Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Despite infighting, Democrats can still unite around one common goal

Opinion

Despite infighting, Democrats can still unite around one common goal

President Donald Trump is a unifying issue for Democrats and Republicans. Above, he speaks during a meeting with President of Argentina Javier Milei in the Cabinet Room at the White House on Oct. 14, 2025, in Washington, D.C.

(Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images/TNS)

The only thing the parties can agree on is that Donald Trump is the central issue of our time.

Let’s start with a recent headline: “It’s 2025, and Democrats Are Still Running Against Trump.”


“After a year of soul-searching and introspection by Democrats about what they should stand for after losing the White House and Senate in 2024,” Shane Goldmacher of the New York Times writes, “the party is largely coalescing behind the same message that has united it for the past decade: stopping Donald J. Trump.”

Now, I confess to having missed a great deal of soul-searching and introspection among Democrats, but I am reminded of a very different search that happened two decades ago: the search for “weapons of mass destruction” in Iraq.

While you might think I am going for some weird metaphor comparing President Trump to a WMD, that’s not my point.

For those too young to remember, the George W. Bush administration focused on Saddam Hussein’s WMD program as the major — some would say sole — justification for toppling the Iraqi dictator.

This became more controversial after U.S. forces failed to find the WMDs the Bush administration, and others, said were there. For opponents of the war, this turned into the refrain that Bush had “ lied America into war.”

This was always unfair. Then-Pentagon official Paul Wolfowitz, in a now forgotten but once very controversial interview with Vanity Fair, explained why the administration focused on WMDs. “(W)e settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction,” Wolfowitz said, “because it was the one reason everyone could agree on.”

It may seem like a stretch — probably because it is — but the parallel came to mind because Trump plays a similar dynamic inside the Democratic Party.

Some segments of the party, personified by Sen. Bernie Sanders and New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani, are flirting with socialism or social democracy. Others are trying to carve out a more centrist, Bill Clinton-style, lane. Some hate Israel. Others defend it. Some want to open the government. Others want to keep the shutdown going. Some support the so-called “abundance agenda,” which seeks to curb government red tape and activist-driven NIMBYism, while others oppose it as a rollback of hard-won environmental and labor protections.

But the one thing they all can agree on: They don’t like Trump.

There are other reasons for focusing on the president. “I worry that Donald Trump is like crack cocaine for our party,” Democratic pollster Celinda Lake told The Times. “Trump is very seductive because when you put up an ad that’s anti-Trump, you get a lot of small-dollar contributions, you get a lot of activists saying, ‘Great job!’ ”

Lake and other Democrats worry that focusing so much on Trump is distracting the party from fashioning a more positive agenda. They’re right. Democrats are about as unpopular as they’ve ever been. This is partly because diehards are mad at their own party for not being tougher in its “resistance” to Trump (hence the shutdown). Other Democrats believe the party is too left-wing and are simply abandoning it.

For instance, in the last five years, nearly twice as many Pennsylvania Democrats switched their registration to the GOP as the other way around. It should be no surprise that opposition to Trump unifies the Democrats who haven’t left for the Republican Party.

Democrats hope that in the short term, opposition to Trump may be enough to win the upcoming off-year gubernatorial elections in Virginia and New Jersey and, perhaps, in the coming midterms.

After all, Trump is unpopular too. His overall approval is just 37%, according to the latest AP-NORC poll. The Economist has him at 40% approving of his second term, with 55% disapproving. Americans give him low scores on the economy and, now, immigration as well.

Still, there’s scant reason to hope for a “blue wave” in next year’s midterms. During the same period in his first term, Democrats had a 9-point advantage on the generic congressional ballot. Now, it’s 1.6 points. A lot rides on where the economy will be a year from now.

However, Trump isn’t just a unifying issue for Democrats. He’s a unifying issue for Republicans as well, which is one reason more people than ever are identifying as independents. Increasingly, calling yourself a Republican means being a Trump supporter for much the same reason that calling yourself a Democrat means being a Trump opponent: It’s the only thing the GOP can agree on.

