Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Political Déjà vu after the Election

Opinion

elections
election, people voting
Brett Deering/Getty Images

Democrats are feeling positively giddy about the recent election results. The Press has noticed. “Total rebuke of the Trump agenda and of Donald Trump,” CNN reported. Democrats are poised to reset from 2024 and reclaim power in the 2026 midterms, said the PBS News Hour. November 4th was the “night Democrats finally stopped losing,” announced Politico.

It was indeed a good night—a very good night—for the Democratic Party. And yet, before we toast the Dems for returning from the political wilderness and we escort Republicans from the political stage, we would be wise to remember a few truths.


Take this NPR story about the resurrection of the Democratic Party and the demise of Trump’s base coalition. The story is titled, “Seven Takeaways from Election Day,” and it begins with the following: “Democrats won up and down the ballot Tuesday night, notably in the governors’ races in Virginia and New Jersey. The victories were a much needed sigh of relief for a party that hadn’t had any high profile victories at the ballot box during the first year of the Trump presidency—despite his record-low approval ratings.” The article goes on to list the so-called “seven takeaways” from election night. They include, “the resistance can win;” “Trumpism has its limits;” the “Progressive Platform gets a boost” (think Mamdani); “the shifting of old political lines continues” (many Latinos, for instance, voted again for Democrats), and perhaps the ultimate takeaway: “voting matters.”

Accurate? No question. Spot-on, really. The article nicely captures the story of the Democratic surge on November 4th. The problem is the piece was written in November 2017, a full eight years before the 2025 election. The article was a debrief of the November election that followed President Trump’s first occupancy of the White House. It’s déjà vu all over again.

That’s a cautionary tale for Democrats. To be sure, the Democrats picked up 40 seats in Congress during the 2018 midterm elections, securing a fairly comfortable majority in the House. But the Republicans gained two additional seats in the Senate that election, thereby maintaining control of the upper chamber. President Trump persevered in his first term to fulfill much of his policy agenda. Indeed, just a month after stumbling in the 2017 elections, Trump passed his signature tax cut. He would go on to curb regulation, impose tariffs, appoint three Justices to the United States Supreme Court, pull America out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal and the Paris Climate Accords, and on and on. He even established the sixth branch of the military: the Space Force.

Democrats have underestimated Donald Trump ever since he rode the Golden escalator and announced his first bid for the White House. The left left him for dead—at least politically—during the initial years of his first term. They called him a fool, an incompetent, and an embarrassment. They ridiculed him for suggesting Americans drink disinfectant to combat the COVID-19 virus. They hammered him for shrugging at COVID and stalling at the economic precipice. Even members of his own Party tried to move him out of the political spotlight. President Biden then trounced him in the 2020 election. January 6th, and several criminal indictments followed. He was done, said leaders of the Democratic Party. No one-term President has ever resurrected his career, they declared.

And yet, today, Donald J. Trump is the most powerful president in the history of the United States. He’s done irreparable harm to the body politic and to America’s credibility at home and abroad. He has tried to destroy those cultural institutions that helped make America great in the first place. He is unaware that the American Revolution was fought for freedom and that the Civil War was fought for equality. He is ignorant of the fact that the greatest Supreme Court decision in history—Brown v. Board of Education—is the greatest defense of diversity, equity, and inclusion. He treats the people’s branch—Congress—as an afterthought. He snubs his nose at America’s judiciary. And at the Press. And in the world. I could go on.

But, even still, he is the most powerful leader ever to occupy the Oval Office. No one even comes close. Part of the reason for this reality is that the Democratic Party relaxed when Trump was most vulnerable. Leaders in the DNC and in Congress (as well as past standard bearers like Barack Obama and Bill Clinton, who were diplomatically passive at crucial moments) discounted the true threat posed by a would-be autocrat. They shouldn’t make that mistake again.

Can Democrats learn from the past? Of course. Myriad possibilities might avoid a repeat, including current party leadership giving way to a new generation of savvy political personalities. David Hogg, Zohran Mamdani, Kat Abu, the “Tennessee 3”, and so many more young and exciting voices are trying to be heard. We should listen.

