Democrats’ Dilemma: A Party in Turmoil
The Democratic Party currently finds itself in a state of confusion and indecision, struggling to formulate a coherent strategy to counter the influence of Donald Trump and his supporters. Should they remain passive and wait for Trump to implode under the weight of his own chaos? This approach may seem appealing given the ongoing Trumpian turmoil, but it risks leaving the party vulnerable to the unpredictable tides of political events.
Alternatively, should they take to the streets and engage in vocal protests? While passionate demonstrations can be impactful, they often lack substance and the Democrats do not possess the numbers for a large-scale uprising. Moreover, it does not present a favorable image for the opposition to openly wish for economic collapse or to revel in moments when the stock market falters. For instance, the recent Fox News report highlighting that the cost of a pick-up truck could skyrocket from $80,000 to $100,000 due to impending tariffs went viral. It was tempting to chuckle, thinking, “That’ll teach those MAGA supporters a lesson.”
However, the reality is stark: reports indicate that U.S. employers are cutting nearly 200,000 jobs, a situation exacerbated by Elon Musk’s drastic reduction of the federal workforce by 63,500 positions. Many of those facing layoffs include military veterans who supported Trump, adding a bitter irony to the situation. The sight of individuals lamenting their choice to vote for Trump on social media is something that brings no small amount of satisfaction to Democrats.
The defeat of the party has led to a state of paralysis. The symbolic actions of wearing pink and waving paddles with slogans during Trump’s address to Congress were seen as amateurish by their own constituents. In a column for The New York Times, commentator David Brooks suggested that the Democrats’ disarray is not currently consequential. He advised them to take a step back, stating, “They’re not in control. They don’t have power.” Yet, he offered an intriguing caveat.
Brooks posited, “I don’t think Democrats have fully grasped that they are now more the party of the elites than the party of the working class. The substantial support that many Black and brown voters have shown for Donald Trump has caught them off guard, necessitating an intellectual revolution to adapt.” The pressing question remains: who will spearhead this transformation?
The last time the opposition faced such a dire situation was after George W. Bush secured two consecutive victories for the Republicans in 2004. Yet, during the Democratic convention that year, a relatively unknown politician named Barack Obama delivered an electrifying speech that spoke of unity and hope. That moment kindled optimism within the party.
Fast forward to today: Where is the Obama of our time? Setting aside the gossip surrounding his personal life, the Barack Obama Presidential Center in Chicago—meant to commemorate his legacy and host his foundation—has become emblematic of the party’s struggles. What was intended to be a celebration of his achievements has devolved into a project plagued by internal disputes, delays, escalating costs, and legal challenges. Recently, Musk’s initiative abruptly terminated the government lease on the center’s temporary location. If all goes according to plan, this nearly $900 million endeavor may finally welcome visitors by 2026. Perhaps, by then, the Democrats will have found their backbone, but presently, there are no signs of revival.
Vice President Kamala Harris still harbors ambitions for her political future, though it remains uncertain whether she aims for a second run at the presidency or seeks to become the governor of California. In the meantime, she seems to be in hiding, although she did host an Oscars watch-party at home with a bag of Doritos, as noted by her husband Doug Emhoff.
Meanwhile, Pete Buttigieg is making appearances on late-night television, but his sights appear set on a Senate run in Michigan in 2026 rather than the presidency. The only figure exhibiting any signs of vitality is Gavin Newsom, the Governor of California. He is aware that he must navigate carefully given his state’s reputation for high taxes, urban decay, and extreme “wokeness.”
Newsom recently invited Trump’s youth organizer, Charlie Kirk, onto his newly launched podcast. When questioned by the anti-trans Kirk about whether he would “say no to men in female sports,” Newsom replied, “I completely agree with you on that. It is an issue of fairness. It is deeply unfair.”
Amidst this political landscape, the return of Andrew Cuomo is garnering attention. Over three years after resigning due to allegations of misconduct while serving as New York’s governor, he is now positioned to reclaim his former role. Many seem unconcerned about his past behavior, especially when contrasted with the current president’s record. At least Cuomo challenged Trump during the pandemic!
Eric Adams, the Mayor of New York, faced corruption charges but has gained favor with Trump on immigration issues, resulting in the Department of Justice suspending those charges last month. He aspires to run again, yet his support hovers around a mere 11 percent.
This leads to an intriguing proposition: the Democrats do not necessarily need an “intellectual revolution,” as suggested by Brooks. Instead, they must demonstrate their ability to effectively manage their cities, states, and even their presidential foundations. If they can establish their competence, the votes will likely follow. Harris has indicated to friends that she will decide this summer whether to pursue the California governorship. Although she valiantly campaigned against Trump, if she wishes to remain a player in politics, her home state seems to be her best avenue. Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez enjoys a passionate left-wing following but may struggle to expand her influence while anchored in the House of Representatives. Like Newsom, she is more adept at rhetoric than action—and neither can compete with Trump for sheer spectacle.
What the party seeks now is a bold and capable leader. The question remains: Is there anyone out there?
Sarah Baxter is the director of the Marie Colvin Center for International Reporting.