What this means for the future is unclear, save for one thing: Once Trump is no longer president, or even once he’s a lame duck, both parties are going to have a huge fight trying to figure out what they stand for.

Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.

Read More

“It’s Probably as Bad as It Can Get”:
A Conversation with Lilliana Mason

Liliana Mason

“It’s Probably as Bad as It Can Get”: A Conversation with Lilliana Mason

In the aftermath of the killing of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, the threat of political violence has become a topic of urgent concern in the United States. While public support for political violence remains low—according to Sean Westwood of the Polarization Research Lab, fewer than 2 percent of Americans believe that political murder is acceptable—even isolated incidence of political violence can have a corrosive effect.

According to political scientist Lilliana Mason, political violence amounts to a rejection of democracy. “If a person has used violence to achieve a political goal, then they’ve given up on the democratic process,” says Mason, “Instead, they’re trying to use force to affect government.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Combatting the Trump Administration’s Militarized Logic

Members of the National Guard patrol near the U.S. Capitol on October 1, 2025 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Al Drago/Getty Images)

Combatting the Trump Administration’s Militarized Logic

Approaching a year of the new Trump administration, Americans are getting used to domestic militarized logic. A popular sense of powerlessness permeates our communities. We bear witness to the attacks against innocent civilians by ICE, the assassination of Charlie Kirk, and we naturally wonder—is this the new American discourse? Violent action? The election of Zohran Mamdani as mayor of New York offers hope that there may be another way.

Zohran Mamdani, a Muslim democratic socialist, was elected as mayor of New York City on the fourth of November. Mamdani’s platform includes a reimagining of the police force in New York City. Mamdani proposes a Department of Community Safety. In a CBS interview, Mamdani said, “Our vision for a Department of Community Safety, the DCS, is that we would have teams of dedicated mental health outreach workers that we deploy…to respond to those incidents and get those New Yorkers out of the subway system and to the services that they actually need.” Doing so frees up NYPD officers to respond to actual threats and crime, without a responsibility to the mental health of civilians.

Keep ReadingShow less
How Four Top Officials Can Win Back Public Trust


Image generated by IVN staff.

How Four Top Officials Can Win Back Public Trust

Mandate for Change: The Public Calls for a Course Correction

The honeymoon is over. A new national survey from the Independent Center reveals that a plurality of American adults and registered voters believe key cabinet officials should be replaced—a striking rebuke of the administration’s current direction. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, Attorney General Pam Bondi, and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. are all underwater with the public, especially among independents.

But the message isn’t just about frustration—it’s about opportunity. Voters are signaling that these leaders can still win back public trust by realigning their policies with the issues Americans care about most. The data offers a clear roadmap for course correction.

Health and Human Services: RFK Jr. Is Losing the Middle

Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is emerging as a political liability—not just to the administration, but to the broader independent movement he once claimed to represent. While his favorability ratings are roughly even, the plurality of adults and registered voters now say he should be replaced. This sentiment is especially strong among independents, who once viewed Kennedy as a fresh alternative but now see him as out of step with their values.

Keep ReadingShow less
Marjorie Taylor Greene’s Break With Trump Over Epstein Files Is a Test of GOP Conscience

Epstein abuse survivor Haley Robson (C) reacts alongside Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) (R) as the family of Virginia Giuffre speaks during a news conference with lawmakers on the Epstein Files Transparency Act outside the U.S. Capitol on November 18, 2025 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Heather Diehl/Getty Images)

Marjorie Taylor Greene’s Break With Trump Over Epstein Files Is a Test of GOP Conscience

Today, the House of Representatives is voting on the Epstein Files Transparency Act, a bill that would compel the Justice Department to release unclassified records related to Jeffrey Epstein’s crimes. For months, the measure languished in procedural limbo. Now, thanks to a discharge petition signed by Democrats and a handful of Republicans, the vote is finally happening.

But the real story is not simply about transparency. It is about political courage—and the cost of breaking ranks with Donald Trump.

Keep ReadingShow less