The Democratic Party also needs to refine its message. The Carvillian “it’s the Economy Stupid” remains the refrain for most leftists, but it desperately needs an update. It’s about affordability now. How about “affordability for all”? (Less catchy for sure, but not insulting either.) Or “all political roads lead to greater affordability”?

The NPR article cited above—the one that was both descriptive and, as it turns out, eerily prescient—asserted two more “takeaways” from that 2017 election: 1) that the 2018 midterm elections and the 2020 presidential contest will be “close and contentious,” and 2) “Democrats should be careful about overanalyzing these results.” Truer words were never spoken. Democrats rested on their laurels after the 2017 elections and the 2018 midterms. And what did that get them? A 2020 presidential election that was so “contentious” and “contested” that it sparked an all-out insurrection, a movement to discredit the results, and, in the end, an America that remains uncharacteristically battered and empty. Thankfully, there is time to rewrite the script.

Beau Breslin is the Joseph C. Palamountain Jr. Chair in Government at Skidmore College.


Read More

Wisconsin Lawmakers Propose Ranked Choice Voting for All Elections

Woman casts vote.

Image: Getty Images on Unsplash. Unsplash+ license obtained by IVN Editor Shawn Griffiths.

Wisconsin Lawmakers Propose Ranked Choice Voting for All Elections

BELOIT, Wis. — State Senator Mark Spreitzer (D-Beloit) and Representative Clinton Anderson (D-Beloit) introduced LRB-5709 on March 5, legislation that would implement ranked choice voting for state, federal, and local elections in Wisconsin.

The Wisconsin legislation would also eliminate the need for February primaries in nonpartisan elections.

Keep ReadingShow less
Foreign Influence vs. Foreign Interference in Elections

Person wearing a hoodie, typing on a computer in the dark.

Xijian/Getty

Foreign Influence vs. Foreign Interference in Elections

Working alongside election denier activists, the Trump administration is reportedly exploring how to use the power of the federal government to take over elections from the states. One of the justifications for this takeover is based on allegations of foreign interference in the 2020 presidential race.

Experts agree that there is no evidence of foreign interference in 2020, although there were instances of influence by countries such as Russia and Iran. Subsequent elections have been subject to a range of foreign influence efforts. Influence and interference are not the same, but President Trump and his supporters conflate the two concepts when raising the specter of foreign meddling in U.S. elections. This confusion is evident in a purported draft executive order that outlines how the administration may seek to violate the Constitution and federalize the administration of elections.

Keep ReadingShow less
Just the Facts: The SAVE Act and the Future of Voter ID Rules
A close up of a window with a sticker on it
Photo by Zach Wear on Unsplash

Just the Facts: The SAVE Act and the Future of Voter ID Rules

Last week, I wrote a column in the Fulcrum entitled “Just the Facts: Voter ID, States’ Powers, and Federal Limits.” The facts presented in that writing made it clear that the U.S. Constitution does not require voter ID and left almost all election administration—including voter qualifications—to the states. However, over time, constitutional amendments and federal statutes have restricted states’ ability to impose discriminatory voting rules, but they have never mandated voter ID.

The SAVE America Act

The national debate over voter ID has entered a new phase with the introduction of the SAVE America Act, the most sweeping federal voter‑identification and citizenship‑documentation proposal in modern history. For more than two centuries, voter eligibility rules—ID included—have been primarily a matter of state authority, bounded by constitutional protections against discrimination. The SAVE America Act would shift that balance by imposing federal requirements for both photo identification and documentary proof of citizenship in federal elections.

Keep ReadingShow less
Primaries Are Already Shaping the 2026 Election – Here’s What We’re Seeing So Far
a person is casting a vote into a box

Primaries Are Already Shaping the 2026 Election – Here’s What We’re Seeing So Far

Primary elections are already underway across the United States, and this year’s contests are giving early clues about what voters may prioritize in the general election.

Several states have recently held high-profile primary races that could influence the balance of power in Congress over the next two years, in both state-wide and local elections. Many of these races involve open seats or competitive districts, making the outcomes especially significant as parties prepare for November.

Keep ReadingShow less