Editorial: The second Trump presidency: How we got here, where we might go

The Seattle Times, The Seattle Times on Nov 7, 2024

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

In the rivers of ink and trillions of bytes dedicated to understanding the past presidential election, consider this notion: The race was really a contest of competing narratives.

Kamala Harris and the Democrats framed the campaign as good vs. evil — a "Star Wars"-like storyline (Harrison Ford and Mark Hamill, actors in the original film, endorsed Harris) with clear characters and motivations.

"Good" were those dedicated to democracy, inclusion and empathy. "Evil" were the dark forces intent on undermining and destroying those same values.

Donald Trump, on the other hand, largely sought to cast the election as a choice between strength vs. weakness. From the beginning of his political career, Trump characterized himself as a strongman who spoke his mind, never apologizing, never feeling shame. As he said while accepting the GOP nomination in 2016, "I alone can fix it."

That Trump is a white man and his opponent a woman of color played into the worst stereotypes and prejudices latent in America. Despite Harris saying she could shoot would-be intruders with her own pistol, Trump portrayed himself as harder on immigrants, tougher on crime, more intolerant of disagreement. As his former chief of staff claimed, Trump fit the definition of a fascist.

The majority of Americans went for Team Bully. In many counties, Trump bested his performance in 2016 and 2020. For many of those who never bought what Trump was selling, the nation feels different today. As history teaches us, leaders often attempt to convey strength while pursuing narrow, anti-democratic agendas.

The editorial board strongly supported Harris and is very concerned about what another Trump presidency might bring.

There is sure to be much hand-wringing and Monday-morning quarterbacking in the wake of this historic election. Those opposed to Trump will soon start casting for a leader to guide a new path.

The search ought to go beyond individuals and include states that are doing it right. Like ours.

Here in Washington, election night brought good news. State voters saved the landmark Climate Commitment Act and preserved the capital gains tax, which goes to education. The Times endorsed state Attorney General Bob Ferguson, and he will become the next governor.

Ferguson won, in part, by portraying himself as a centrist, abandoning his past positions to support public safety priorities such as criminalizing drug possession and hiring more cops.

If lawmakers avoid extremes and follow a moderate path, this state has an opportunity to claim the spotlight from the Other Washington. With one big caveat.

Olympia is governed by one party. To show that they can be effective without turning the legislative process into a series of ill-conceived social experiments created by special interests, Ferguson and the Democrats must listen to other voices and the centrists within their own party.

In a time of tumult, Washington can show this place of apples and airplanes, computers and craftspeople, mechanics and millionaires can avoid simple political narratives and get it right.