Henry Abbott

Donald Trump’s victory in the 2024 election poses a serious threat to the democratic institutions and civil liberties that most Americans cherish. This is the candidate who has repeatedly discredited the 2020 election results and claimed that he would be a dictator, but only for the first day of his presidency.

His announcements for cabinet appointments have been similarly concerning. Matt Gaetz, the far-right Florida representative, was announced as Trump’s pick for attorney general, which would make him leader of the same Justice Department that previously investigated him for sex trafficking. Stephen Miller, who can be best described as an American Goebbels, has been slated as deputy chief of staff. Trump’s appointments of such cronies to high offices of the government may suggest that he will follow through on Project 2025’s proposed civil service reforms. The plan calls for the president to reclassify many positions in the nonpartisan federal bureaucracy as political appointees, which would then allow for the appointment of far-right ideologues that would tear apart the regulatory state from the inside out.

Such changes would result in a radical transformation of the structure of the American political regime by weakening the institutions that protect the majority of Americans from political and economic abuses of the elite, thus undermining the legitimacy of democratic governance. Trump’s presidency will also pose a threat to the civil rights of racial, sexual and religious minorities, both through the rightward-drifting policy of the Republican Party as well as the conservative supermajority on the Supreme Court that the new administration could secure for the next thirty years. The repeated assaults on both the democratic institutions and public conscience of this nation during Trump’s previous term have knocked down many of the barriers that would have impeded him when he takes office in three months.

The election results were a stunning loss for the Democratic Party. The vote shows that 90 percent of counties nationwide shifted towards Republicans in 2024 relative to 2020. Despite Trump’s elevation of white nationalist ideologues and, I would argue, the use of such rhetoric himself, Kamala Harris’s vote share among Black Americans and Latin Americans fell substantially compared to 2020, when the Democratic candidate was an old white guy. I believe this happened because the Democratic party “has abandoned the working class,” as Bernie Sanders wrote in his statement on the election results. The party failed to offer a transformative agenda to a nation asking for change. Instead, it tacked to the right and capitulated to Republican positions on issues like immigration instead of challenging these positions and the bigotry that often supports them.

However, many liberal pundits and politicians had other takeaways. MSNBC anchor Joe Scarborough blamed anti-black racism and misogyny among Latinos for Kamala Harris’s loss, loss, pinning two marginalized groups against each other and diverting blame away from the Democratic Party’s decision-making. MSNBC anchor Joy Reid claimed that Harris had run a “flawless campaign” but that the citizenry was simply too far radicalized towards the right to vote for a Black female president, and the Twitter accounts of many Democratic politicians echoed this sentiment. I agree that racism, sexism and other forms of bigotry played a part in Harris’s loss, but I am offended by the lack of self-reflection from a party that has objectively failed. Instead of criticizing the Democratic strategy, center-left politicians and media outlets have scolded voters from groups they have taken for granted. I agree that we must combat troubling trends like the online far-right radicalization of young men, but I believe that the best way to sway those who feel alienated and dislocated in today’s political economy is to offer an ambitious agenda—a change to the status quo. When asked if she would’ve made choices differently from Biden during her time as VP, Harris said, “there is not a thing that comes to mind.… I’ve been a part of most of the decisions that have had impact.”

In his statement on the election, Bernie Sanders asked, “Will the big money interests and well-paid consultants who control the Democratic Party learn any real lessons from this disastrous campaign?” When I read that line, I felt that it perfectly encapsulated the uncertainty and anger I felt when the election was announced for Donald Trump. A convicted felon. A bigot. A buffoon! A man whose approval ratings never exceeded 49 percent. This guy should have been a layup for the Democrats. He should have been a layup in 2016 and 2020, but the first was a loss, and the second was a close victory that was largely helped by Trump’s incumbency during the COVID crisis. In all of their campaigns, Clinton, Biden and Harris followed a center-right agenda at the behest of corporate donors and the use of corporate consulting in the party’s decision-making. The piecemeal reforms that Harris proposed are insufficient in the face of the crisis of inequality today—but are palatable to the party’s SuperPACs. Those who opposed Biden’s support for the Israeli genocide against Palestinians were disappointed to hear that Harris would follow the same playbook. Harris campaigned with Liz Cheney but felt that it would be distasteful to do so with Sanders. This strategy succeeded in amassing a war chest of over $1 billion, three times that of the Trump campaign. Voters in battleground states were bombarded with advertising, and much of the Democratic advertising focused on “toughness” on immigration and personal attacks on Trump while neglecting the smattering of popular reforms, like banning price gouging for groceries and expanding Medicare, that the campaign had adopted. The voters have heard the message of this center-right Democratic Party. They heard it in ads before YouTube videos and between episodes of Abbott Elementary, and they have not been convinced.

The alternative is clear and has been offered for years by politicians like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Movements that have coupled progressive economic policies with an ambitious agenda against discrimination in all forms have energized and inspired voters, especially those from backgrounds like the youth and the lower-income, who typically have lower turnout. Progressive ballot measures did well in 2024, even in Republican states. Alaska, Missouri and Nebraska approved the adoption of paid sick leave, and Alaska voters banned anti-union captive meetings. In turn, many right-wing propositions were defeated: Three states, two of which went for Trump, rejected private school vouchers, a key part of both Trump and his party’s platform. Polling has hinted at the electoral promise of ambitious, universalistic policy: six in ten Americans support Medicare-For-All, 67 percent support a wealth tax and a majority of Americans disapprove of Israeli conduct and the U.S.’s unconditional military support of that conduct.

I personally feel that the desire for change in this country is almost palatable. So many people are sick of knowing that the greatest, wealthiest country in the world is failing its people in so many ways. Whether a lefty like me likes it or not, in this election, Trump was the change candidate, and Harris was the status quo option. Many people are suffering right now in the status quo, and Harris should’ve offered them something more substantial, not just because it’s the winning electoral program, but because it would inspire the better halves of ourselves. It would engage us in the act of coming together as a country to try and build a prosperous and secure future for everyone. It would be the act of creating new institutions to provide medical care, the expansion of public transportation networks and the transition to a green energy economy. Rather than the divisive team sports it has become, this is what politics and government should be.

I forgot to tell you that Bernie answered his own question that I posed to you: “Probably not.” I find it hard to believe that the decision-makers in the Democratic Party will reflect on their failures and give up on their playback. The current system of consistent corporate fundraising is far too profitable for many of them. It will be up to those of us who have voted for this party, who have done our part to stave off fascism, to rock the boat and shake the party out of its complacency.

Jason Olaru-Hagen is a member of the Class of 2025.