Stop me if you’ve heard this…

“Democracy is doing just fine, thank you. We’re headed for a peaceful transfer of power. The government is still functioning. There are no riots in the streets.

What about all that talk before the election about Trump being a threat to democracy? Turns out, it was exactly that: just talk. Sure Trump made some wild claims during the campaign. But that’s just Trump being Trump. Don’t take it seriously. Nothing to see here…move along.”

Sound familiar? I’m sure you’ve read or heard something along these lines — certainly from Trump supporters but even from some on the left who desperately want to believe that things aren’t as serious as they are. 

Unfortunately, such statements are misguided at best — and a deliberate distortion at worst. To see just how distorted the rhetoric can get, here’s a quote from an obviously right-wing op-ed that recently appeared in The San Diego Union-Tribune. [I’m not going to cite the link to the article, or the author’s name, because I don’t want to provide undeserved publicity to such drivel].

“Democracy proved to be a terrible campaign concept in November. For ‘Save Democracy’ to work, there would have had to have been a real, obvious threat to democracy and, as much as Democrats tried to speak it into existence, voters did not believe that Trump was that threat. This is what Democrats are failing to see. Democracy is not at stake. And voters know that what Democrats want is not to preserve democracy for democracy’s sake, but as one of many means to justify their ends.”

So…what’s wrong with all of that? Just about everything. Here’s why…

Yes, it was a “free and fair election.” But that means very little about what is yet to come.

Was the election in November “free and fair”? For the most part, yes. But not because of efforts by Trump and the GOP. It was successful despite their efforts, We had to run a gauntlet of right-wing attempts at voter suppression and election manipulation to keep it fair. Thankfully, almost all the legal challenges against these anti-democratic actions were successful.

The other reason the election remains viewed as “free and fair,” ironically, is because Trump won. Had he lost, it is certain that Trump would have declared the election a fraud and proceeded down a road similar to what we saw in 2020 — which led to the January 6th insurrection. And his MAGA supporters would have followed him. So much for democracy being safe.

But in the end, as to whether or not Trump represented (and still represents) a threat to democracy, none of the above matters. The primary concern regarding democracy was never the election itself. The concern was always what would happen after the election — should Trump win and return to power. The concern was about Trump, once back in the White House, attempting to dismantle our democracy. And that is exactly where we now are.

There are already ominous signs about what is about to be unleashed. In Timothy Synder’s book On Tyranny, his first lesson in fighting tyranny is “Do not obey in advance.” Yet unforced capitulation is exactly what many corporate CEOs, government officials and (most especially) the supposed mainstream media are already doing — out of greed, a desire for power, and/or fear.

The post-election period, rather than dissipating fears about a looming autocracy, are confirming just how accurate those fears are.

Yes, Trump won. But that makes the threat to democracy that much more serious, not less so.

I’ve said it before, but it bears repeating: The number of people that voted for or against Trump has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not he remains a threat to democracy. The MAGA world wants you to believe this is not the case; but it is.

Such people (as evidenced by the op-ed I cited above) argue that Trump’s victory proves he is not a danger: “After all, if he was so dangerous, the voters would have recognized this and he would have lost.” That may have almost been true a couple of decades ago — when anyone with Trump’s baggage of scandals, lies and criminal behavior would have never even gotten the nomination. But it’s certainly not true anymore — mostly thanks to a silo consisting of right-wing social media, Fox News, and disinformation campaigns. 

In any case, history tells us that even the most heinous dictators can garner enough support to win a democratic election — and then proceed to dismantle the freedoms and protections that permitted that election. It happened with the rise of Hitler in Germany [*] and the ascent of Putin in Russia, to cite two prominent examples from the last hundred years. Make no mistake: The path from a democratic election to autocratic rule is well trod — and we are already traveling down it.

Finally, even if you were inclined to accept the fallacious notion that voting totals correspond to the degree of threat that Trump represents, the election results mean that, for a huge swath of this country, the threat is very real. Trump’s margin over Harris, on a percentage basis, was extremely narrow — only 1.62 percent.

Yes, the claims about Trump and autocracy were a campaign issue. But that doesn’t make them any less true. Far from it.

