Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Do Trump’s Goals Justify His Words and Actions?

Do Trump’s Goals Justify His Words and Actions?

President Donald Trump.

Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images

As co-publishers of The Fulcrum, it is time to clarify our mission in the context of what we are witnessing from the current Trump Administration.

The barrage of executive orders in the last few weeks has resulted in outrage by his political opponents. In many cases, the responses are justified. Still, at times, the responses ignore the fact that there might be some truth in what the Trump administration is saying and legitimate reasons for some actions they are taking.


Our challenge as a publication, dedicated to keeping our readers informed so we can repair our democracy and make it live and work in our everyday lives, is not to be overly reactive or partisan. At the same time, we must not ignore the dangers of the administration's degrading, hostile, and accusatory language and dangerous actions when they occur, while also acknowledging inappropriate responses when they occur.

Finding the proper balance is a difficult task indeed.

The Fulcrum must be mindful of the fact that Trump won a plurality of the vote and currently has a majority approval rating. If we are to serve our mission of engaging a broad spectrum of citizens from the left, right, and center in the political process, all working together to face tough challenges facing our nation, we must be mindful of this fact.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

We believe it is our obligation to acknowledge that a varying percentage of the administration's statements and actions have merit and are based on truth while, at the same time, not normalizing the language Trump uses or understating the devastating impact many of his executive orders or other actions are having on millions of people in the United States and around the world.

On his first day in office, January 20, 2025, Trump signed an executive order initiating a 90-day pause on all U.S. foreign development assistance to assess the efficiency and alignment of these programs with U.S. foreign policy. The order also called for reviews of each foreign assistance program to determine whether to continue, modify, or cease them.

Some notable statements by Musk and Trump followed the executive order. Musk stated on social media that "USAID is a criminal organization." Trump echoed Musk’s sentiments by saying, "The agency is run by a bunch of radical lunatics."

It is easy to be reactive to statements like this. It is, perhaps, even imperative that The Fulcrum calls out such dangerous language used by Trump and Musk and do the same should members of Congress from the other party make similar comments.

However, strongly admonishing abhorrent words or actions while, at the same time, acknowledging some degree of truth in the underlying action are not mutually exclusive. Finding where that truth is remains one of our key objectives.

In the case of USAID, The Fulcrum acknowledges the need to engage in a thoughtful and analytical process, leading to the elimination of waste, fraud, and abuse that exists in USAID and frankly in all organizations—governmental and nongovernmental. That is far different from the slash-and-burn approach underway. Acknowledging the need to reform the government does not mean always condoning the methods being used to do so; that ability to offer nuanced commentary is what we pride ourselves on.

One way of accomplishing this is to call attention to the logical fallacies employed by Trump. Hyperbole is one of the Trump administration's favorite logical fallacies. This approach might best be served by using an approach that Socrates developed to respond to logical fallacies that we now call the Socratic Method. In its simple form, one can ask questions in an effort to refute a statement or hypothesis that allows individuals with opposing opinions to build upon those differences rather than becoming further separated by them.

Socrates wisely recognized that human nature needed to be nudged away from its natural inclination to focus on who's right and wrong or who wins and who loses. Instead, he proposed that seeking to better understand the thoughts, beliefs, and viewpoints that differ from our own can give rise to new insights, greater awareness, and generate, otherwise, undetected solutions and remedies to stalemated problems and issues.

Citizens don't have to be experts, like Socrates, to recognize some of the deplorable techniques—currently used by many politicians of both parties—within posturing, filled with twisted facts and vitriolic disdain, that solely seeks to win our trust. As these behaviors unfold, The Fulcrum will not only report on these actions but, most importantly, strive to find solutions.

One reason Americans so easily fall prey to such deceptive political ploys is that lodged within our human nature is a tendency to embrace information that supports our beliefs and to ignore or distort evidence contrary to our beliefs. Although understandable, this tendency can blind us from the facts and the truth. We will not be blinded.

And so, as we embark on a new administration, The Fulcrum will remain vigilant. We will attempt to understand the tactics of debate and expect more from ourselves, our politicians, and our nation.

In the coming weeks and months, we will be specifically attentive to the many logical fallacies used by politicians. At this juncture, we are focused on the Trump administration because they are the administration in power. However, when those on the left employ the same logical fallacies (not to mention despicable language) to manipulate public opinion and divert attention from substantive issues, we will report on that as well. We also understand that spotlighting illegal and unconstitutional actions is a mandate for each of us and should rise above partisanship.

