Trump’s MAGA Revolution Won’t Change Hearts and Minds

 

Trump is shoving right-wing MAGA ideology down America’s throat. It’s not a recipe for success.

January 1981

We’re about six months into the Trump presidency, and it’s pretty clear that the Trump administration is bent on transforming the American landscape into some sort of MAGA fantasyland. His reckless issuance of Executive Orders that have dubious constitutional abidance, his attacks on universities, the press, law firms, and anything else that have not bowed sufficiently to Dear Leader, and especially his indiscriminate frisking of brown-skinned people to fulfill a deportation quota, have spectators gasping for breath. There’s something familiar about this.

I was a politically active young fellow in the winter of 1981 when Ronald Reagan assumed the presidency. I vividly remember the newspaper headlines right after Reagan’s inauguration, trumpeting a push for deregulation, massive cuts to government programs, a harsher stance toward the Soviet Union, and especially the problematic pledge to 1) increase the defense budget, 2) cut taxes, and 3) balance the budget.

That last promise, the one about tax cuts paying for themselves and sparking a resurgent economy, not only didn’t come to pass, but it probably contributed to a recession by the summer of 1981, one that the Federal Reserve called “the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression.” Reagan survived that and got reelected.

Trump and Reagan

For two American presidents with aspirations to lead a conservative revolution, a substantial electoral mandate would be beneficial. Reagan could surely claim that. In the 1980 presidential election, Reagan beat an incumbent president by 10 percentage points (51-41) and carried 44 states. Donald Trump did not earn a majority of the votes, but still prevailed by a 49.8-48.3 percent margin. Trump’s electoral vote margin was 312-226. It was the closest election since the disputed 2000 presidential election.

Trump and Reagan stood on opposite poles in messaging and political theater. Reagan, with a twinkle in his eye, spoke of America as a “shining city upon a hill” whose best days were ahead. Trump, on the other hand, decries “American carnage” whose cities are burning to the ground.

Hearts and Minds

So Reagan had a bigger mandate and a more likable message. Regan was a staunch believer in conservatism and aspired to use persuasion and cunning to win America’s confidence. Reagan was meticulous in articulating a conservative message.  Trump, not so much.

It’s just not in Trump’s nature.  He is motivated by the acquisition of power, seeking retribution on perceived enemies, and a gluttonous need for flattery and obeisance. Trump lacks core principles that would guide a consistent policy agenda. Accordingly, Trump has caved on key policy initiatives (e.g., tariffs) and has turned against people (e.g., Elon Musk, Leonard Leo) who would be natural conservative allies.

It almost seems as if America is a vast schoolyard and Trump is the schoolyard bully. But can you win hearts and minds that way? Don’t you need a program, a plan, a purpose that the people can embrace with confidence?

Project 2025

You might remember candidate Trump’s initial reaction to Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation’s blueprint for a conservative makeover of American society. “Some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal,” Trump said last summer. “I wish them luck, but I have nothing to do with them.”

Of course, right after his inauguration, Trump hired Project 2025 co-author Russell Vought to be his budget director. And the Trump administration has loosely followed the edicts of the 900-page document. Judge for yourself whether any of these choice pickings from Project 2025 will win the hearts and minds of Americans:

Children suffer the normalization of transgenderism with drag queens and pornography invading their school libraries. [page 1]

The next conservative president…starts with deleting the terms sexual orientation and gender identity, diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), gender, gender equality, gender awareness, gender-sensitive, abortion, reporductive health, reproductive rights, and any other term used to deprive Americans of their First Amensment rights… [p. 4-5]

Climate change research should be disbanded. [p. 675]

[Child labor] With parental consent and proper training, young adults should be allowed to learn and work in more dangerous occupations. [p. 595]

Treat participation in any critical race theory or DEI initiative..as per se grounds for termination of employment. [p. 708]

Abortion is not health care, and states should be free  to devise and implement programs that prioritize providers that are not entangled with the abortion industry. [p. 472]

In a poll conducted a month before election day 2024, Project 2025 remained deeply unpopular with the American people. Overall, just 13 percent supported Project 2025, with 52 percent opposed. Only self-described MAGA Republicans narrowly supported Project 2025 by a 30-24 percent margin. And yet, this is the blueprint for governance that the Trump administration has adopted.

The Mad King

In a normally functioning democracy, political leaders like the American president govern through strategic persuasion. They advance their policy agenda by accepting compromise and embracing mutual respect. The preeminent political scientist Richard Neustadt hypothesized: “Presidential power is the power to persuade.” Certainly Reagan governed in that spirit.

Donald Trump and his MAGA allies have no such ambitions. Authoritarians like Trump rule by fear. Marc Elias, the voting rights lawyer and publisher of Democracy Docket, elaborates:

[Authoritarians] seek to impose their will on others through terror, cruelty, and physical force. Niccolo Machiavelli famously wrote, ‘It is much safer to be feared than loved…fear preseerves you by a dread of punishment that never fails.’

Recounting the last six months of the Trump presidency would confirm this dismal predicament.

Electoral Consequences

Of course, Trump and the Republican Party fully recognize the disadvantages of owning such an unpopular governing agenda. With an eye toward the 2026 midterm elections, they are pursuing a two-pronged attack on free and fair elections: making it harder to vote and further gerrymandering congressional districts.

According to Marc Elias, the US Department of Justice under Trump has shifted from protecting voting rights to imposing stricter voting rules that would disenfranchise voters. The DOJ has withdrawn challenges to various states’ legislative actions to purge voters from the rolls, reduce early voting, impose voter ID or proof of citizenship requirements, and demand access to sensitive voter information.

The DOJ has also withdrawn a challenge to Texas’s scandalous effort to “re-gerrymander” its congressional districts so that in a state where Republicans win 55 percent of the vote, Democrats would have a chance to win only seven of 38 congressional seats.

Coda

Since Republicans control both houses of Congress, we must rely on the federal and state judiciary to challenge the far-right takeover of our government. Four great organizations are actively working to provide courtroom resistance to Trump’s fear-based autocratic enterprise. They are:

American Civil Liberties Union
Brennan Center for Justice
Democracy Docket
Southern Poverty Law Center

Democracy Docket‘s Marc Elias alone is litigating 50 of the 144 voting and election cases across 42 states. But the Republican National Committee, flush with cash, is involved in more than half the cases. It’s a David vs. Goliath situation.

Google one or all of the organizations. Click the DONATE button. You’ll be glad you did.