September marked a critical turning point for President Donald Trump and his political movement. For the first time since he successfully rallied supporters around denying the results of the 2020 presidential election, the MAGA movement’s resolve is renewed — this time in its broader war against America’s liberals, the institutions they’ve historically controlled and, of course, the “radical left.”
Trump’s critics are quick to call him and his antics “unhinged.” Such a characterization is fitting — he acts with impunity, disregards the costs of his more harmful policy positions and punishes those who dare to question him. In this way, he’s consistent: political retributive justice in America today is, for the most part, devastatingly blind.
The MAGA movement was always clear-eyed on the “cultural poisons” it was fighting (see Project 2025), but now its supporters have come to understand the dangerous justification for their cause as it exists today — the elusive “enemy from within.”
This was always a key aspect of the “America First” ethos: we must withdraw from the world because a more threatening adversary exists on the home front. It lives on our college campuses and our television screens, in our discourses, city streets and the United Nations headquarters. Trump and his ilk brand this enemy and their leaders as “radical,” “evil” and “anti-American,” invoking the kind of late-stage divisiveness from which authoritarian regimes of the past have emerged.
Recognizing the dire need to bolster defenses, Democrats reminded us last week that substantive opposition to Trump still exists in Congress, voting against supporting Republicans’ budget to fund the government.
Trump and his allies wasted no time indicating that they would use the shutdown as an opportunity to defund “Democrat agencies,” putting out their usual social media campaigns and a bizarre AI-generated clip of Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought dressed as the Grim Reaper.
In this digital age, relevance reigns supreme. It is why many — particularly young people — are frustrated with leaders who hide behind obvious hypotheticals and increasingly look to more progressive candidates who challenge current party orthodoxies, make bold promises and, as a result, exist on much bigger platforms.
If more moderate establishment Democrats are unwilling to cede party control to an emergent class of democratic socialists, they must radically change their strategy. Merely contextualizing the second Trump term is as easy as it is ineffective — playing to the average voter’s pains and short-term memory while keeping up with the nonstop flow of news and information as it comes out is a much more difficult political challenge.
Sen. Chuck Schumer and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) say this shutdown is about Republican cuts to the Affordable Care Act in their One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The unnecessary justification drowns itself in dreadfully boring context and fails to meet the moment. It was likely informed by the same groups whose tepid, focus-group-tested brand of politics has doomed the party in recent elections.
But contrary to what these groups may advise, what Schumer and Jeffries say matters little. Despite how you feel about them, the two sharing the spotlight with MAGA Republicans in the second Trump term, as a baseline, is indeed a convoluted kind of political victory.
There is little about a government shutdown that is good for a country. Loyal civil servants — frequent targets of the Trump administration in recent months — will bear the brunt of the cost. The optics aren’t great, and neither is the fact that these employees have had their paychecks delayed mere days after rent is traditionally due in this country.
Needless to say, proceeding with this shutdown at this time is a pretty rich political maneuver. But this is precisely why Democrats should embrace their shutdown and, instead of resorting to meandering answers about the rise of healthcare premiums that will happen regardless, leaders like Schumer and Jeffries should flaunt what limited political bona fides they still have — even if those are the power to shutter the federal government.
With his mastery of this particular virtue, Trump has outmatched his foes at every turn. But for the opposition, there is a crucial distinction between temperature and pressure. Fiery rhetoric, like being quick to brand Trump and Republicans as “fascist” or “authoritarian,” creates heat, mobilizes the extremes of both sides and, at best, alienates the moderates and independents that have shown themselves to be the deciders of our elections.
But applying pressure — like shutting down Trump’s government because you actually believe your claims of what’s happening — is a sign of strength. It’s a kind of commitment to values and convictions, and has the powerful side effect of making news in a political environment that is determined by an entrenched attention economy.
No one is under the impression that Democrats had any other choice. If they are as principled as they say they are, Democrats could not in good conscience green-light Trump’s war on our democratic institutions. They couldn’t afford to — our fundamental right to disagree with it is at risk.
Aidan Klineman is a Medill junior and author of “Off-Campus: White House.” He can be contacted at [email protected]. If you would like to respond publicly to this op-ed, send a Letter to the Editor to [email protected]. The views expressed in this piece do not necessarily reflect the views of all staff members of The Daily Northwestern.
