Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Do presidential elections really matter? This one does!

Do presidential elections really matter?  This one does!
Getty Images

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

In October of 2012, I published an op-ed in the Huffington Post entitled, “Do Presidential Elections Really Matter?”


Today as I think back to the election of 2012 between incumbent Democratic President Barack Obama and Republican Governor Mitt Romney of Massachusetts, I realize how different the times were then. While Obama and Romney certainly had vastly different beliefs and policy prescriptions, the differences pale in contrast to what many Americans believe is an existential threat to America should the person they are opposed to in the 2024 election win.

In October of 2012 I suggested that both Democrats and Republicans believed if their nominee were elected, the serious problems our country faced would be tackled with a new vigor, and real change would actually occur. Unfortunately, this thinking was actually a fallacy as proven by history.

I used the deficit as an example stating that, “Economists and politicians universally believe that we must tackle the deficit problem, but does anyone really believe this urgent national problem will be addressed if the liberal wing of the Democrat party is unwilling to cut entitlements and conservative Republicans are unwilling to raise revenue?”

How ironic is it that not only did we fail to address the problem in 2012 but today in 2023 we are experiencing another partisan battle that threatens to result in a default on our nation's debt.

The thesis of my writing in 2012 was that so often in our history we experience a new president come into office with lofty ideals only to be stymied by the system. I suggested that politicians and the media overplay the importance of the outcome of presidential elections in determining the direction our country will take in the four years following the election given that more often than not national elections merely validate an establishment that never really changes. I still believe this today. I still believe that unless a new paradigm is created that changes the temperament and the process by which Congress operates, our democratic republic will be mired in dysfunction and hyperpartisanship at the expense of the American citizenry. The president can propose legislation, the president can use the bully pulpit, but the president's hands will be tied if we have a divided Congress, more interested in scoring points against the other political party than in solving problems.

Unfortunately nothing has occurred since 2012 to change my thinking except today my concerns are not just about partisanship and dysfunction, they are also about the very existence of our democracy. Today there is an existential threat to our democratic republic. Elections now are not just about differences in policy but about the potential demise of the democratic republic that will define the future of democracy in the United States for future generations.

What we witnessed after the presidential election of 2020 should not be forgotten. The fact that to this day despite the insurrection of January 6, 2021, 61 percent of Republicans still believe that President Biden did not win the election. This is one reason why the presidential election of 2024 does matter.

If Americans don’t trust the election results, can our democracy possibly survive?

"For the election system to work, our entire democracy to work, depends on trust in the election system. That is the reason why there is and has always been a peaceful transition of power after elections in the United States," said Wendy Weiser, who directs the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice. "And if that belief isn't there, then there's a real risk that we can see more resistance to peaceful transitions of power, more resistance to the electoral system overall."

Former President Donald Trump, and candidate for president in 2024, has already made it clear what is at risk when in early March he said this to thousands of cheering supporters:

“In 2016, I declared, ‘I am your voice.’ Today I add: I am your warrior, I am your justice, and for those who have been wronged and betrayed, I am your retribution!”

That statement should be alarming to all Americans. The presidential election of 2024, unlike the presidential election of 2012, is not about jobs, the deficit, abortion or immigration. It is about retribution. It is about getting back at your opponent, about punishing those who disagree with you.

As Americans it is time for us to realize that there is no America without democracy, no democracy without voting, and no informed voting without respectful debate.

Each one of us as we think about who we will vote for in 2024 must make a stand for democracy. We must make a pledge that rises above partisan issues. It is time that we demand that all candidates agree to three simple principles of democracy:

  • The right of all American citizens to participate in a transparent, safe and secure election process.
  • The peaceful conduct of all elections and the peaceful transfer of power.
  • The treatment of all my fellow citizens with dignity and respect, and never with contempt.

If We the People, from the right, left and center all make this pledge to defend and protect our democracy, the election of 2024 will truly matter!


Read More

Zohran Mamdani’s call for warm ‘collectivism’ is dead on arrival

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and his wife Rama Duwaji wave after his ceremonial inauguration as mayor at City Hall on Jan. 1, 2026, in New York.

(Spencer Platt/Getty Images/TNS)

Zohran Mamdani’s call for warm ‘collectivism’ is dead on arrival

The day before the Trump administration captured and extradited Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro, many on the right (including yours truly) had a field day mocking something the newly minted mayor of New York City, Zohran Mamdani, said during his inaugural address.

