Unlock the White House Watch newsletter for free
A guide to what the 2024 US election means for Washington and the world
Even the anti-Donald Trump graffiti on the streets of West Hollywood is now sparse and half-hearted. Eight years ago, California was a “resistance” state. Come 2025, visitors will encounter a different mood: resignations, boredom with the topic, a “we’re already there” attitude from thoughtful Democrats, and sometimes disapproval of the U.S. economy under a deregulated president. Potential to be curious about.
Liberals are shrugging. It’s only natural that this has been happening around the world since Trump’s victory last November. You can’t be angry all the time. In the authoritarian regimes of 20th-century Europe, dissident people often engaged in so-called “internal migration.” That is, instead of fleeing or fighting, they retreat into their private lives when the political realm grows dark around them. Separating like this is smart, not weak.
Just don’t take it too far, that’s all. I feel like liberals have a healthy acceptance of electoral realities and hope that a second Trump term won’t be so bad. please.
Three things undermined Trump’s impact last time. None of them apply now. First, he’s eager to be re-elected. That leaves him willing to anger the median voter to some extent, but no further. (The speed with which he severed ties with the slightly theocratic Project 2025 last summer showed how much this supposedly hot-tempered man wants to avoid unnecessary unpopularity.) Unless something goes wrong with the 22nd Amendment, Otherwise Trump is now liberated from the inherent discipline of electoral politics. Even midterm elections are meaningless because the race to succeed him will begin immediately. The second presidential term is two years.
what else? There were enough old-school Republicans in his first administration — Gary Cohn, Rex Tillerson — to curb his excesses. He now dotes on Macca-type officials and cabinet secretaries. Tulsi Gabbard may soon be at the helm of U.S. intelligence. It is neither stoic nor genteel to ignore this.
The bottom line is that the world in 2017 is stable enough to absorb a certain amount of chaos. Inflation is low and Europe is at peace. The last pandemic in the West was a century ago. Trump will launch tariffs and overseas deviance this time on more vulnerable networks.
We could go on like this, listing some practical, casual reasons to worry. We could mention the federal judiciary, which is more Trumpian now than it was when he took office. Will it restrain him? We might also mention that when he retires, he will be 82 years old. Last time, he had to consider the legal risks, earning potential and social reputation he would face in his post-presidential life. Will it be such a factor now?
Ultimately, however, my argument—and much of the political commentary—comes down to instinct. There is an arrogance in the Maga world now that was not present in 2017, in part because Trump did not win the popular vote. Talk about higher economic growth, territorial conquest, planting an American flag on Mars: if that doesn’t give you a sense of pre-collapse pride, impending overexpansion, then we just have different antennae. (I hope I’m wrong.) In all democracies, a party is most at risk when it achieves new electoral victories. The difference with the United States is the size of the stakes in the outside world. Think of George W Bush’s historic run in the 2002 midterm elections, or Lyndon Johnson’s escalation in the Vietnam War in 1964, when his vote pile went from It can be seen in space.
Yes, a war of choice is out of the question under Trump. (Though events may prompt leaders to take unusual action. Remember, the perception of Bush before September 11 was that he was an idle isolationist.) More likely, a tariff frenzy will trigger an uncontrollable The world will react, or the economy will get too hot, or the Constitution will crumble to the brink of collapse as Trump tries to reward friends and hunt down enemies. At the very least, there will be internal finger-pointing when it becomes clear that public debt, urban squalor, and other problems in the United States are beyond technoliberal solutions.
Whatever the specific shape of the coming chaos, the relative lack of concern compared with eight years ago is what stands out. The liberal line in 2025 seems to be this: We panicked about Trump too much last time, so let’s not make the same mistake again. No half of this proposition can withstand the slightest intellectual scrutiny. panic Was As it turns out, unless those two impeachments — one for trying to overturn the election results — somehow don’t count. Also, even if the first term isn’t that bad, why assume the second one is? Trump and his movement are now more serious entities. His inaugural address this week was stunning in scope and delivery.
That doesn’t mean people who don’t like Trump should follow his advice to “fight, fight, fight.” Protests and activism are a dead end for Democrats. But if smugness is bad, so is cringing self-doubt. The lesson for liberals from the 2024 election is, or should be, a narrow one: Stop picking dud candidates. This has turned into something of a broader crisis of confidence, with people questioning whether their basic assessment of Trump as a threat was correct. Being proven right will be no fun in the next few years.
janan.ganesh@ft.com
