Let's not sugarcoat it. If President-elect Donald Trump attempts what he has foreshadowed, we are about to enter the most challenging period of our 248-year-old republic.

At the same time, Americans remain an idealistic, compassionate people who believe in our Constitution, Bill of Rights, and principles of fairness and opportunity. And our country is one where a large majority support the institutional guardrails that undergird our system — the courts, an independent media, national and state legislatures as checks on executive power, a civil service that pledges allegiance to the rule of law rather than to an individual or ideology.

Concerns about everything from inflation to the so-called “deep state” underpin much of Trump’s support, but pollsters have also found that for many, democracy was also on the ballot this fall — not because they reject it, but because they feel it has failed them, their families and their communities.

In this view, Trump will not destroy democracy; instead, he will give it back to the people. This will turn out to be a mirage, but that is where we are. What, then, are we to do?

We want America to succeed

In the coming months, the right-wing echo chamber will reverberate with the phrase; “Being American means wanting the president to succeed.” Such a statement is both dangerous and un-American.

If Trump does as he has promised, his successes could actually mean America’s failure. Tariffs will likely increase the costs of imported goods by 20 percent or more. Cuts to Medicaid will challenge state budgets and affect the health of millions. Politicizing the Department of Justice to stamp out opponents will undermine the rule of law. The potential use of the military and our state national guards to conduct mass deportations will tear American families apart while disrupting key elements of our economy. Tax cuts will impose costs on future generations and make economic opportunity more difficult. Undermining NATO will embolden our enemies and make the world a more dangerous place.

We have a duty to oppose those policies and principles not because they emanate from Trump, but because they are bad for the country. And Trump’s support is not monolithic. While he retains zealots who will support whatever he does, many of the policies he will advance will draw fire from those who voted for him.

Checks and balances remain the heart of the American system. Ideas are to be vetted and policy constructed within this cauldron, and opposition is essential not only to successful policy but to America’s greatness.

Allegiance to the office – not the man

In our system, a president has certain prerogatives, including the selection of his Cabinet. But this power is not unfettered and leaves the actual appointments to the Senate. We call this “advise and consent,” and it provides a check and balance against political overreach. Trump’s win was no mandate (his popular vote margin was about 1.5%), and while democratic principles require acknowledgment of his victory, they do not command blind allegiance to the man. Even as he prevailed on Election Day, he remained deeply unfavorable.

Many of Trump’s Cabinet picks appear to be based more on loyalty than competence. The Senate should provide appropriate deference, but need not confirm any of them. Moreover, our elected representatives have a responsibility to thoroughly vet proposed appointees, and to insist on rigorous FBI clearance, especially for national security nominees such as Tulsi Gabbard, Pete Hegseth and Kristi Noem. There is no rationale for utilizing so-called “recess appointments” to avoid this scrutiny, nor justification for advancing Kash Patel as a new FBI chief when there isn’t even an opening (Christopher Wray did not say he planned to resign until after Trump tapped Patel).

Cabinet appointments will be the first real test for Republican senators, especially those like Mitch McConnell (Ky.), Bill Cassidy (La.), James Lankford (Okla.), Thom Tillis (N.C.) and Rand Paul (Ky.), all of whom either have expressed concern about this process or have questioned the qualifications of the candidates. Send them a note emphasizing their role in our liberal democracy.

Opposition on many fronts

American opposition to Trumpist approaches requires rejection of attempts to normalize his presidency while avoiding catastrophizing about its potential result. Much remains about which we should worry, but we cannot let this sap our energy; otherwise, it becomes easier for the grifters to have their way. Opposition will neither be easy nor time-limited.

With Trump in control of the executive and legislative branches, this feels like a Herculean task. But remember that our political system remains complex. Lawsuits can counter illegal executive orders, and presidents cannot pass legislation simply on their own. On the day Trump takes office, he will be a lame duck and will find that even his legislative allies have a keen sense of political survival that may prove to be a formidable obstacle to plans that can hurt their constituents. Actions that frustrate his agenda may be subtle and not generate large headlines, but they will occur.

