See Disclaimer.
The second Trump administration is markedly different from the first. A populist without substance, Mr. Trump’s ‘strength’ as candidate has always been to take real or perceived issues, distort and amplify them, and sell himself as the One able to fix them—in no time at all, to boot.
In his first term, he most often failed to deliver ‘solutions’ and what he did ‘accomplish’ was scattered and at a slow pace. He took us backwards as a country, but he did not manage (even if he tried) to obliterate democracy and democratic guardrails. Lack of substance and discipline were key to his ultimate failure.
In his second term, his ‘solutions’ are coming fast and furious, seemingly from a combination of two playbooks that were or are being created for him—Project 2025 and Elon Musk’s playbook. The administration’s actions might seem random, until you look at them from the perspective of perpetuating power outside democratic norms. Once this lens is applied, the puzzle quickly falls in place—and signs of discipline emerge amidst the deliberate chaos.
Authoritarian regimes are too often installed by voters, unwittingly or out of despair. Once elected, authoritarians invoke ‘exceptional circumstances’ to shift away from the democratic rules that led them to power but could remove them from it. There is nothing novel in this administration’s approach—except that it is being applied to the most influential Democracy in the world, at lightning speed, with devastating consequences that are global in scale.
In my view, the gutting of the federal government is one of the key elements of the administration’s strategy. Another is deconstructing the Constitutionally mandated separation of powers, to concentrate all meaningful power in an Executive Branch controlled by loyalists and unbound by legal and ethical frameworks. The third is disrupting geopolitical alignments, to weaken global support systems for democracy.
There might be intriguing questions about whose agenda this is: Mr. Trump, Mr. Musk, Project 2025’s brain trust, or an uneasy and perhaps frail coalition of the three? But the most relevant question now is how to best resist it—in fact, how to best build a viable alternative to it.
Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT), an emerging voice of resistance, correctly identifies the preservation of free elections as our collective top priority. Elections enabling true alternance of power have been the essence of America. Can we keep it that way? A key test will come in 2026, as the 2028 elections might be no more than a rubber stamp on authoritarianism if Trump-subservient Republicans win the midterms.
But free elections matter only if voters are offered a compelling alternative to authoritarianism, that they can understand and embrace. Principled individual and group resisters, effective legal challenges to law-skirting administration’s actions, and genuine outrage at Town Halls held by elected Republicans are all needed—but they do not suffice. For Democrats to emerge as a winning alternative, the party must drastically re-think its priorities, strategies, and message. It is a complex challenge for a party demoralized and in disarray.
To rise to the challenge, Democrats should spearhead a high-profile Opposition Cabinet, organized as a shadow government and blending competent practitioners and innovative thought leaders. The charge: (1) keep elections free; (2) hold the Trump administration to account, politically and legally; (3) selectively develop and effectively communicate alternative policy positions; and (4) build a broad electoral coalition for 2026, inclusive of independents, Trump-opposing Republicans, and minor parties.
— Antonio Baptista
Outside the box 