While our desire is to be fair and accurate, we must be mindful of not falling into the moral equivalency trap. When equally bad or good words or actions are presented as being equally bad or good, this can be potentially dangerous. As an example, if a Fulcrum news story implies that both protestors and terrorists are harmful and the comparison fails to acknowledge that while vandalism is illegal and disruptive, it is not morally or ethically equivalent to causing mass casualties through a terrorist attack, we are falling into the moral equivalency trap. It is essential that we are mindful of falling into this trap as we try to be balanced by inadvertently downplaying or exaggerating the seriousness of different events.

While our coverage must be balanced, the extent of our coverage of an event will take into account the significance and impact of actions, and the impact these actions are having on people, communities, and systems. Simply stated, not all sides deserve equal coverage.

The Fulcrum is partisan about one thing: “Democracy.“

The Fulcrum will not be distracted.

David Nevins is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.

Kristina Becvar is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and executive director of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.

Read More

Pope Francis and Democracy: Navigating Beliefs and Political Systems
person wearing white cap looking down under cloudy sky during daytime

Pope Francis and Democracy: Navigating Beliefs and Political Systems

Pope Francis is being remembered for his reformist stance that both challenged conservative elements within the Catholic Church and resonated with progressive movements. The 88-year-old Argentina-born pontiff passed away on Monday following a series of health complications.

The leader of the Roman Catholic Church often shared his perspectives on various societal issues, including the relationship between faith and democracy. His tenure as pope was marked by a commitment to social justice, human rights, and the dignity of all individuals, which naturally intersects with democratic ideals.

Keep ReadingShow less
Public Perspectives: Trump Presidency

U.S. President Donald Trump prepares to watch the Ultimate Fighting Championship at the Kaseya Center on April 12, 2025 in Miami, Florida.

(Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

Public Perspectives: Trump Presidency

Ahead of Election Day 2024, the Fulcrum launched We the People, a series elevating the voices and visibility of the persons most affected by the decisions of elected officials.

Now, we continue the series to learn if the Donald Trump administration is meeting the voters' motivations for voting in the 2024 presidential election.

Keep ReadingShow less
CO lawmakers work to protect voter rights after Trump elections order

More than 95% of all voters in the United States use paper ballots in elections.

Adobe Stock

CO lawmakers work to protect voter rights after Trump elections order

Some Colorado lawmakers are scrambling to protect voter rights after President Donald Trump issued an executive order to require proof of citizenship to register to vote. They say the requirement would disproportionately affect low-income voters and people of color.

David Becker, executive director of the Center for Election Innovation and Research, said the language in the U.S. Constitution is very clear that the authority to run elections is delegated to individual states.

"Everyone - Republican, Democrat, liberal, conservative - wants to keep ineligible voters off the list. And there's always some value in discussing how to do it better," he explained. "Unfortunately that's not what this executive order does. It's really a remarkable seizure of power from the states."

Trump has cast doubt on the integrity of American elections for years, despite evidence that fraud is extremely rare. The new order claims the nation has failed "to enforce basic and necessary election protections," and would allow the Department of Homeland Security and 'DOGE' to access state voter rolls. Colorado Senate Bill 1 - which would bar voter discrimination based on race, sexual orientation or gender identity - has cleared the state Senate and now moves to the House.

Becker noted that Congress does have constitutional authority to change election rules, and did so most notably after passage of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. And in 2021, he says House Democrats passed a sweeping set of election reforms that ended up dying in the Senate.

"But at least that was done through congressional action. What we have here is an executive power grab - an attempt by the President of the United States to dictate to states how they run elections, how they should exercise the power that is granted to them by the Constitution," he continued.

Becker noted the new order suggests serious misunderstandings, intentional or not, about the nation's election system, which he says is secure. It's already illegal for non-U.S. citizens to vote, and voter lists are as accurate as they've ever been. More than 95% of all U.S. voters use paper ballots, which are available in all states, and ballots are audited to confirm results.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Keep ReadingShow less
The Pressing Issue of Distinction Overload

Multicolored megaphones.

Getty Images, MicroStockHub

The Pressing Issue of Distinction Overload

We live in a time of distinction overload, namely a proliferation of distinctions that are employed in all aspects of contemporary political, economic, and social life. Distinction Overload—let's name it—is overwhelming citizens who pay attention to workplace dynamics, politics, and family life. Distinction Overload is a relative of information overload, associated with the Information Age itself, which is a descendant of the information explosion that occurred during the Renaissance after Johannes Gutenberg invented the printing press.

You can’t really talk or write, let alone think, without making distinctions, and the process of human development itself is very much about learning useful distinctions—me and you, left and right, good and evil, night and day, yes and no, mother and father, humans, fish and animals, and so on. Some distinctions reflect opposition; others divide reality or ethics into three or four or more categories.

Keep ReadingShow less