Ben Domenech

The early attitudes from Democrats toward the new Trump administration are difficult to judge in a vacuum – and that’s the context we’re currently in a dozen days before the second inaugural. Last time around, it was only after the combination hits of the Women’s March and the manufactured Russiagate freakout that we saw elected Democrats put in a position where anything less than loud resistance was unacceptable. So here, in the in-between time before Trump returns to the White House, the positioning may not accurately reflect where things will be a month from now. That being said, there are signals – and they already reflect a different attitude from some Democrats.

Donald Trump’s ascension to his second presidency comes with a new cadre of followers and sidekicks, in the form of a cabinet built almost entirely from fresh faces. This is not a president interested in continuity, which he signaled early on, stating on social media that Nikki Haley and Mike Pompeo — his erstwhile United Nations ambassador and secretary of state — would have no place in his second administration. The first name wasn’t a surprise, given the obvious tension he had with the woman who was his last challenger in the primary. The second was because Pompeo had been a dutiful supporter of Trump while in office, wrote a book defending their shared record on foreign policy and rejected the opportunity to run himself.

Mike Johnson's status as an accidental speaker, thrust into his role in part because it was so undesirable or impossible for other longer-tenured members to achieve, was always going to be tested once there was a Republican in the White House again. And since that Republican turns out to be Donald Trump, currently the acting president in everything but title, Johnson's decision-making was going to become all the more controversial, subject to the whims and leanings of Trump's political instincts.  It turns out we didn't even have to wait until the inauguration to find out what that looks like.

Could 2025 give Democrats a do-over for how they misplayed the results of Donald Trump's first election? Early signs point to yes — and that could come at the consternation of some conservatives. Let's consider some political alternative history for a moment. In the immediate aftermath of the 2016 election, it's easy to forget how many Democrats started sounding a note of reconciliation with the incoming president. Chuck Schumer, Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders were all open about their willingness to find common ground with the new White House on infrastructure and other policy areas, hoping their views would be closer to Trump's than more fiscally conservative Republicans.

It was a gray May afternoon in New York City when a thirty-year-old homeless man named Jordan Neely — who had dozens of encounters with law enforcement, suffered from schizophrenia and other mental health issues and was under the influence of synthetic drugs — boarded the F train and began ranting and raving at the straphangers on board. He said he was ready to die, that someone would die today, screaming that he didn’t mind going to jail or getting life in prison. Scared passengers backed away, with one young mother barricading her five-year-old behind a stroller. Witnesses attest to what happened next: a young man headed to the gym, an ex-Marine named Daniel Penny, did what others wouldn’t be brave enough to do in this situation.

A phenomenon that will likely be with us throughout the second term of Donald Trump as president is a dynamic of left-right crazy that will foment anxiety and desperation with ludicrous speed. Here’s the way the ouroboros tangles: a right-wing voice indicates that Trump is about to do something crazy in a positive sense. A left-wing voice responds with anxious fear that this crazy step is about to be taken in a negative sense. Then this crazy thing doesn’t happen, but there’s an explanation — the right-wing seizing upon the idea that a crazy good thing was undermined by various forces, while the left wing is sure their online pushback was key to stopping the crazy bad thing from happening.

So Joe Biden decided to go out by doing the thing. And why not? For all the people who praised him for being noble and restrained, for insisting that no one is above the law and the court process must play out, what did they really do for him in the end? Plunge the knife blade under his shoulder blades with slightly less force than Nancy Pelosi? A betrayal is still a betrayal, regardless of the motives — and there are consequences for that; in this case, the consequences stand to Hunter Biden's benefit. He is pardoned, with a vengeance. Karine Jean-Pierre insisted it would never happen. Jen Psaki praised the president to high heaven, as a mark of his high character.

The reaction in most elected Republican circles to the naming of President-elect Donald Trump’s nominees for the most prominent positions in his administration has ranged from the exuberant, to the somewhat skeptical, to the truly head-scratching, to, in one obvious case, outright disgust. But what’s emerging now is a clearer picture of what Trump 47 has as an idea of his cabinet — and it’s far more consistent, and potentially transformative, than some observers currently seem to appreciate. Cabinets and top officials are most often drawn from a pool of experienced politicians with lengthy résumés, earned from decades of service in varied capacities and concentration in their particular area.

It took John Thune just two ballots to get the job of the new majority leader of the Senate, replacing Mitch McConnell after eighteen years of rule. Attempts to challenge him by John Cornyn and Rick Scott fell short, with the final tally of the secret ballot (where just about everyone knows how everyone else is voting) led to a 29-24 vote victory.  The South Dakotan is a longtime member of the Republican establishment, originally recruited by the George W. Bush team to challenge the supposedly unbeatable Tom Daschle, the Democratic minority leader at the time, in what became the most expensive campaign of 2004.

Donald Trump’s second term administration is taking shape, and thus far it’s turned out to be impressively Catholic in its approach — representing Trump’s dominance of the Republican coalition and his capacity to ignore the worst instincts of some of his more vocal supporters on the New Right who see governance through a naive lens. One of the questions heading into this term was who Trump would disappoint by being insufficiently one thing or the other — by being too radical in some areas or too modest in others. But at this point, there are very few people disappointed in the names he’s chosen, outside of a handful of very online voices who had fantasies of their favorite pundits and follows on X getting a shot at cabinet positions.

Welcome to Thunderdome. I have been part of the television coverage of election nights going back twenty years. I have stories from all of them that are of note. Election nights bring out the craziness in people: they lose their minds, lose the plot and react with a jittery manic mindset based on disabused assumptions about the world they inhabit. This happens often. I even made Jamelle Bouie so mad he left the CBS bureau in 2016 to take a walk. That’s how much of a jerk I can be on election nights when people are desperately holding on to hope for their candidates... Since my candidates always lose, I don’t care about their feelings, and that’s very freeing. Oh, your hopes for the future have been irrevocably dashed? This must be something new for you.

Welcome to Thunderdome and Happy Halloween — where this scary, chaotic, insane election season is finally coming to a close. You can hear my take on where things stand here. Election Day should come as a moment of relief to finally have some resolution. Instead, many voters worried about what comes next resemble nothing so much as Douglas Adams’s infamous bowl of petunias, falling rapidly out of the sky: “Oh no, not again.”Why do they feel that way?