The Democratic Party Needs a Better Plan

We’re up against the billionaire agenda; not Trump, not MAGA, not even the pathetic GOP

Photo by Shane on Unsplash

• He can stay. He can go. He can be impeached or voted out. But removing Trump will not remove the infrastructure of an entire party that embraced him; the dark money that funded him; the online radicalization that drummed his army; nor the racism he amplified and reanimated. –Congress member Alexandria Ocasio Cortez

In a few days the administration of Donald J Trump will begin. In addition to his fever dreams of international conquest, the word is that there are 100 executive orders to be published following the inaugural ceremony. His proposed administration includes 28 people from Project 2025, 11 Fox News hosts/contributors, 9 lobbyists, 5 billionaires, and 4 multimillionaires.

What we experience in the coming days will be different from any other change in administrations in US history. There are three themes that can be expected in the initial wave of Trump version 2.0:

• Revenge, Reaction (via Project 2025), and Racism.

I think it’s smart that most activists have backed off from the idea of Resistance v2.0. It’s not that the bad things coming down the pike should be accepted without comment; it’s the need to do more than just say no. It’s the need to salvage what we can from the coming storm.

Unfortunately, there are people who seem well-meaning, but have been bitten by the “savior” bug promulgated into our culture by the entertainment industry. They need to understand the broad range of institutions already infected with MAGA, the compliance game being played in high places, and the historical roots going back to the anti-New Deal groups.

Protest if you must, but the accomplishments of anti-Trump forces in last last period amounted to winning mostly small battles. The big one, namely the tax subsidies for wealthy individuals and corporations, continues to weigh the country down, and extending it is the incoming administration’s top priority. Much of what Trump V.1 wanted to do was foiled by infighting and incompetence within the administration.

I’m not saying that standing up for SNAP benefits, for example, isn’t important, but doing so must (and I mean must) include the class aspect as part of a long term strategy of undermining the ascending oligarchy. These actions amount to the billionaire agenda; nothing more and nothing less. Let’s call it what it is.

The so-called conservatives orchestrating in the MAGA movement follow exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.

At this point there are no unified forces capable of repelling large parts of the billionaire agenda. Notice that I didn’t say the Trump agenda or Project 2025 blueprint. I believe the most effective response is to look beyond the next four years.

Rooted in History

If you follow the historical threads of the hydra-headed monster of the billionaire agenda, it’s possible to go back to the late 19th Century when the first ultra-wealthy strutted out of their closets.

Along the way there are markers: the American Liberty League –formed by Democrats opposed to the New Deal– and the legend of the Lewis Powell memo, which centered on using the Chamber of Commerce as a vehicle for fighting the country’s leftward drift.

It’s not the specifics of the Powell memo that had the most impact. After all, the future Supreme Court justice was a life-long Democrat who was a firm believer in both the traditional economic and political systems. His aim was to repel the Ralph Naders of the times.

Recalling the bipartisan nature of the origins of the institutional destruction we are likely to witness should help in understanding that what’s really going on is a class war.

The Powell memo’s impetus has led to the institutions who represent the infrastructure of today’s billionaire boosters, starting with Business Roundtable, leading to foundations and think tanks like Heritage, Charles Koch, Castle Rock, Scaife, Lynde and Harry Bradley, and Olin foundations, among many others, as well as the Pacific Legal Foundation, the Cato Institute, the Federalist Society, and the Chamber of Commerce National Litigation Center.

The election of President Barack Obama refocused the need for the wealthy to tamp down the increasing progressive electorate. Our 44th President had successfully tapped into broad discontent connected to the unraveling of the social safety net and was offering ideas that would enable a voting block for years to come.

It’s my contention that President Obama’s abandonment of the grass roots network powering his election in favor of letting the Democratic party’s traditional power brokers handle his agenda was a critical mistake.

Jane Mayer’s Dark Money book uncovers how a California gathering shortly after the 2008 election by Charles Koch and his billionaire allies launched a years-long scheme to protect their fortunes by sabotaging Obama’s presidency.

The wealthy participants didn’t just fear Obama—they feared democracy itself. They saw the rising demand for fair wages, healthcare & environmental protections as a threat to their wealth. They dedicated themselves to rig the system in their favor leveraging their monies to buy power.

In subsequent years their minions engineered a takeover of the courts, bankrolled voter suppression laws, and unleashed a tidal wave of dark money to manipulate elections.

Anne Nelson’s book, Shadow Network reveals how this plot was about more than campaign cash. The Council for National Policy (CNP)—a secretive alliance of billionaires and religious extremists—used dark $ to push extreme policies under the guise of “family values.”

