Resistance (alone) is Futile

The election of Donald Trump as president of the United States has unleashed a robust resistance movement throughout the country. However, while straightforward obstruction was quite effective for the Republicans during Obama's presidency, true long-term victories in the battle of ideas require more than that. For starters, a true opposition must present its own specific policy positions for the American people to accept. Also, it’s unnecessary to oppose every single thing Trump and the Republicans in Congress do, especially if it’s something the majority of Americans actually favor. Perhaps just as importantly, sometimes the best course of action might be the dirty word of 21st century U.S. politics: compromise!

Without detailed proposals to counter Trump’s agenda, the choice for the American people becomes binary: Trump or Not Trump. Finding a position of strength from which to resist the president of the United States and his bully pulpit is difficult enough, but without an explicit plan, it becomes even more difficult to convince the majority of Americans that the alternative to Trump is actually better. Many Americans might just opt for the devil they know, since you often can't beat something with nothing. So, for example, rather than saying “we oppose Trump for X,” the opposition should say “we believe Y is better for the American people than X for reasons 1, 2, and 3.”

The often chaotic nature of the Trump presidency, at least in its early stages, makes it difficult to hit the moving target of near-constant executive actions and Twitter statements. Therefore, it can be counterproductive for the resistance to respond to every single last thing that comes from Trump or even his Republican allies in Congress. Sometimes, the best response is to not respond at all, particularly if it involves a policy or law that already enjoys widespread support. An unintended consequence of constantly disputing everything is that many Americans might reject the opposition entirely just because of its unpopular position on a particular issue.

Finally, there’s nothing wrong with compromise. Certainly, it’s preferable to the current highly dysfunctional political environment in Washington. In the spirit of finding common ground, the best bet is to focus on the issues that enjoy broad backing. For example, anything having to do with increasing government accountability is likely to win the endorsement of Americans from across the political spectrum. This may even serve to widen the appeal of the opposition, by offering a feasible alternative that is also able to put differences aside for the sake of what’s best for the country.

Our two-party system ensures that most Americans will probably find things they agree with in both parties. For this reason, rather than just outright challenges to everything having to do with Trump, the best bet for the resistance is to adopt and promote definitive policy positions that are to the greater benefit of the American people, leave the Trump policies that already enjoy wide public approval alone, and find compromise where possible on the policies in which both sides can work together. These initiatives would position Trump’s opposition movement as a viable political force going forward, regardless of who ultimately leads the way.