Breslin is the Joseph C. Palamountain Jr. Chair of Political Science at Skidmore College and author of “A Constitution for the Living: Imagining How Five Generations of Americans Would Rewrite the Nation’s Fundamental Law.”
This is the latest in “ A Republic, if we can keep it,” a series to assist American citizens on the bumpy road ahead this election year. By highlighting components, principles and stories of the Constitution, Breslin hopes to remind us that the American political experiment remains, in the words of Alexander Hamilton, the “most interesting in the world.”
The Democrats are underwater. Alarmingly so. That’s good news for Joe Biden.
A recent Gallup poll revealed that there are fewer Democrats and Democrat-leaning independents than at almost any time since Gallup began seriously studying party affiliation in 1992. Democrats are currently underwater by 7 percentage points, in terms of partisan advantage (“the percentage of U.S. adults identifying as or leaning Democratic minus the percentage identifying as or leaning Republican”). Only once before — in December 1992 — did Democrats face a similar shortfall. Since then, the party on the left has almost always been in the black, even reaching a partisan advantage of a whopping 18 percent in 2008.
Doubtless those figures have the Biden campaign worried. The deficit has prompted some urgency. In recent weeks, the president has stepped up his attacks on former President Donald Trump, altered his immigration stance, touted his economic success, and even put money directly back into the pockets of his most skeptical audience. Democratic members of Congress have similarly celebrated the considerable successes of this administration. So has the Democratic National Committee. And yet the needle has barely moved. The last time the Democratic Party was consistently above water was the summer of 2021. Since then, the party of the left has been furiously swimming upstream, trying to gain traction with a largely disaffected electorate.
So, what happened? What accounts for the significant decline in Democratic Party support in recent years? Well, the first thing one notices when reviewing the fine-grained data is the fairly significant increase in independent voters over the past two decades. The percentage of independent voters used to hover around 30 percent; they constitute almost half of the electorate now. That increase in non-affiliated voters has assuredly impacted the Democratic rolls.
Of course, it’s also impacted Republican numbers. Thirty-eight percent of the electorate were registered Republicans in November 2004. Today, that number is 27 percent. It seems that the independent electoral movement is siphoning converts from both sides of the aisle.
Perhaps it’s the incumbency problem at the top. Sitting presidents are frequently the source of partisan ire and admiration. Perhaps we can infer something about the Democrats’ deficit from presidential popularity over the decades. The answer is maybe. Biden’s job approval rating is low, averaging around 40 percent for the past many months. That’s bad news for the incumbent. But those numbers are within the margin of error for several former presidents, including Trump and, until right before the 2012 election when he saw a considerable spike, Barack Obama. One incumbent president was reelected with less than stellar approval ratings (Obama), and one was not (Trump). Throughout this period, though, Democrats were still doing well — they were above water.
We might also surmise that Democrats face unprecedented headwinds, challenges no party or president has likewise encountered in the 21st century. Covid-19 wreaked havoc on public perception ( the economy is not as bad as many suggest); there is battle fatigue over the country’s support for overseas wars; both the Supreme Court and Congress appear feckless; polarization is testing our capacity for patience and compassion; traditional allies, like young voters, union members,and persons of color, are abandoning the party in record numbers; the party’s standard bearer is just plain old. I could go on. The list is long, the troubles are real and the Democrats are reeling.
So then why is this good news for President Biden? Why should Democrats feel some optimism about the current electoral landscape?
Because he’s keeping it close. The most recent polls show that Biden is running neck and neck, nationally, with Trump. The current president is even remaining competitive in some of the crucial swing states. Staying competitive in a race where both candidates are facing eye-popping disapproval ratings may seem like a hollow victory. But in this political climate — where the Republican base is more energized, incumbency is a liability, Democratic Party registration has slowed, Covid’s electoral relevance is long gone, inflation remains high and traditional Democratic backers are questioning their allegiance — any victory is welcome. The contrast is rich. The Democratic Party is bleeding support while polls suggest that its leader remains electorally viable.
Of course, the presidential race is barely across the starting line. Nov. 5 is a long way off and a lot can happen between now and then. If I’m Julie Chavez Rodriguez, Biden’s talented campaign manager, I’m focused as much on getting the Democratic Party above water as I am on the administration’s record, or the candidate’s experience, or even the virtue of continuity. What is more, a push to close the partisan gap in the months leading up to Election Day has the benefit of dimming the spotlight just a bit on an incumbent president who appears reluctant to spar with the press. Counter the president’s electoral vulnerabilities, I say, with a multifront campaign centered on his successes, Trump’s unpredictability and shoring up the Democratic Party rolls.
In the end, it seems apparent that closing the 7 percent deficit Democrats face today may be the key to holding on to the White House, surging in the Senate and flipping control of the House. Democrats, it appears, will need to learn how to tread water once again.












Ben Droz
Ben Droz







U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during a campaign rally at Pinnacle Bank Expo Center on the Nebraska State Fairgrounds on October 05, 2026 in Grand Island, Nebraska.
The President Invited Iran to Bomb My Home
I was driving home to San Diego from Los Angeles on Monday night when I heard that the President of the United States had offered both cities up to Iran as bomb targets. At a rally in Nebraska, defending his war, Trump told the crowd, “let [Iran] take out Los Angeles, let ‘em take out San Diego.” It was, he said, “a very small price to pay.”