The CNP became the engine for one party rule, funding anti-abortion laws, attacking LGBTQ+ rights, and dismantling public education. Their “moral crusades” were nothing more than a smokescreen for consolidating power and ensuring tax cuts for the ultra-wealthy.

In 2024, nearly $2 billion in dark money flooded the election cycle. Billionaires bought Senate seats, state legislatures and even the presidency. If you think about it, Democrats were talking democracy, not seeing this was an auction where only the rich could bid.

What we’ve seen in recent years involves a strategy to spread fear, divide Americans, and erode trust in government. The latest example is the disinformation campaign concerning the California fires, where attacks on the competence of governing, fears of immigrants looting, and bluster from politicians about DEI have all served to disrupt what historically would be a coming together in support of those impacted by a disaster of nearly unimaginable scale.

These billionaires don’t want you to see the real enemy—their insatiable greed. Their vision of America isn’t a democracy. It’s a plutocracy, ruled by billionaires.

Thinking Longer Term

What this election has made crystal clear is who the real enemy is—it’s not Red America. It’s wealthy Americans who see democracy as an obstacle to their greed. Donald Trump isn’t going to live forever, and the grifting inherent in his circles presents opportunities that can be exploited by a forward looking movement.

The Democratic party (and their allies in labor–another story) are the only forces capable of standing up to the totality of the forces arrayed against people who think that being servile to fat cats isn’t a desirable lifestyle or way to run a government.

Having said that billionaires are the bad guys here, I think it’s important to realize that the overlaps in the Democratic party with the instruments of democracy’s destruction need to be severed. Having a slightly less cruel plutocracy is not a worthy goal.

As Politico and a host of other legacy outlets like to say, Democrats nationally are in disarray. Their presidential campaigns did everything consultants told them to do and missed the class consequences of the contest.

The national party will elect officers at their winter retreat on February 1st. The outcomes will have a significant impact on the Democratic Party’s organizational and electoral strategies ahead of the 2026 midterms and the 2028 presidential election.

The new chair will oversee decisions about funding state-level campaigns, shaping the party’s national message, and allocating resources to key battleground areas. These decisions are critical for addressing challenges like voter engagement, outreach to diverse communities, and countering Republican gains in key regions.

The two leading candidates for DNC Chair, Wisconsin’s Ben Winkler and Minnesota’s Ken Martin came up through the state party infrastructure, and don’t really have differences in tactical plans for leadership. What’s missing are strategic proposals improving the party’s fortunes.”

The American Prospect's Micah Sifry obtained the closely guarded list of all DNC members. What stands out are at-large members, who were supposed to be voted in by the membership, but were put forward by outgoing chair Jamie Harrison as a single slate and voted on up-or-down as a bloc. Therein lie many of the hacks whose dedication to wealthy donors stands in the way of making substantial changes in operation.

Here’s former Obama advisor Dan Pfeiffer:

• On a daily basis, the job of Democrats in Washington is not to govern. At the federal level, Democrats have no real ability to do so. We can’t introduce bills, call anything to a vote, or hold committee hearings. Since Trump and the GOP plan to use the Budget Reconciliation Process to pass all of his major agenda items, we can’t even use the filibuster as leverage to demand changes.

• On the off chance that the Republicans want to collaborate on something consistent with our values, we should accept. Where we have leverage to influence policy, we must use it. However, our primary task is pretty simple — break up the Trump coalition before the next election.

• This isn’t just a job for Congressional Democrats. Let’s be honest; they have a limited megaphone. Every Democrat needs to chime in; from our prospective presidential candidates, to folks in the media (like me), and activists (like you).

Getting Democrats on the same page is a tough job, and there needs to be a mechanism for doing so. In the past, this sort of unifying work has relied on the charisma of candidates. Modern day differences in media consumption require a new approach.

In addition to the all-important work of fielding an array of down ballot candidates, an all-in line-of-attack can amplify opposition to billionaire schemes, helping the party get into position for future elections.

Historian Timothy Snyder, whose book On Tyranny has gained more traction as the Trump remnine approaches, has a banger of an idea that could go a long way toward keeping Democrats relevant and in the news: What the British call a shadow cabinet.

• What to do? People talk about resistance, and about opposition. What forms should these take? I have written elsewhere about what citizens can do. Leading politicians of the opposition party, the Democratic Party in the United States, have a special responsibility, and also special opportunities. One of these is to form a shadow cabinet…

…

• …The regular reactions of its members to Musk-Trump would flow from different sense of politics and policy. That is material that the press needs, and that we all need. As Trump and his cabinet undertake their unpredictable whorl of destructive policy, journalists and others will be at a loss as to what to say. The worse things get, the harder it is to think of an alternative. As time goes by, the chaos of Musk-Trump might seem like the only possible reality. That, of course, will be the goal of the new regime: to persuade us that government just means dysfunctionality, spectacle, and repression. At every moment, members of the shadow government can remind us what government could instead be doing, positively, for the people. They are there to remind us that a better America is always possible.

