Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

What would really happen if Trump wins?

Mark Esper sitting next to Donald Trump

Defense Secretary Mark Esper (left) and other leaders stood up to Donald Trump when he was president. Trump would likely face similar resistance if he wins another term.

Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images

Cooper is the author of “ How America Works … and Why it Doesn’t.

If Donald Trump wins the presidential election, many worry that America will descend into dark times.


Washington Post columnist Ishaan Tharoor, for example, detailed myriad ways he thinks Trump would subvert American democracy:

“As my colleagues have reported over the past year, Trump has made clear his stark, authoritarian vision for a potential second term. He would embark on a wholesale purge of the federal bureaucracy, weaponize the Justice Department to explicitly go after his political opponents (something he claims is being done to him), stack government agencies across the board with political appointees prescreened as ideological Trump loyalists, and dole out pardons to myriad officials and apparatchiks as incentives to do his bidding or stay loyal.”

These concerns don’t withstand scrutiny. If Trump wins, American democracy will undergo a severe stress test. Yet again. But it won’t plunge into dictatorship, authoritarianism or fascism. These are coherent governmental structures. Instead, if Trump wins, America will have an incoherent and volatile mix of some government institutions that function democratically and some that don’t.

The fundamental problem with predictions like Tharoor’s is that Trump can’t actually accomplish these things. The federal bureaucracy can’t be “purged” by the sitting president. Valid federal legislation authorizes and funds government agencies — so the courts won’t allow them to be gutted by executive order. Republican presidents have long tried to shrink the administrative state. They’ve failed every time. Even if the federal bureaucracy were halved it would still be huge.

The Justice Department, moreover, didn’t go after Trump’s enemies while he was president. To the contrary, DOJ lawyers rejected Trump’s demands to prosecute Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, James Comey, Andrew McCabe and others. The DOJ did, however, prosecute many of Trump's friends, like Roger Stone, Michael Flynn, Steve Bannon, Paul Manafort and Tom Barrack. And of course the Justice Department brought two major cases against Trump himself. To imprison his enemies, as Tharoor warns about, Trump would need grand juries to indict on his command, courts to illicitly rule in his favor and juries to render his chosen verdicts. There’s no reason to think any of those things could happen.

The Senate, furthermore, still has to confirm all executive-level presidential appointments. And pardons only apply to specific acts and offer no protection under state law or for future activity. Just look at Bannon, who was first pardoned by Trump for one thing and then later convicted of something else.

Moreover, Trump wouldn’t control most government activity — at the federal, state or local level. If the Democrats take the House in November, they will oppose Trump at every turn. We should expect Trump’s third impeachment — for something or other — to commence promptly. Democratic-run state and local governments likewise would fight back against Trump's initiatives, just like they did previously.

The most serious domestic risk America faces if Trump wins is that the military starts doing his bidding. But there’s no reason to expect this to happen. He has long had strained relations with military leaders, including secretaries of defense (John Mattis and Mark Esper) and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley. The military has steadfastly refused to obey Trump’s improper orders.

This isn’t to say a second Trump presidency wouldn’t be dangerous. It would be. But the biggest concerns would reside where the American electorate often doesn't bother to focus: international affairs. This is where American presidents have the fewest checks on their power and the most potential to do harm. The international community is desperate for sober and rational American leadership — the opposite of Trump-style diplomacy.

If Donald Trump wins the election there will be plenty to worry about, to be sure. But there will also be many doomful predictions that don’t come true.


Read More

When Separation of Powers Becomes a Suggestion
We the People billboard
Photo by Larry Alger on Unsplash

When Separation of Powers Becomes a Suggestion

One of the most dangerous mistakes Americans are making right now is treating the threat to our democracy as a collection of daily outrages — the latest social media post, the latest threat, the latest norm broken. Those things are certainly bad, often stunningly so. But they are not the real problem. The real problem is structural, and it runs much deeper.

At his most charitable interpretation, Donald Trump does not think like an elected official operating inside a constitutional democracy. He thinks like a businessman. In that mindset, success is measured by dominance, efficiency, and loyalty. What produces results is kept; what resists is discarded. Rules are obstacles. Norms are optional. Institutions exist to serve the leader, not to restrain him. At present, this governing style is all about energizing perceived positives and minimizing perceived negatives. Increasingly, those “negatives” are people: immigrants, minorities, trans Americans, and the poor. The danger here is not just institutional; it is human. When checks and balances weaken, there are fewer brakes on policies that treat entire groups as costs to be managed rather than citizens to be protected.

Keep ReadingShow less
Criminals Promised, Volume Delivered: Inside ICE’s Enforcement Model

An ICE agent holds a taser as they stand watch after one of their vehicles got a flat tire on Penn Avenue on February 5, 2026 in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

(Photo by Stephen Maturen/Getty Images)

Criminals Promised, Volume Delivered: Inside ICE’s Enforcement Model

Donald Trump ran on a simple promise: focus immigration enforcement on criminals and make the country safer. The policy now being implemented tells a different story. With tens of billions of dollars directed toward arrests, detention, and removals, the enforcement system has been structured to maximize volume rather than reduce risk. That design choice matters because it shapes who is targeted, how force is used, and whether public safety is actually improved.

This is not a dispute over whether immigration law should be enforced. The question is whether the policy now in place matches what was promised and delivers the safety outcomes that justified its scale and cost.

Keep ReadingShow less
NRF Moves to Defend Utah’s Fair Map Against Gerrymandering Lawsuit

USA Election Collage With The State Map Of Utah.

Getty Images

NRF Moves to Defend Utah’s Fair Map Against Gerrymandering Lawsuit

On Wednesday, February 11, the National Redistricting Foundation (NRF) asked a federal court to join a newly filed lawsuit to protect Utah’s new, fair congressional map and defend our system of checks and balances.

The NRF is a non‑profit foundation whose mission is to dismantle unfair electoral maps and create a redistricting system grounded in democratic values. By helping to create more just and representative electoral districts across the country, the organization aims to restore the public’s faith in a true representative democracy.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Constitutional Provision We Ignored for 150 Years

Voter registration in Wisconsin

Michael Newman

A Constitutional Provision We Ignored for 150 Years

Imagine there was a way to discourage states from passing photo voter ID laws, restricting early voting, purging voter registration rolls, or otherwise suppressing voter turnout. What if any state that did so risked losing seats in the House of Representatives?

Surprisingly, this is not merely an idle fantasy of voting rights activists, but an actual plan envisioned in Section 2 of the 14th Amendment, which was ratified in 1868 – but never enforced.

Keep ReadingShow less