The proud member of the Democratic Socialists of America proclaimed: “We will replace the frigidity of rugged individualism with the warmth of collectivism.”

Keep ReadingShow less
The Lie of “Safe” State Violence in America: Montgomery Then, Minneapolis Now

Police tape surrounds a vehicle suspected to be involved in a shooting by an ICE agent during federal law enforcement operations on January 07, 2026 in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

(Photo by Stephen Maturen/Getty Images)

The Lie of “Safe” State Violence in America: Montgomery Then, Minneapolis Now

Once again, the nation watched in horror as a 37-year-old woman was shot and killed by an ICE agent in Minneapolis. The incident was caught on video. Neighbors saw it happen, their disbelief clear. The story has been widely reported, but hearing it again does not make it any less violent. Video suggest, there was a confrontation. The woman tried to drive away. An agent stepped in front of her car. Multiple shots went through the windshield. Witnesses told reporters that a physician at the scene attempted to provide aid but was prevented from approaching the vehicle, a claim that federal authorities have not publicly addressed. That fact, if accurate, should trouble us most.

What happened on that street was more than just a tragic mistake. It was a moral challenge to our society, asking for more than just shock or sadness. This moment makes us ask: what kind of nation have we created, and what violence have we come to see as normal? We need to admit our shared responsibility, knowing that our daily choices and silence help create a culture where this violence is accepted. Including ourselves in this 'we' makes us care more deeply and pushes us to act, not just reflect.

Keep ReadingShow less
Two groups of glass figures. One red, one blue.

Congressional paralysis is no longer accidental. Polarization has reshaped incentives, hollowed out Congress, and shifted power to the executive.

Getty Images, Andrii Yalanskyi

How Congress Lost Its Capacity to Act and How to Get It Back

In late 2025, Congress fumbled the Affordable Care Act, failing to move a modest stabilization bill through its own procedures and leaving insurers and families facing renewed uncertainty. As the Congressional Budget Office has warned in multiple analyses over the past decade, policy uncertainty increases premiums and reduces insurer participation (see, for example: https://www.cbo.gov/publication/61734). I examined this episode in an earlier Fulcrum article, “Governing by Breakdown: The Cost of Congressional Paralysis,” as a case study in congressional paralysis and leadership failure. The deeper problem, however, runs beyond any single deadline or decision and into the incentives and procedures that now structure congressional authority. Polarization has become so embedded in America’s governing institutions themselves that it shapes how power is exercised and why even routine governance now breaks down.

From Episode to System

The ACA episode wasn’t an anomaly but a symptom. Recent scholarship suggests it reflects a broader structural shift in how Congress operates. In a 2025 academic article available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN), political scientist Dmitrii Lebedev reaches a stark conclusion about the current Congress, noting that the 118th Congress enacted fewer major laws than any in the modern era despite facing multiple time-sensitive policy deadlines (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5346916). Drawing on legislative data, he finds that dysfunction is no longer best understood as partisan gridlock alone. Instead, Congress increasingly exhibits a breakdown of institutional capacity within the governing majority itself. Leadership avoidance, procedural delay, and the erosion of governing norms have become routine features of legislative life rather than temporary responses to crisis.

Keep ReadingShow less
America’s Two Economies - Soaring Stocks and Slashed Food Stamps

As 2026 begins, the U.S. economy is splitting in two—booming corporate profits and stock gains for the wealthy, deepening hardship for working families.

America’s Two Economies - Soaring Stocks and Slashed Food Stamps

The close of the 2025 holiday season has revealed a stark divide in the U.S. economy. As 2026 begins, the United States appears to be operating in two financial realities: record corporate profits and soaring stock values for the wealthy, alongside deepening hardship for millions of ordinary households. For many Americans, Christmas was overshadowed not by celebration but by economic strain, compounded by the rollback of key federal assistance programs.

The year’s economic data offered mixed signals. Online sales surged to $11.8 billion on Black Friday, and overall holiday spending is projected to exceed $1 trillion for the first time. Yet nearly half of all national consumption now comes from high-income households, whose spending on luxury goods and premium travel masks the growing struggles of families at the lower end of the income scale.

Keep ReadingShow less