Is the Populist Movement a Party Surge or a New Kid on the Block?

 

In the brief time since President Donald Trump's inauguration, an unrelenting wave of protests against the new administration has motivated grassroots activists. The populist movement is steadily growing all over the United States. Contingents from all degrees of the left are joining together. All of them have one thing in common – they are anti-Trump.

The latest high-profile protests have been organic, not organized by any party. The women’s march on inauguration weekend and the protests that brought thousands to airports following Trump’s executive order temporarily banning refugees and immigrants from seven majority-Muslim countries have brought great promise to this new American movement.

So, Democrats have good reason to feel energized these days. As the minority party, they point to these grassroots protests, marches, and demonstrations as a sign that President Trump has already sparked involvement by their base at historic levels. They know they have a great opportunity to plug into both the outrage over the election of President Trump and the new electoral movement to solidify a brighter future.

The problem with any one party justifying the recent unrest as support for them alone is the reality that the anti-Trump movement is comprised of many factions. As a political party attempts to channel the enthusiasm, they may easily misread the desires of this agitated contingent.

If the movement becomes a part of a re-energized, established party, then that group – most likely the Democrats – must assume accountability for the will of the people. Not only must a party keep the movement engaged, but also it must actively represent their interests.

Representative Kathy Castor (Dem. Florida) said ...

“It’s how we turn the protest into a movement. The grassroots, the citizens across the country, I feel, are way ahead of politicians. Citizens across the country are worried and they’re energized and they are in the lead for a change. They want to hear from their elected representatives at all levels. They’re more engaged than ever. We’re focused on how do we focus that energy into elections and really making a difference in policy from the Hill."

(James Arkin. “Dems Hope to Ride Grassroots' Anti-Trump Wave Till 2018.” realclearpolitics.com. February 13, 2017.)

But wait.

Others are not content with the Democrats “riding” a grassroots movement that has, quite frankly, produced much of the “same old, same old.”

After a decade of Democratic control in Washington, rank-and-file liberals had mostly retreated from the activist community. Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, said, "Some organizations would have it be the highlight of their year if people showed up at events across the country in response to months of planning. And here it happens within a couple hours, organically."

(Gregory Kreig. “The anti-Trump protest movement digs in -- but can it win?” CNN. February 12, 2017.)

You see, for the party to pick up the mantle of protest, they likely fear inserting themselves too much, and they worry about problems if they professionalize the effort. Also, they must consider the possibility of backlash. An enraged grassroots group might turn some of its fire on Democrats if they’re seen as working with Trump or if the movement judges them too traditional.

What concerns a political party most is converting the movement into an electoral outcome. Politicians want to be elected, and many use such surges for personal gain. Plug in, take advantage, get paid.

Certainly many of the anti-Trump contingent cares less about party affiliation than about policy agendas. They are seeking new solutions to pressing problems. Some fear one party might attempt to weaken their messages and control the content of a wide scope of grievances.

The populist group understands that the party certainly did not ignite their activism. In addition, they realize the organic nature of the movement is part of its strength. “Change” is the mantra for the protesters. To them, the status quo is partisan and ineffective.

Green explained, "These are people who are getting engaged in protests for the first time. It's really the white blood cells of democracy attacking unconstitutional actions and a fairly illegitimate president."

Granted, political movements understand that party affiliations provide proven means of successful maneuvering. I'm sure this grassroots group would revel in a solid, powerful alliance. However, it remains to be seen if any old political entity is able to inspire a collective awakening of people across all spectrums of the country.

Right now the message of the movement is if you are unwilling or unable to create actions to end hatred and inject values of respect, inclusion, love, and equality back into our national politics, then stand aside. President Trump is a grave threat to democracy, freedom, human rights, equality, and the welfare of our country.

 

Something's Happening Here ... Reality and Induced Reactions

 

Here we are in the post-presidential-election days still divided, still unsure of just exactly what it means to face the reality of a Donald Trump presidency. All across the nation leaders are calling for acceptance and unity in spite of protesters in many cities all around the country hitting the streets and chanting “Not my president!” and “Love trumps hate!”

Many of the protesters say they do not harbor illusions about reversing the outcome of the election. They claim they are speaking out in hopes that Trump and his supporters will ease their hardline rhetoric on many issues including immigration and possible mass deportations, Muslim bans, and LGBTQ rights. Others seek changes in the electoral college: At last count, Hillary Clinton leads Donald Trump in popular vote by more than 1.1 million.

On the other side, Trump, himself, claimed some of participants were “professional protesters” planted to cause disruption. Others opposed to the protests have accused dissidents of being sore losers and have slammed students for skipping classes to voice their opposition to the results of the election.

One Iowa lawmaker, Rep. Bobby Kaufmann (R-Wilton), plans to introduce a piece of legislation he’s calling the “Suck It Up, Buttercup Bill” when the Legislature resumes in January to target state universities that use taxpayer dollars to fund election-related sit-ins and grief counseling above and beyond what is normally available to students. His bill would also establish new criminal penalties for protesters who shut down highways. Students and faculty at Iowa State and the University of Iowa deny that they spent extra money on those events.