Did the Democrats hope to that their warnings about Trump’s fascist plans would lead to his defeat? Absolutely. But that doesn’t make the warnings any less true. Trump has openly promised to lead this country down the road to autocracy — dismantling government institutions and using his office for personal gain and revenge — without regard for norms or legal constraints. This is exactly what autocrat-wannabes do. In an obvious bit of projection, Republicans may try to persuade the public that they are the victims rather than the perpetrators here. Don’t be fooled.

In the end, the “proof will be in the pudding.” A year from now, we’ll have a much clearer sense of where our democracy is heading. If my view is accurate, much of what I have been saying here will have moved from a warning to a reality. That doesn’t necessarily mean Trump’s supporters will have abandoned him. We know from history that dictators can maintain their popular support — at least for a while — even after they assume autocratic rule. The critical question will be — will it be too late to change course? Or will Trump have amassed so much power that — as with the dictators of the past — he can suspend our freedoms with impunity? Will 2024 turn out to be the last “free and fair” presidential election in this country? Stay tuned.

______________________

* Synder quotes this incredible passage from a German Jewish newspaper in the 1930’s: “We do not subscribe to the view that Mr. Hitler and his friends, now finally in possession of the power they have so long desired, will implement the proposals circulating in [Nazi newspapers]; they will not suddenly deprive German Jews of their constitutional rights, nor enclose them in ghettos, nor subject them to the jealous and murderous impulses of the mob. They cannot do this because a number of crucial factors hold powers in check… and they clearly do not want to go down that road.”

To repeat (one last time): For Democrats, and for anyone else who hoped to keep Trump out of the White House, November 5 was a crushing blow — both in terms of what it portends for the future of the Democratic Party and more generally for democracy itself. As the BBC wrote:

“Donald Trump swept to victory by chipping away at groups of voters which Democrats once believed would help them win the White House for a generation…’Demography,’ these left-wing optimists liked to say, ‘is destiny.’ Sixteen years later, however, that destiny appears to have turned to dust.”

The resistance takes shape…

Now, it’s time to move beyond lamenting the past — and toward preparing for the dangers that lie ahead. Unfortunately, Democrats are far from certain as to how best to proceed. As CNN wrote:

“In CNN’s conversations with two dozen top Democratic operatives and elected officials since Election Day, the fear isn’t just that no one knows the answer to what’s next – it’s that they don’t even know what the question is at this point.”

On a more optimistic note, there is an emerging Democratic consensus, as described in The New York Times, on what an “Anti-Trump Battle Plan” will look like.

And, as noted in USA Today: “The Donald Trump resistance is ready for when Democrats are done grieving.” Exactly what form Trump resistance will take remains a work in progress. One thing is clear: the old rules for opposing Trump and MAGA will not apply. This is not 2017. Trump 2.0 will be far worse and much more difficult — and risky — to navigate successfully.

…and so does the capitulation

That’s why one of the most troubling signs, as we begin the fight against the Trump agenda, is that people and institutions who actively fought against Trump in 2017 are now deciding to capitulate instead. Nowhere is this more evident than in the media.

Ominous warning shots appeared in the days before the election, when the publishers of The Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post blocked intended endorsements for Kamala Harris — just before they were about to be printed. This was generally viewed as a shameful move to avoid a Trump retaliation, should he win. *

In the wake of the election, capitulations have begun to accelerate. Almost immediately, Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski (of MSNBC’s Morning Joe) “went to Mar-a-Lago for a fence-mending meeting with President-elect Donald Trump.” It was widely panned as a sell out. Even staff within MSNBC viewed it as “a troubling early sign of capitulation to Trump. ‘Normalizing Trump is a bad idea,’ wrote Katie Phang.” **

A few days later, Comcast announced plans to “spin off its NBCUniversal cable TV networks, including MSNBC” within the next year. There is speculation that this could lead to the end of MSNBC altogether. Even worse: guess who half-joked that they might purchase the network? Elon Musk! [By the way, the ongoing right-wing takeover of mainstream media is very far from a joke. It’s happening.]

Of course, fears of retributions after Trump takes office are not unwarranted — as he has vowed revenge on his enemies, especially the media, on numerous occasions.

More generally, as The Guardian wrote a few days before the election:

“A lot has changed since 2016 – including the increasingly conservative bent of the US supreme court after three Trump appointees. If Trump is elected in November, the laws that protect news organizations might crumble or be weakened.” “Donald Trump poses a clear threat to journalists, to news organizations and to press freedom in the US and around the world.”

The Brookings Institute similarly asked:

“Donald Trump has threatened to shut down broadcasters, but can he?”

