Jack* wrote this ten days ago:
Much of what Donald Trump proposed as a candidate should be embraced by the protesters. Trump is not a conventional republican. He campaigned on maintaining and strengthening the social safety net programs of social security and medicare. Although he did run against the Affordable Care Act, he promised to maintain the popular provisions of preventing Insurance Companies from denying coverage to persons with pre existing conditions an also to allow
parents to insure their children up through age 26. He ran on a program of reducing tensions with Russia and supporting them in their efforts on behalf of Assad to defeat Syrian rebels which include components of Sunni/Wahabi fundamentalists including Isis. He has proposed a one trillion dollar stimulus program. And at various times has said he would raise taxes on the Investment Bankers that are at the apex of a financialized economy, while promoting a manufacturing economy that employs workers and produces goods.
He has promised to renegotiate trade deals so they are more favorable to workers in the United States. He wants to enforce existing immigration laws and enact policies that will evaluate immigrants in terms of which ones provide the greatest benefit to the United States as a whole. When Bernie Sanders was interviewed by Ezra Klein, Sanders pointed out that refusal to enforce immigration laws is bad for workers and was supported by the Koch Brothers.
All of these proposals should appeal to the protesters as they are more progressive and liberal than policies espoused by Hillary Clinton (except that Hillary Clinton wanted to grant those who had entered the country illegally, an opportunity to remain.)
To enact constitutional amendments 3/4 of the state legislatures have to support it. Right now the Republicans control all but 17 and of those 17, in four of them the Republicans already control at least one house of the legislature. If they win control of those four and one more they will be in a position to approve new constitutional amendments, amendments that surely progressives dislike.
Protesters should realize they are playing with fire. It is fine to march and denounce Trump although by calling him an extremist, it reveals that they are partisans and not principled. Any acts that disrupt the everyday lives of people, such as blocking highways, breaking windows, harassing persons not supportive of the rallies, only turns off the very persons they are trying to reach and persuade, and even worse it risks pushing Trump into the arms of traditional Republicans. The last thing the protesters should want is for Trump to make common cause with Paul Ryan to impose Ryan’s budget, or with the Neo Conservative war mongers to continue America’s foreign interventions in support of our “Empire.” It also appears the protests are counterproductive as Trump’s approval ratings have risen from 37 to 46 percent since the election and his unfavorability ratings have dropped from 61 to 46 percent. 65% of Democrats and most of the protesters say they want the Democratic minority to act toward Trump as the Republican minority acted toward Obama, as a monolithic bloc aimed at thwarting anything Obama wanted to do. As it was Congress passed the affordable care act without any Republican votes and barely squeezed out approval of a stimulus package, that instead of creating jobs by repairing infrastructure, was doled out to states that used the funds to
close budget holes and to pay employees in the public sector; sort of disguised bribery to to keep them voting for the guy who allowed them to collect bonuses and not have to accept pay cuts. But in his first two years when he had a Democratic House and Senate, Obama didn’t offer programs that fit within the Republicans’ ideology or its politics.
Some of Trump’s proposals do. In fact, some of his proposals likely, will face Republican opposition and cannot be passed without Democratic support. If Democrats think this will help their chances in the 2018 midterms, then perhaps they should stick with a plan of obstruction, even if it would be more in keeping with their principles to support them. But Democrats are defending 25 Senate seats in 2018, many of them in states where Trump handily defeated Clinton. Do the protesters want to lose those as well?
Both Schumer and Sanders have indicated that they will work with Trump on proposals that they favor. This puts them as realists, but also at odds with the Democrats as a whole. It also undermines the Trump equals Hitler argument as neither of them would try to help a Hitler pass any legislation.
Further, the Republicans have not changed the senate rules to do away with the filibuster (which requires 60 votes for cloture) and which allows the minority party if it has at least 41 votes to exert some leverage on legislation. However, the senate under the Democrats did vote to bar the filibuster for lower court and other office appointment confirmations. If the Democrats take an obstructionist tack in the Senate, the Republicans may eliminate it entirely.
The unintended consequences for the protesters will almost surely make a President Trump govern more conservatively than he would otherwise. The protests may push the Republican majority in the Senate past 60 so that they wouldn’t even have to bar the filibuster to enact conservative legislation or confirm conservative appointees and it may result in tipping enough state legislatures Republican so that some conservative ideas become enshrined in the
Constitution.
