Politics
This is the new progressive strategy for warring with Trump
Progressive Democrats wrestling with how to navigate a second Donald Trump presidency are settling on a new approach: Take his populist, working-class proposals at his word — or at least pretend to.
If he succeeds, they can take some credit for bringing him to the table. If he doesn’t, they can bash him for it.
It’s a change in strategy, emerging in private conversations among some liberal elected officials and operatives, that comes after years of resisting Trump ended with him returning to the White House.
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said in an interview that she would likely work with Trump if he pursues antitrust promises he made on the campaign trail. Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) said he sees himself partnering with Trump to tackle “large corporate consolidations,” while Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) posted on X that he “looked forward” to Trump “fulfilling his promise” to cap credit card interest rates.
Even Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), the resistance icon who popularized the motto “nevertheless, she persisted” while skewering a Trump cabinet pick in 2017, is finding common cause with the president-elect.
“President Trump announced during his campaign that he intended to put a 10 percent interest rate cap on consumer credit,” Warren told Blue Light News. “Bring it on.”
But, she added, “if he refuses to follow through on the campaign promises that would help working people, then he should be held accountable.”
An aide to a progressive member of Congress, who was granted anonymity to discuss internal strategy, stated the obvious: Liberal Democrats will continue to oppose most of what Trump does “tooth and nail.”
However, the person said, “For the few policy proposals that we think will help the working class, capping credit card interest rates being one of them, we’ll say, ‘Put up or shut up.’ Because if he does, it’s a great win for millions of people across this country. And if he doesn’t, it exposes him as a fraud that he is.”
Progressives are not suddenly buying MAGA hats, and with Trump not yet in office, the range of ways they may engage him — or oppose him — remains a work in progress. They are still appalled by Trump’s behavior and policies, including his plans to create the largest deportation program in history, cut taxes for the wealthy and roll back transgender rights. And many of them fear that Trump is an aspiring dictator who threatens democracy itself (which Trump allies have said is unfounded).
But some of Trump’s populist campaign promises fall in line with progressives’ own aspirations. Those include making in vitro fertilization treatments free, ending taxes on tips and capping credit card interest rates. He has also promised for years to protect the popular programs of Social Security and Medicare. At times, he has promoted directing Medicare to negotiate drug prices.
When asked for comment, Trump spokesperson Steven Cheung said, “President Trump’s America First policies will help uplift all Americans and Democrats know voters are now firmly behind him, as opposed to their failed and tired policies that have devastated this country for the last four years.”
And some of Trump’s allies have also backed a handful of other ideas that progressives support, from slashing the Pentagon to strictly enforcing antitrust laws.
Billionaire Elon Musk, who has been charged by Trump with downsizing the federal government, appeared to agree with progressive Rep. Ro Khanna in a recent thread on X that the Department of Defense spends too much money on contractors.
Top Trump ally Matt Gaetz, whom the president-elect tapped for attorney general but has since withdrawn, has praised Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan. Khan is revered on the left for infuriating Wall Street and aggressively busting up monopolies. Though Khan is not expected to stay on under Trump, and Musk said she would be “fired soon,” Vice President-elect JD Vance has also spoken positively about her and called for breaking up Big Tech.
Last week, Khan returned the favor at an FTC meeting, saying that she is “so grateful and appreciative of the bipartisan support” for her work, “including from Vice President-elect Vance and formerly Congressman Gaetz.”
Progressives are clear-eyed that with a Republican-controlled House and Senate, many, if not most, of Trump’s populist campaign promises will not happen — if he were ever serious about them to begin with. But they believe that his voters want him to follow through. They also lack any power in Congress and are desperate for even an outside chance to influence policy.
Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Institute, said that his group conducted polling in the critical battleground states of Pennsylvania and Michigan during the final week of the election. He said the surveys, done in conjunction with the liberal firm Data for Progress, found that the majority of Trump’s voters want him to crack down on price gouging, raise taxes on billionaires, and strengthen anti-monopoly laws.
“Trump actually made promises to people, like helping those on Social Security, ending taxes on tips, and capping credit card interest at 10 percent,” he said. “His own voters believe he has a mandate on that, plus higher taxes on billionaires and big corporations. So let’s hold a mirror up to him and ask, are you going to be a hypocrite or not?”