I was coming from a Bernie Sanders rally for Proposition 40, the one-time tax on California billionaires that would send 90% of its revenue to healthcare. We desperately need it to pass because, in order to give tax breaks to billionaires, Trump signed a law that will strip health coverage from 10 million Americans; this tax will make sure we can still cover Californians. Call me crazy, but I think taxing billionaires one time so we can make sure kids in California get to see a doctor is a very small price to pay. I also think that even if Trump were joking, it is indefensible to make jokes about the potential destruction of so many lives. Human life is never a small price to pay. Human life is priceless.
Plus, the reality is: here in San Diego, we’re already paying the price for Trump’s actions, and it’s not small at all. He has gutted FEMA, tried to kill climate resiliency programs, and destroyed public health standards, while his signature law is set to cut off health insurance and food support for hundreds of thousands of San Diegans. Like plenty of American cities, San Diego is already busy finding local solutions to respond to the problems this president has recklessly created.
Not to mention, at least 19 American service members have been killed in this war already. Human rights monitors have documented more than 3,600 dead in Iran by April alone. Here at home, gas is sitting just pennies below its all-time record. Taxpayers have already spent more than $45 billion on the war, while Trump’s oil and gas portfolio has grown by roughly $15.5 million this year alone. Of course anything is a “small price” to someone paying free.99 for this war, and profiting from it. Meanwhile, We the People are paying twice: first for the war, and then for the consequences of that war. But now he wants San Diego to pay a third time, flippantly offering us up to Iran.
It is worth noticing which cities he thought to name. Were San Diego and Los Angeles strategically chosen to signify something to his audience, or were they simply the first cities that came to mind as expendable places? Either way, the effect is to normalize—-and to gauge a crowd’s reaction to–the idea of massive violence in major California cities, suitable targets because of their perceived liberal lean. So what if Iran needs to bomb a little bit of America before the war can be over? Who cares, says Trump, if they target Los Angeles and San Diego?
By the way, why didn’t he offer up San Francisco, the free-love hippie-town MAGA loves to hate (and also my birthplace)? Could it be because that’s where the tech titans live? The same ones who joined Trump for Xi Jinping’s state dinner, a guest list worth a combined $2.4 trillion?
San Diego may have fewer billionaires, but it is home to more than 115,000 active-duty service members and 230,000 veterans. One in six active-duty sailors–in the entire Navy–is stationed here. So is one in four Marines. You cannot throw a rock in this county without hitting a military family: brats and spouses and veterans are among us. I got out of the Navy last year after ten years, and eight of those were here in San Diego. When Trump says “let ‘em take out San Diego,” he’s talking about the backbone of the United States military. He’s also talking about the people fighting his war.
San Diego has not been watching this war from the sidelines. Today, the USS Abraham Lincoln returns to North Island after an almost yearlong deployment to the Middle East that featured food shortages, broken toilets, and mold in the showers after 286 days at sea without a single port call. Eight sailors in the Lincoln’s strike group attempted suicide, but in August, when a reporter asked whether the deployment had gone on too long, Trump said “not nearly long enough.” Now he has told a crowd in Nebraska that we should let Iran take out the city those sailors call home. These are sociopathic sentiments.
Last week at Quantico, Pete Hegseth closed his address to the force by telling them, “President Trump has your back and so do I.” To the contrary, President Trump has put one of the biggest military towns in the country forward as a target for our adversaries. With friends like these, the “domestic” in “against all enemies, foreign and domestic” starts to sound a lot less hypothetical.
San Diego is home to Naval Air Station North Island, Naval Base San Diego, Naval Amphibious Base Coronado, the Point Loma submarine base, Camp Pendleton, and Miramar (and I have been permanently stationed at or trained at all of them). If Iran bombed San Diego and Los Angeles, aside from the devastating loss of life, it would cripple an immense share of our national security readiness.
And for what, exactly? Trump says the war is “essentially almost over with.” This is the same man who claimed in June 2025 that Iran’s nuclear program had been “obliterated,” then launched a war over it anyway on February 28. More than seven months later, he wants us to believe two things at once: that we’ve basically won, and that we might need to sacrifice an American city or two to finish winning. If the war is almost over, why does anybody need to take out San Diego?
I wonder if Trump’s endorsed candidate for California’s 48th District here in San Diego County will respond to these remarks. He recently said “no pain, no gain,” when referring to the gas prices San Diegans are paying. Jim Desmond, would you apply that same mindset if we were bombed? Or do you have the moral courage to stand up for the people you’re running to represent?
Last November, six Democratic members of Congress, all veterans, including Senator Mark Kelly, recorded a video reminding troops of their duty to disobey unlawful orders, restating the law that says so. Trump called it “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH,” and then his Justice Department went looking for an indictment, which a grand jury refused. The president treated reading the law out loud to the troops as a capital offense, but then he himself invited a foreign enemy to destroy two American cities, possibly as a punchline. Is anyone calling the latter sedition? Who is demanding accountability?
Calling our lives a small price to pay affirms a moral bankruptcy, as well as an obvious dereliction of duty to the office he holds. While we can’t impeach him or invoke the 25th Amendment ourselves, we must stop being so quiet about what we’re paying already. We can make our voices heard by calling our representatives, writing op-eds, knocking doors, phone banking, and voting in defiance of the man who threatens the safety of our city. Ballots are already arriving in mailboxes. Vote, and vote yes on 40 (and no on 41 and 42).
Trump has been harming our cities for a while, but now he is inviting our military adversaries to join him in the harm. If we have any self-respect as Americans, we must not tolerate our leaders disregarding the dignity of lives in this way. We must fight for our home.
Julie Roland was a Naval Officer for ten years, deploying to both the South China Sea and the Persian Gulf as a helicopter pilot before separating in June 2025 as a Lieutenant Commander. She has a law degree from the University of San Diego, a Master of Laws from Columbia University, and is a member of the Truman National Security Project.