The answer: Possibly, yes. “A president of the United States already has powers beyond coercing the FCC. These powers could be exercised not only against broadcasters, but also against those who operate the internet.”

So some prudence is justified. The question is how much and in what way. What we are now seeing is too much and in the wrong way. ***

Not surprisingly, capitulation extends beyond the media. Eight years ago, Democratic governors were more than willing to do battle with Trump. Now, not so much. As Politico wrote:

“Dems’ new Trump resistance strategy is ‘Playing nice.’ As Democratic governors game out how to deal with a second Trump administration, one thing is clear: It’s not 2016 anymore. Governors face a more politically sophisticated version of Donald Trump, and are calculating that they need to choose their battles more carefully — and find ways to cooperate — after their anti-Trump strategy led to a nationwide shellacking.”

In the months ahead, I expect the list of left-wing capitulators to continue to grow.

In other words, if you are someone who remains determined to fight the Trump agenda, you may find yourself increasingly isolated as the people and organizations you’ve counted on as allies succumb to the fear of and pressure from the Trump White House.

In case you are still unclear as to what this all means: This is the beginning of how democracies end.

A starting point

Yes, it can be disheartening to watch these capitulations and realize that a huge swath of this country not only seems unconcerned about Trump’s promised retributions…they are positively enthusiastic at the prospect. But let’s not forget that, while Trump won the election, more than half of the country (75 million people!) did not vote for Trump (with the latest count, Trump’s vote total is now less than 50%!). There are a whole lot of people out there who are on our side — who oppose Trump and understand the danger he represents. This is a starting point to counter any sense of isolation and to instead join the resistance.

_____________________

* Update December 5: The situation at The Los Angele Times is far worse than I realized at the time this column was first posted. Harry Litman lays it all out here, making it clear that he “doesn’t want to continue to work for a paper that is appeasing Trump and facilitating his assault on democratic rule for craven reasons.”

** Update December 6: The situation on Morning Joe has gotten worse since this column was first posted. David Frum describes how he was “excused” from the show (and will likely never appear on MSNBC again) for a rather mild critical comment he made about Pete Hegseth and Fox News. Shortly afterward, co-host Mika Brzezinski read an apology for his remarks. Frum continues: “It is a very ominous thing if our leading forums for discussion of public affairs are already feeling the chill of intimidation and responding with efforts to appease.”

More generally, Marc Elias has echoed the sentiments expressed here, writing: “”What has surprised me, depressed me and ultimately angered me are the voices that have gone silent. So many who were so loud in warning about the dangers of Trump now speak only in whispers if at all. The critics who were bold and brash when they thought Harris would win are now tamed and seeking accommodation. Media figures who claimed to be the bastion of protection for our democracy now make pilgrimages to temper Trump’s anger.”

*** Update December 16: Yet another bowling pin falls. This time ABC News capitulates…making a $15 million settlement in a court case that Trump brought against the network and where ABC would have likely prevailed. It involves statements made by George Stephanopoulos  during an interview with Senator Nancy Mace — regarding a court’s finding in the E. Jean Carroll lawsuit that “Donald Trump has been found liable for defaming the victim of rape by a jury.” Trump claimed he was defamed. It’s a win for Trump that he does not deserve…and allows him to avoid what would have been an embarrassing deposition. If Trump were not President-elect, the settlement would almost certainly never have happened. To read all the gory details, check out this column by Harry Litman.

Even as Election Day recedes in the rear view mirror, I continue to survey the wreckage.

There is not just one reason Kamala Harris lost the election. But some things mattered more than others. Much more.

In particular, Kamala Harris — and the Democrats in general — did not lose the election because of mistakes her campaign made (too conservative or too progressive; I’ve heard both). And it was not because of inflation, illegal immigrants, racism, misogyny, Gaza, elitism, identity politics or any of the other usual suspects. I am sure some of them contributed to her loss. But they were not determinative causes.

In fact, all of those potential causes are largely irrelevant. They should not have mattered — because Trump should never have had even the slightest chance of winning in the first place. In a sane world, he would have never even gotten the nomination. 