Not all progressives agree with that strategy. Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.), a member of the so-called Squad, said of Trump, “I’ve never gotten the impression that he’s been accountable to anything in his life.” But, she said, “I don’t fault anybody for trying.”
Sen. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) said that holding Trump’s feet to the fire in Congress is “a little bit unrealistic — we don’t have the votes.” But he said there is room to advocate for liberal policies.
“If there’s areas we agree, let’s work together and get them done: credit card fees, cap on interest rates, prescription drug reference pricing,” he said. “I’m all about working on things that are going to help working-class people.”
Either way, it’s not 2017 anymore. And Resistance 2.0 won’t look exactly the same as its first era.
“There’ll be places where resistance is appropriate,” said Warren. “For example, if Trump follows his V.P. JD Vance in trying to ban access to abortion nationwide through the FDA, there will be massive resistance. If Trump follows through on his promises for more tax cuts for billionaires and billionaire corporations, we’re going to be in that fight all the way.”
At the same time, she said, “if Trump is going to lower interest rates on all consumer loans to 10 percent, count me in.”
Under the political radar, the country’s food stamps program is undergoing a slow-motion transformation. The ramifications could bubble up into the midterms.
Changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program from Republicans’ One Big Beautiful Bill Act are rolling out in phases, from tougher work requirements to restrictions on non-citizens. Food stamp rolls already shrank by more than 5 million people nationwide as of this summer, as the hardest-hit state, Arizona, saw an outright majority of its food stamp recipients lose benefits.
The latest alteration clicked into place Oct. 1, when the share of administrative costs states and counties have to pay rose to 75% from 50%. An even bigger financial shift looms in a year, when states with high payment error rates will have to assume some benefit costs for the first time, a scenario that’s already rippling through state and local budget planning.
It all adds up to a new era in federal-state relations — and in the size and nature of the welfare state.
In a year when affordability worries top voters’ priority lists and grocery prices strain their wallets, Democrats think the SNAP shift gives them an opening to make Republicans pay politically after the GOP used social safety net cuts to food aid and Medicaid to help pay for last year’s tax cuts.
“People are getting kicked off these programs at the very moment they’re going to the polls to vote,” House Agriculture ranking member Angie Craig (D-Minn.) said. “I sure wouldn’t want to be a Republican headed into the November ballot.”
But Republicans think they have a compelling story to tell voters, trying to right-size a program that spends millions of dollars on erroneous payments. The SNAP changes align with the Trump administration’s broader push to crack down on fraud and make the government smaller or more efficient. Implementing stricter work requirements for welfare often polls well, and trying to move people toward work gets at the root causes of poverty, they argue.
“The premise is simple: Let’s make sure that this program is preserved for those truly in need, and that we aren’t squandering taxpayer dollars,” a senior USDA official told Playbook in an interview. “And let’s make sure that if folks are able-bodied, they are work training or volunteering for 20 hours per week.”
That doesn’t mean Republicans in competitive races are putting SNAP and Medicaid cuts front and center on the campaign trail. When they tout last year’s megalaw, new tax breaks typically lead the messaging. And 10 frontline GOP House campaigns didn’t respond to requests for interviews about how they can win on SNAP.
At the state and county level, some governments are scrambling to prepare for a massive cost shift, hitting at the same time as significant Medicaid changes. The resulting bureaucratic jumble has contributed to some of the SNAP losses this year, as recipients struggled to get through overtaxed call centers, some states cut staff, and others tightened their processes.
“It really sets up a change in the federal responsibility, and I view it as a slippery slope,” warned Barbara Guinn, New York’s commissioner of the Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance. Her state is staring down a possible $1 billion added burden next year, though they’re advocating for a repeal of the benefits change. “Once they implement any kind of cost shift, I think it will be easier for them to take similar actions in the future.”
Whether to delay next year’s cost shift has already generated tensions over the farm bill in the Senate, where Democrats are demanding a longer postponement than Republicans’ offer of one year. Some Minnesota counties are considering significant property tax increases to pay for the extra costs, Craig said: “We’re going to be pushing hard for a two-year delay — at the request of, frankly, many of my Republican county commissioners, not just Democrats.”
