton’s example. However, it could take a while. Twelve years passed between Ronald Reagan’s victory in the 1980 election and Clinton’s triumph in 1992. Thus, if President Trump and his allies play their hand right, we may be entering a period of historic and much-needed Republican governance.
