Confusion is now a political strategy in America — and it is eroding our democracy in plain sight. Confusion is not a byproduct of our politics; it is being used as a weapon. When citizens cannot tell what is real, what is legal, or what is true, democratic norms become easier to break and harder to defend. A fog of uncertainty has settled over the country, quietly weakening the foundations of our democracy. Millions of Americans—across political identities—are experiencing uncertainty, frustration, and searching for clarity. They see institutions weakening, norms collapsing, and longstanding checks and balances eroding. Beneath the noise is a simple, urgent question: What is happening to our democracy?
For years, I believed that leaders in Congress, the Supreme Court, and the White House simply lacked the character, courage, and moral leadership to use their power responsibly. But after watching patterns emerge more sharply, I now believe something deeper is at work. Many analysts have pointed to the strategic blueprint outlined in Project 2025 Project 2025, and whether one agrees or not, millions of Americans sense that the dismantling of democratic norms is not accidental—it is intentional.
Some people describe the President as “ignorant,” a word they reach for out of frustration. But in my view, ignorance is not the issue. What looks like confusion or impulsiveness is often a strategy—one refined over decades. Public reporting has documented patterns of manipulating systems, refusing to pay vendors, challenging courts, and framing himself as a perpetual victim. These behaviors didn’t begin in the Oval Office; they simply gained a larger stage there.
I have come to believe that confusion is part of the plan. When leaders contradict themselves, rewrite history, rename institutions, or attack their predecessors, the public becomes disoriented. Confusion weakens vigilance. It makes people doubt their own understanding. And when citizens are overwhelmed, those in power face fewer obstacles to manipulating institutions, bending norms, and reshaping democracy to serve themselves rather than the nation.
The danger of a leader who rewrites the nation in this way is not limited to the moment. When a President renames institutions, erases traditions, mocks predecessors, or dismisses constitutional obligations, he is not just breaking norms—he is reshaping what future leaders may feel entitled to do. Democracies erode slowly, through repeated violations that become normalized.
People across the country are trying to make sense of what is happening. Yet we are watching other forms of democratic distortion take root—extreme gerrymandering that dilutes voters' will (Gerrymandering Explained | Brennan Center for Justice), and public attacks on the press that intimidate journalists and undermine the First Amendment’s core purpose: to ensure that citizens can question power without fear.
Commentators who repeat invented names — calling it the “Department of War” or the “Gulf of America” — must stop. When the media echoes language that has no legal basis, it risks normalizing it. Reporters have a responsibility to use the lawful, accurate names of our institutions, not the versions a president creates for political effect. Just because he says it does not make it legal.
Another part of this pattern is the effort to reshape government itself. We have watched a steady push to install people who will support the President’s goals, while removing or sidelining those whose job is to enforce transparency, ethics, or accountability. Inspectors general, career civil servants, and independent watchdogs exist to protect the public interest—not the interests of any one leader. When these positions are weakened or replaced with loyalists, the checks that safeguard our democracy begin to crumble.
We have also watched the President exert extraordinary influence over Congress even when he was not in office, shaping votes, intimidating dissent, and ensuring that lawmakers aligned with his goals. Now he openly signals his desire for a third term, and public reporting shows that several billionaires appear to be supporting efforts that could help consolidate his power (OpenSecrets. A leader who can influence Congress, weaken oversight, and command vast financial support can operate without meaningful restraint.
The Kennedy Center is not just another building in Washington. It was created by Congress in 1958 as the National Cultural Center, and in 1964—after President John F. Kennedy’s assassination—Congress amended the law to rename it the “John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts” (Public Law 88‑260). Because its name is established in law, no president has the authority to change it. Only Congress can do that. So, when a president claims to rename the Kennedy Center, alters signage, or encourages others to refer to it differently, he is not exercising legal power—he is attempting to rewrite history through spectacle and intimidation.
Even if his name is added to buildings or institutions, millions of Americans will not recognize it. The Kennedy Center will always be the Kennedy Center — a national memorial established by Congress, rooted in history, and tied to President Kennedy’s legacy. We will not normalize attempts to rewrite our cultural identity. We say the Gulf of Mexico, not the “Gulf of America.” We say the Department of Defense, not the “Defense of War.” A democracy survives when its people refuse to surrender language, history, or truth to political theater.
One of the clearest examples of this pattern came during a televised interview in May 2025. When the President was asked whether he must uphold the Constitution—the very document he twice swore to protect—he replied, “I don’t know.” That answer was not merely evasive; it was alarming. How can any leader raise their hand on Inauguration Day, swear an oath before the nation, and then claim uncertainty about whether that oath applies? For me, this was not ignorance. It was a performance of ignorance—a strategy that creates confusion, lowers expectations, and excuses behavior that would be unacceptable from any other public servant.
We are living through a moment when history, culture, and democratic traditions are being reshaped before our eyes. Citizens are not wrong to feel unsettled. They are not wrong to ask questions. And they are certainly not wrong to demand accountability from those who wield power in their name.
We must demand normalcy again. Not the normalcy of complacency, but the normalcy of functioning institutions, ethical leadership, and respect for the Constitution. Congress must act—not observe. Congress must restore what has been damaged, protect the legal names of institutions, rebuild the West Wing, and reassert its constitutional authority as a check on executive power. Congress must strengthen ethics laws, protect inspectors general, enforce transparency, and ensure that no president—current or future—can rewrite history, rename institutions, or operate outside the law.
The media must rise above attacks and intimidation. They must report what a president says, but they must not legitimize what is unlawful or invented. They must use the legal names of institutions, correct misinformation in real time, and refuse to normalize language that confuses or misleads the public.
Citizens must insist on accountability. They cannot pass laws, but they can force lawmakers to act. They must demand restoration of damaged institutions, support independent journalism, vote, speak out, and protect historical truth.
These solutions are not theoretical—they are doable. Congress already has the authority to pass laws and enforce oversight. Media outlets already have the tools to correct misinformation and maintain editorial independence. Citizens already have the power to vote, organize, pressure representatives, and shape public opinion. Democracy has been repaired before—after Watergate, after McCarthyism, after eras of corruption and overreach. It can be repaired again.
This is not a partisan concern. Millions of Americans in red, blue, and purple states are unsettled by what they are witnessing. Republicans, Democrats, and Independents — including some current and retired leaders in Washington — have expressed alarm at the erosion of norms, the rewriting of institutions, and the growing sense that our democratic foundations are shifting beneath us. The uncertainty is national, not ideological, and the responsibility to confront it belongs to all of us.
Confusion may be the strategy, but clarity is still our power — and democracy holds only if citizens refuse to let uncertainty become the new normal or allow its erosion to continue in plain sight.
Carolyn Goode is a retired educational leader who writes about ethical leadership, institutional accountability, and the concerns many Americans are expressing about the direction of the country.