Conservatives see the new calculus as a long overdue change to improve efficiency and incentivize program integrity. Improper payment rates are high in many states (though they comprise both over-payments and under-payments, and error rates are different from fraud). Those that reduce errors enough won’t have to take on paying the benefits. And even opponents of the changes think lower error rates are a worthy goal. SNAP rolls often ebb and flow with the economy, and the recent drop could reflect the job market pulling people out of need — or the removal of people who shouldn’t have been getting food stamps in the first place.
“There needs to be some level of accountability,” the USDA official said. States with high error rates “need to start to have skin in the game.”
But at a time when many households are already squeezed by inflation, the SNAP changes have correlated with higher numbers of Americans turning to charities to ward off hunger. The surge in people losing food aid came more quickly than expected. The unemployment rate hasn’t meaningfully changed. And the vast majority of large food banks in a recent NBC survey said they were grappling with higher demand, in part due to food stamp changes. Another rule kicking in the day after the midterms could lead to many retailers being bumped out of SNAP as places where low-income people can use their benefits.
For state governments, a set of sweeping operational changes are now underway to conform to new policy demands, often requiring more money or staffing at already under-resourced offices. And the budgetary stakes to get error rates lower are sky-high.
“It’s a really complicated, nuanced and confusing time for states who are trying to administer SNAP,” said Lauren Kallins, a senior legislative director at the nonpartisan National Conference of State Legislatures, which has advocated for a delay in the benefits costs shift.
National Democrats are increasingly shifting their attention away from North Carolina’s Senate race as polls show former Gov. Roy Cooper ahead, eyeing once long-shot races as possible pickups. But a veteran Democratic strategist who helped deliver the party’s last presidential victory in the state is urging donors not to take a win for granted.
David Plouffe, who managed behind Barack Obama’s narrow 2008 victory in North Carolina, urged Democratic donors and supporters not to grow complacent in the final weeks of Roy Cooper’s Senate campaign, according to audio obtained by Blue Light News.
“I think that this race … has I think been the best run race in the country,” Plouffe said on the call. “But that doesn’t mean that we can rest easy.”
He warned about North Carolina’s relatively fixed partisan makeup as a purple state, making it difficult for a candidate to dramatically expand their base of support.
“There’s certain states that elections happen within a bound, and this one will be that way as well,” he said.
In public polling, Cooper leads Republican Michael Whatley, who has struggled to boost his name recognition against the much better-known former governor. And as Democrats grow increasingly bullish on their candidate’s chances of flipping the seat — one of four pickups they need to take control of the Senate — national groups have begun shifting their money and attention to other contests, including most recently to Kansas.
But Plouffe said North Carolina needs to remain a priority.
“We have to win the ones we have to win,” he said on the call to Cooper’s finance committee.
Just days before Plouffe’s remarks, Senate Democrats’ top super PAC pulled back some of its spending in North Carolina, following a much bigger retreat by Republicans’ top super PAC in the state.
Plouffe cautioned that North Carolina has historically been a tough state for Democrats at the federal level, especially in recent years. The party hasn’t won a Senate race there since 2008, when Obama became the last Democratic presidential candidate to carry the state, winning by fewer than 15,000 votes. He lost the state in 2012.
“Even though we carried the electoral votes back then, we only did so by I think 14,000 votes. So it was our narrowest victory,” Plouffe said. “And in 2012, we tried to win North Carolina again with the help of so many people on this phone, and we just couldn’t get it done. And that tells you how difficult the state is.”
Plouffe also cast the stakes of Cooper’s race as extending beyond November, arguing that a Cooper victory could provide a blueprint for the party’s eventual 2028 presidential nominee.
“Democrats need to compete and win in North Carolina in 28,” he said. “And it’s one thing to look how a governor can win a state. The best route, the best scout that you receive, is how someone in a federal race won in a tough state, and that can show you the way.”
Byron Donalds says he is not a ‘yes man’ to Trump
lead image
-
Politics2 years agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
The Dictatorship2 years agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Politics2 years agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Dictatorship2 years agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics2 years agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words