(Brianne Pfannenstiel. “Iowa lawmaker's 'suck it up, buttercup' bill targets protests.” The Des Moines Register. November 14, 2016.)

So there, in a nutshell, you have it. Fallout over the election of Donald Trump is occurring, and no one should be surprised that the dissent is so prevalent. The contentious, belligerent Trump campaign is reaping its just rewards in a divided, distrustful, nervous America.

Many are calling the protesters “thugs” and “selfish babies” for voicing their opinions. It is true, some violent and criminal outbursts have occurred during the unrest. No one should tolerate or support such unlawful behavior. However, as one protester, Daniel Hayman, 31, or Seattle said of his peaceful actions ...

"The flag means freedom of speech, freedom of religion, equal protection under the law and other values like diversity, respecting differences, freedom of assembly and freedom of the press. We're trying to reclaim the flag and push forward those values."

(Alexander Besant. “U.S. protesters march against Trump presidency for fifth day.” Reuters. November 14, 2016.)

Kellyanne Conway, Trump's campaign manager, echoed Trump on Fox News saying that she was sure many of the protesters were paid professionals, although she offered no proof.

And, suggesting a double standard, Conway said on NBC's "Meet the Press" that if Clinton had won the election and Trump supporters had protested, "people would be freaking out that his supporters were not accepting election results."

"It's time really for President Obama and Secretary Clinton to say to these protesters: 'This man is our president,'" she said.

To Kellyanne I say: “Wake up yourself, 'buttercup.' Your candidate told his constituency that the 2016 election was rigged and called upon people to 'march on Washington' after President Obama won re-election in 2012.”

And, who should speak to the protesters in a non-threatening, understanding manner? The President-elect Donald Trump. He needs to make mea culpa after mea culpa for his childish, nasty rhetoric.

After all, this is the same Donald Trump who in November 2015 said of a protester in Birmingham, Alabama:

"Maybe he should have been roughed up, because it was absolutely disgusting what he was doing." 

This is the same Trump who called out a protester being escorted out of his rally before the Nevada caucuses in Las Vegas on February 23, 2016, saying …

"I love the old days – you know what they used to do to guys like that when they were in a place like this? They'd be carried out on a stretcher, folks. I'd like to punch him in the face.”

Although Republican House of Representatives Speaker Paul Ryan told CNN on Sunday that protests were protected by the First Amendment as long as they were peaceful, some have been critical of Democrat leaders who haven't begged Americans to stop voicing their dissent.

I would ask these people: “Why would President Obama or Hillary Clinton plead with people to end the protests immediately after the election when Trump bashed them like a two-headed monster every day?” Their silence supports the freedom of expression in a nation frightened by a Trump administration full of questionable people like Steve Bannon and Rudy Giuliani.

 

I am sure many will remain convinced that the protesters have no right to express a preference without having to endure scorn. To them I say: “I have already endured month after month of scorn by emotional Trump supporters who insist my liberal views are retarded and even criminal.” I have been called a “libtard” and a “baby killer” on social media for my opposition of Trump and my disagreement on issues like the freedom of choice. Perhaps peaceful public protest is not just sour grapes. Touche'. 

The protests after the election have occurred in cities and on college campuses too numerous to mention including the cities of Chicago, Cleveland, Dallas, Los Angeles, Miami, Nashville, New York, Portland, Winston-Salem, and the universities of Arizona State, Illinois State, the University of California, the University of Georgia, the University of Kentucky, and the University of Michigan.

Also, international protests have occurred in cities such as Melbourne and Perth, Australia, and Auckland, New Zealand.

No one can deny the separation that the Election of 2016 has caused. One result of the divide is that a large number of people have more closely examined their own views and the views of others with many claiming that they now possess greater self-realization and an improved transparency of their community, their state, and their nation. What remains to be achieved is a satisfactory feeling of inclusion in the workings of the democratic government. Trump has done nothing to endear himself to those who suffered his wrath. He is a man whose apologies are littered by vain excuses.

To have a president refer to the District of Columbia as a “swamp” that now must be “drained” of its bureaucracy is frightening because the chief executive does not legally have the power to reorganize the government at his discretion. It is simply nonsensical to believe Trump will do so … unless he plans to act with malice toward the institution of the federal government itself.

Just who supports the whims of a businessman who would be king has yet to be revealed. Special interests that hold up his position will surely be spared any expulsion from the arena. But, even conservative activists say they are unsure of what to expect from the new president-elect. Given his stormy character and his lack of experience, Donald Trump may soon find that it takes more than bluff and bluster to operate in the boggy environment of the nation's capital.

In the meantime, protesters fill the streets to express their individual concerns over what is yet to come. The First Amendment lives.

“Americans tend to think that the only way one can participate in politics, the only possible way to take political action, is to vote. And yet in recent years – in particular since the 2008 financial crisis – Americans have been rediscovering the power of protest.”

— Sarah Jaffe writing in Rolling Stone, November 15, 2016