Opposition will occur in many states as well. Trump’s plans for mass deportation, for example, can only succeed with massive support from law enforcement. But what happens if he attempts to federalize national guards typically under the control of governors, either to send them to the border or conduct raids of workplaces and homes? Governors will immediately be placed on the hot seat. Will they voluntarily relinquish their authority to the national government to permit their constituents to be used to round up families to be sent back to Central America? Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey (D) has already promised that her state police would not cooperate with the mass deportations Trump has promised.

Almost immediately upon Trump’s election, Democratic governors began planning. Gavin Newsom of California called a special session of the Assembly in an effort to “Trump-proof” his state by providing more monies to the state’s attorney general to fund lawsuits against Trump initiatives. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul and Attorney General Letitia James pledged to “protect New Yorkers’ fundamental freedoms from any potential threats.” Gov. J.B. Pritzker of Illinois and Gov. Jared Polis of Colorado created Governors Safeguarding Democracy, a group whose central aim is to fortify democratic institutions in the states and ensure the rule of law.

Prominent state attorneys general like Rob Bonta in California, Kris Mayes in Arizona, Phil Weiser in Colorado and Keith Ellison in Minnesota have all vowed to use their offices to resist expected Trump excesses.

Protect the next elections

The first steps on the road back are the next elections — not in 2026, but in 2025, when New Jersey and Virginia will hold contests for governors and their legislatures. The Virginia contest will likely draw the most attention, if only because the commonwealth has a Republican governor who claims that the party is gaining significant momentum in the state. Democratic candidate Abigail Spanberger can make history if she wins, and you can help.

Three states — Wisconsin, Louisiana and Pennsylvania — will conduct supreme court elections in 2025, with the Badger State’s only five months away. If you have never given to a supreme court candidate, maybe now is the time.

Mayoral contests will occur in major cities across the nation, from San Francisco to Charlotte to Buffalo to Virginia Beach. These will be the first referendums on the Trump presidency, and will prove critical in defining the narrative for the 2026 midterms, when the entire U.S. House will be on the ballot and 36 states will hold races for governor. State legislative races will be everywhere, and groups like The States Project are already building for the next contests.

Over the next two years, protecting the vote and the machinery of elections is critical. In the last several years, many state legislatures have adopted new laws to make voting more difficult. But these actions have not always passed constitutional muster. Trump acolytes will undoubtedly propose more measures to restrict voting and the defense of democracy will require opposition to them. This means supporting voting rights groups working both through the courts and in local communities.

Moreover, successful elections feature strong candidates who embrace new ways to spread their messages. New groups like Indivisable’s Truth Brigade are emerging to counter misinformation and to build common ground more effectively, much like the Public Leadership Institute’s IdeaLog has done recently. New media organizations are expanding their reach; States Newsroom is a coalition of outlets that covers politics and policy in most every state in the nation.

Looking for information on legal challenges? Democracy Docket and the Brennan Center’s State Court Report are good sources. Other platforms such as The Downballot, Pluribus, Stateline and a new entry, State Navigate, provide fast moving information on state issues from different perspectives. If you want to support grassroots organizing in Virginia, Virginia Plus has been on the front lines in the commonwealth, and has made a big difference to candidates seeking higher office.

Our time of challenge

Martin Luther King Jr. said that the “ultimate measure” of people is not where they stand “in moments of comfort and convenience,” but how they respond to a challenge. That challenge is now upon us, and finding your niche within these groups can, as King said, “build dikes of courage to ward off the flood of fear.”

_____

Toscano is an attorney and a former Democratic leader in the Virginia House of Delegates. He is the author of “ Fighting Political Gridlock: How States Shape Our Nation and Our Lives.”

_____

©2025 The Fulcrum. Visit at thefulcrum.us. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.