Harris lost because of the huge numbers of people who were willing to overlook Trump’s obviously disqualifying attributes — and vote for him anyway. People decided they were okay with voting for a convicted criminal, a rapist, a fraud, a con man, an inveterate liar — and someone guilty of attempting to overthrow an election leading to a violent insurrection — and all the rest (as I’ve detailed in previous columns, starting with this one). Under any other circumstances in American history, Trump’s baggage would have been way more than enough to end his political career — in an instant. Period. But not this time. This time he had the full backing of the GOP and went on to win the Presidency. The key question then becomes WHY? Why were so many voters willing to give Trump a pass he did not deserve?

Back in July, many people said they couldn’t support Biden, even though they voted for him four years ago and generally liked him, because of his obvious and serious mental decline. Ultimately, that’s what led to his withdrawal. Trump should have faced a similar reckoning — in spades — due to his moral, ethical and legal failings. Even people who supported him at one point should have said the bar is now too high for them to get over it. But they didn’t. Again, the question is WHY?

One key answer, as detailed in a The New Republic article, is the dominance of right-wing media:

“Today, the right-wing media sets the news agenda in this country.”

“I think a lot of people who don’t watch Fox or listen to Sinclair radio don’t understand this crucial chicken-and-egg point. They assume that Trump says something and the right-wing media amplify it. That happens sometimes. But more often, it’s the other way around. These memes start in the media sphere, then they become part of the Trump agenda.”

“To much of America, by the way, this is not understood as one side’s view of things. It’s simply ‘the news.’ This is what people—white people, chiefly—watch in about two-thirds of the country.”

On Fox News and other right-wing outlets, viewers never heard about the extent of or legitimate basis for Trump’s legal problems. When told, for example, that Trump had been held liable for sexual assault, a common reaction among his supporters was to express disbelief: “That can’t be true.” At best, viewers were told a lie: that Trump’s legal problems were all the result of Democratic “lawfare” — the Biden administration and a weaponized Justice Department targeting Trump. Trump was portrayed as the victim rather than the culprit. When that is the only story you hear on the “news” — not just from partisan ads, but from what you likely view as unbiased reporting — you not surprisingly come to believe it. So you wind up giving Trump a pass.

[A related effort was a $45 million disinformation ad campaign created by political advisers to Tesla founder Elon Musk, designed to suppress votes for Harris. Once again, to the extent this was successful (and it seemed to be, as the Democratic vote was down several million from what it was in 2020), the success was based on falsehoods that came to be believed.]

Here’s one other recent example: As reported by NPR, the right-wing media successfully convinced millions of Americans that FEMA (and thus indirectly Harris and Biden) was failing in their effort to help victims of Hurricane Helene. It was all a lie. But it worked.

“Rumors, misinformation and lies about the federal government’s response to Hurricane Helene in the southeastern United States have run rampant since the storm made landfall, especially around funding for the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

The claims have become so widespread that FEMA set up a response page to debunk many falsehoods around how disaster funding works and what the agency’s response has been.”

So how do we break the stranglehold right-wing media have on the news and the people who consume it? How do we stop the massive spread of lies? I honestly don’t know; but people are working on it. If we can’t come up with an answer, Democrats’ efforts to regain power is likely doomed to fail — no matter what else they do. Many Democrats are hoping to capitalize on an expected backlash to Trump’s policies — as the policies inevitably fail to produce the promised results. Maybe that will happen. But it seems more likely that a backlash, if one even occurs, will not lead to defections from Trump supporters. Instead, Fox News and related media will claim that any troubling news is all due to Democrats and their efforts to block what Trump is trying to do. Or something like that. It will be a lie. But people will believe it. Because the right-wing media control the narrative in politics today. And MAGA will succeed in the midterms — just as they did this past election. And this will continue to repeat — unless and until we find a counter to the right-wing media dominance. I am not holding my breath.

Update: November 21: It turns out that that giving a pass to Trump’s past behavior may be the lesser of two mistakes voters made this election. The greater error was underestimating — or outright dismissing — the future harm he is now posed to wreak. It’s already begun — with Trump’s cabinet nominations. And the consequences, as outlined by Timothy Snyder (author of On Tyranny), are likely to be devastating. Here’s a quote:

“Taken together, Trump’s candidates {for cabinet positions etc.} constitute an attempt to wreck the American government…It is a mistake to think of these people as flawed.  It is not they will do a bad job in their assigned posts.  It is that they will do a good job using those assigned posts to destroy our country…And citizens, regardless of how they voted, need now to check their attitudes.  This is no longer a post-electoral moment.  It is a pre-catastrophic moment.”