• Under Musk-Trump, every attempt will be made to make oligarchy, rule by the wealthy few, seem normal. The deeds of billionaires will be justified by the very fact that they are billionaires. Their own rise to the top of American politics will be celebrated as the success of everyone. Musk’s basic idea is that we should all suffer and thank him for our suffering. A shadow cabinet will help here as well. Simply by virtue of not being oligarchic, shadow cabinet members remind us of the variety of Americans and the variety of their perspectives. Their proposals will show that we could act together on behalf of the interests of the people, broadly conceived. Oligarchy is incompatible with democracy, and a shadow cabinet will remind us of the difference.

Merely cutting and pasting the British model would be problematic, if for no other reason than the differences in legislative and executive systems. Marketing a relatively unified opposition means the US should have it’s own branding. Given the paranoia around the “deep state” on our side of the pond, the term “shadow cabinet” won’t do. Some have suggested “people’s cabinet,” a term I could live with, but I think we can do better.

***

There are other ideas that have potential as bottom-up ways to increase the Democratic party’s visibility and influence.

Scott Lewis at Voice of San Diego has a piece up on voter turnout in San Diego County. What the numbers it cites show is a serious lack of enthusiasm on the part of voters who went for the Blue in past elections.

• Looking at percentages, Trump did better in San Diego than he did in 2020. Looking at actual votes, though, provides a little more nuanced and interesting story. San Diego County had more voters in 2024 than it did in 2020, yet Trump received about 7,000 fewer votes in San Diego County than he got in 2020.

• The turnout for Harris was much, much worse. In 2020, President Joe Biden, running with Harris as vice presidential candidate, got 123,278 more votes than Harris received four years later from San Diego voters.

The local party, which is currently amid a campaign for statewide representatives, is (from what I can tell) also in disarray. There’s fussing and fighting and feuding, and last year’s sudden death (motorcycle accident) of party chair Rebecca Taylor hasn’t helped matters.

The party’s “club structure” has been weakened by questionable financial actions by a few leaders; much of this squabbling could go away if there were more meaningful tasks to be done.

What could work locally and/or nationally would be membership drives, giving those of us who vote Democratic but don’t have time for the mania of meetings, a stake and dedicated members a more measurable goal.

Variations on how this could work need be only limited by the imagination…Like being able to provide a universal basic level of support for down ballot candidates. Personally, I’d like the opportunity to opt out of the endless barrage of campaign solicitations, and could be motivated to give more by scheduled events of some sort where –even if by virtual means– a sense of community was fostered.

These are just my ideas, and I certainly don’t expect anybody to run out into the streets proclaiming their validity. It would be nice to get us all on the same page about the nature of the beast we face: it’s a class conflict, and anybody who doesn’t understand this is going to be on the losing side

What is RedNote, the Chinese social media app that US TikTokers are flocking to? Via Eric Cheung at CNN

• Well, for starters, Xiaohongshu wasn’t designed for English speakers, while TikTok isn’t in China at all.

• Xiaohongshu’s name could be seen as a tongue-in-cheek reference to a red-covered book of quotations from the founding father of Communist China, Mao Zedong.

• One of the app’s key features is its content algorithm, which focuses on user interests rather than the people they follow. Some users say this fosters more original content and reduces the dominance of powerful influencers.

***

Putin needs Trump's help more than ever by David R. Lurie at Public Notice

• Last week, in the midst of the latest wave of Russian bombings of apartments and markets, a leading rightwing American influencer repeated Putin’s lie that the West forced Russia to invade its neighbor. According to this influencer, by leaving open the possibility of Ukraine joining NATO at some undefined date in the future, President Biden and other Western leaders forced Putin’s hand, compelling him to embark on a campaign mass murder and destruction.

• “I could understand their feeling,” said the influencer, of the purportedly beleaguered Putinists.

• That rightwing influencer was Donald Trump.

***

What to watch for as Trump takes office by Kate Morrissey at Beyond the Border (new Substack, local writer!)

• According to Oliver Ma, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California based in Bakersfield, agents used racial profiling to approach people at gas stations and in other public places.

• “They're just pulling random people over on the roads who are brown,” he said.

• Ma said roughly 300 community members were taken during the operation based on information he had received from their families. Many were still trying to find their loved ones on Friday. He likened the situation to a mass kidnapping.