Having Difficulty Processing Trump’s Victory?

I recently discovered that numerous people are having a hard time emotionally processing the Trump victory. The intensity of reactions to Trump’s election victory surprised me. Many people expressed a range of strong, negative feelings, but I find it difficult to fully understand this response. I don’t mean to demonstrate my low EQ, but I don’t get it. Polls had indicated a close race for weeks if not months, and sources like FiveThirtyEight and betting markets had even predicted a Trump win. This result, therefore, should not have been a shock, and people have had time to prepare.

As president, Trump will soon have significant control over all three branches of government. In terms of the judiciary, he will inherit a conservative Supreme Court that endorses the unitary executive theory, a principle asserting that the president has ultimate authority over the executive branch.

The Court has granted Trump significant immunity regarding many of his actions as president. Unfortunatly, this covers Trump’s past and future deeds.  He has also expressed plans to reshape the Justice Department, asserting it will serve him and his administration rather than operate independently. With Rep. Matt Gaetz in charge of DOJ, it is hard to imagine any situation where the DOJ would bring charges against the president, no matter what he did. Trump is famous for saying, “”I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, okay, and I wouldn’t lose any voters, okay?” Now we know he could shot someone and not be indicted” Over time, we can expect numerous Trump-appointed judges, often unqualified, but loyal to Trump, to join the federal bench, solidifying this vision of executive power.

In Congress, Trump will benefit from a majority in both the House and the Senate, without the constraints of a Senate Majority Leader like Mitch McConnell, who previously opposed some of Trump’s initiatives. Trump may even seek to lower the filibuster threshold from 65 votes to a simple majority, greatly diminishing the minority party’s influence and reducing the checks and balances in the system. Historically, the Republican Party almost always followed a political platform, but Trump’s administration marked an exception in his first term. However, “Project 2025” has since emerged as the new conservative roadmap—a plan aligning with Trump’s leadership style and ambitions.  While Trump disavows knowing anything about Project 2025, a congressional hearing brought to light how many of Trump’s people worked on Project 2025. A CNN review found at least 140 people who worked for Trump worked on the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025.

While giving any single person too much power poses risks, doing so with Trump specifically could have particularly concerning consequences. Yet, if Kamala Harris had won, her presidency would have likely faced intense opposition. Consider the experience of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who once appeared poised to win the presidency. Republicans launched numerous investigations against her, leading to the exposure of her private email server. Former Representative Jason Chaffetz, who chaired the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, openly stated that if Clinton were elected, he would keep her administration tied up in litigation over the Clinton Foundation.

When President Obama won, key Republican leaders reportedly gathered the night of his inauguration to discuss ways to block his legislative efforts, aiming to prevent him from achieving a second term. Obama often found himself struggling to gain Republican support, even for ideas aligned with traditional Republican values, such as the market-based reforms in the Affordable Care Act. If Harris had won, Trump would likely have stayed active in politics, mobilizing his base to block her legislative agenda. Many of Trump’s supporters believe opposing Harris is a fight of good versus evil as described in the Biblical apocalypse.

In the past, Trump has even rejected bipartisan agreements, such as a border security proposal, in favor of keeping immigration as a divisive campaign issue. His approach illustrates a political strategy that prioritizes divisive issues to maintain control over the narrative.

Despite these challenges, history has shown that progress persists. America’s civil rights journey has never been without obstacles, and while different presidents may influence the speed or difficulty of this progress, they cannot halt it entirely. When apartheid in South Africa once seemed insurmountable, it eventually fell through sustained advocacy and resilience. In the same way, progress in the United States will continue, even under a President Trump.

I am surprised that commentators don’t see Kamala Harris as the leader of the Democratic party. Trump lost, was impeached, indicted, convicted and had historically high negatives and at no time did the Republicans not see him as the leader of the Republican party. And they were right to stick with him as his victory proves. The Democrats would do well to stick with Kamala Harris moving forward as she has significant experience to build upon, including running a national campaign and raising over $1  billion.