What We Need From The People Now
Don't chase the shiny stuff
This is the final post of my mini-series considering the responses necessary as we move beyond Day 100 of the Trump 2.0 presidency. Last Wednesday, I wrote about the media and offered my unsolicited advice:
Don’t simply report on container ship inventory, explore small business owners who have difficulty getting supplies. Don’t talk about hypothetical adjustments to automobile tariffs, talk to autoworkers who have been furloughed. Don’t describe DOGE cuts, talk to long-time civil servants who have lost their jobs mid-career. Don’t talk about the arbitrariness of immigration raids, tell the story of people wrongfully detained.
There was a good illustration of this Thursday night as Stephanie Ruhle and Jacob Soboroff held a town hall meeting with federal employees that had been fired through the DOGE cuts. I watched a little bit of it, but frankly got depressed and switched to something else. The New Republic’s Michael Tomasky wrote about it Friday, underscoring how reporting like this not only helps us understand the impacts of administrative decisions but that regular reporting like it in the past might have made the culling of federal employees much harder.
Friday, I wrote about the need for Democrats to up their game. My takeaway:
What the Democrats need to do right now is to take one or two issues most central to public well-being and design legislative initiatives that can begin to address those as soon as Democrats take the House in 2026 and fully implement them when they take the White House in 2028.
Today, I’m exploring how the general public needs to shift perspective to make it through these sure-to-be-challenging years. The preamble to the US Constitution begins with the phrase “We The People” and describes how, on our behalf, the government pursues its noble goals.
This is the bedrock principle of consent of the governed. We exercise that consent by selecting officials to represent our interests. The biggest lie about Trump’s “huge mandate” isn’t that it is factually incorrect (he won by 1.5% and failed to win a majority of votes cast). It’s that his victory, regardless of its size, doesn’t change that essential element of consent of the governed. He doesn’t get to do whatever he wants.
The chaos of the first 100 days, either intentionally or unintentionally, creates a sense of helplessness — that everything is happening too fast and we can’t make a difference. This is the heart of authoritarianism, making people feel that the leader is all-powerful and nothing we do can change that.
The protests are cathartic. I was at the “No Kings” gathering in Denver last month. It was encouraging to see thousands of other citizens who needed to voice their concern. It was peaceful and joyful. While it’s helpful that Rachel Maddow devoted segments of her show to the varied protests, it’s hard to see them as changing things in the near term.
The Town Halls, whether sponsored by a congressional representative or an alternative if the representative refuses, are valuable in illuminating the issues of concern to citizens. But these are too often dodged by the representative — if she/he attends. And there have been troubling tendencies in recent days to make it harder for people to get in (restricting admission, changing venues) or having security officials remove individuals from the town hall. Given how little the 119th Congress has accomplished and the absolute unwillingness of Republicans to challenge Trump on anything (with few exceptions), it’s hard to imagine a representative leaving a town hall session newly committed to doing something constructive.
This lack of legislation also puts some limits on the effectiveness of calling representatives. If Congress isn’t voting on legislation, calling mostly records citizen sentiments and may simply shape things around the edges.
So what do we do? I’d suggest one place to begin is to focus our attention in new directions. Two weeks before Inauguration Day, I wrote a piece titled “Don’t Chase The Laser Pointer”. I wrote:
The way to not act like cats is to focus on a couple of key issues. For example, how will the plans for mass deportation unfold? Yesterday the House passed a bill calling for the deportation of undocumented immigrants who had been convicted of burglary, theft, larceny, or shoplifting. It stands a good chance of passing the Senate. What will that implementation look like, who would be affected, and what’s the margin for error?
Okay, I was really naive to think that the administration would care what the Congress did. On the other hand, when they are picking people up for having traffic tickets or a fishing violation, this was made justifiable by the Lakin Riley Act.
We have to fight back against the constant chaos that is Trump 2.0. Doing so will require a high degree of discipline, especially for political junkies like me. Here’s what I’ve come up with as a first step, building on what I wrote back in January.
I’m going to try to completely ignore Trump and his gang.
It strikes me that the protests and the town halls and the calls to representatives are all driven by whatever Trump/Musk/Bondi/Noem/Lutnick have said most recently. It keeps them at the center of the conversation. They don’t care if they are portrayed in a bad light because 1) they feel no shame, and 2) they are still dominating the agenda.
So, Trump thinks girls should have 2 dolls instead of 30. Or 5 pencils instead of 250. Or that we should turn Alcatraz back into a working prison. Or that he “doesn’t know” if he has to follow the constitution. Or that the MS-13 photo was real. Or that we might invade Greenland. Or place tariffs on foreign films. Or he’s the Pope or a Star Wars character.
None of it matters.
Ignoring him/them will be hard because both regular media and social media is primed to take those claims and amplify them. They cannot even bring themselves to say that he’s lying or nonsensical (for the most part — a shoutout to the Bulwark).
Ignoring him will keep us from what Timothy Snyder calls “obeying in advance”. And, if lots of people do this, it will deprive Trump of the thing most narcissists require above all: attention.
What could we do with the time and mental energy saved by ignoring him? I think the answer is to become very knowledgeable about a topic of interest to you. I confess that I haven’t done well with this yet myself. However, I’ve been watching a friend devote tons of energy to becoming knowledgeable about legislation here in Colorado protecting trans rights. She has testified on multiple occasions and kept her social circle up to speed on the latest developments. It’s inspiring.
We can’t all be interested in every issue. People will focus on what’s important to them.
For my own interests, I know I’ll continue to find new networks to assist in pushing back on Christian Nationalism and the oversized influence conservative evangelicals have on federal policy. At the local level, I’m still exploring ways of developing community-based linkages that can strengthen the social fabric. I’m certain that other things will drop into my lap as we go forward.
As We The People take control of the things that are available to us, we are one step closer to exercising the consent of the governed. And are not reliant on whatever crazy thing shows up on Truth Social or a press availability or a Fox interview.
Democracy will be stronger as a result. And we’ll be a little less frazzled.
I like the thrust of this essay, John, with one question: Should we not oppose one direction of Trump and then also support one agenda we believe in? I'm concerned that totally ignoring the nonsense may let some of it pass through the filters.