Progressives are betting entirely on hatred of the President and a disaster of any kind, but what if that disaster never occurs?
While it is normal for the opposition party to oppose, I don’t think many would argue that opposition to President Trump is on an entirely different level than anything we have seen in recent history. Democrats today don’t merely oppose him on political or ideological grounds. Instead, they insist that almost everything the President does is both illegal and unconstitutional, unconscionable and immoral while simultaneously insisting that domestic and international calamity will be the certain result. The situation is so extreme that at least some segment of progressives continue to demand his removal from office on whatever grounds, either impeachment or the 25th amendment, and prognosticators expect that Democrats will almost certainly impeach him for the third time should they regain control of the House of Representatives in the upcoming mid-term elections. In addition, there is already something of a cottage industry of recommendations for the next Democrat Presidential nominee’s platform. Brian Beutler, formerly of The New Republic, summed this up quite nicely earlier this week while adding an insane new plank. As he put it, “The next Democratic president will have a rotted, hollowed out state to fix, a social compact to restore, and a world order to steady. That stuff will be the ‘why’ of the next campaign. But as a litmus test, we’ll want all Democrats to be willing to say, e.g., ‘I will demolish Donald Trump’s palace ballroom,’ ‘I will confiscate his Qatari jumbo jet,’ and ‘I will remove the words ‘Donald Trump’ from the Kennedy Center and the Institute of Peace, and anywhere else he’s plastered his name.’ We’ll want them to understand why doing those things is important. And we’ll want them to pass the test without mistaking those promises for a real platform.” Mr. Beutler continued, going one step further than anyone has before, claiming that the future Democrat nominee should make it clear he or she would allow President Trump to be extradited to a foreign country for unspecified crimes, a position that would have been unimaginable in any other era. “Today, I’m toying with a new entry: The next Democratic president should be willing, in his or her heart, to honor extradition requests for Trump from countries where he’s unilaterally violated the domestic law. Such as, for instance, Venezuela.”
While it might be easy to dismiss him as too Trump-deranged for his own health and insanity, it was late last year when some in the media were speculating on whether or not key Trump Administration officials should face jail time under a future Democrat President for the “double tap” strike on a cartel drug boat last September. Though he might have taken it to a new level, Mr. Beutler isn’t alone in his belief that President Trump must be erased in all ways and punished in more ways than one. Beyond the hard-nosed political rhetoric, almost every Democrat in Congress has also steadfastly opposed almost every President Trump initiative while proposing next to none of their own and they have done so even when some of the provisions should have been palatable to them in principle. Consider the Big Beautiful Bill. For decades, Democrats have positioned themselves as champions of the working class, but primarily because President Trump was involved, they refused to support low-income friendly provisions such as no taxes on tips, no taxes on overtime, and no taxes on social security, plus expanded child tax credits and dependent care credits, even though each will put more money in the pockets of key constituencies. More cynically, Democrat voters tend to be concentrated in high tax “blue states,” and yet they also opposed increasing the state and local tax deduction, denying their own base thousands of dollars of tax relief. By some estimates, the bill will save the average tax payer up to $10,900 per year, though to be fair, critics claim those estimates are based on far too aggressive economic projections, suggesting the actual figure will be lower yet still substantial. Beyond a basic refusal of support or an attempt to secure votes on provisions they might support in isolation, Democrats railed against the entire bill as both a figurative killer of the economy and a literal killer of people. “Today, Donald Trump and the Republican party sent a message to America: if you are not a billionaire, we don’t give a damn about you,” explained Ken Martin, the Democratic National Committee chair upon the bill’s passage last Fourth of July. “While the GOP continues to cash their billionaire donors’ checks, their constituents will starve, lose critical medical care, lose their jobs – and yes, some will die as a result of this bill. Democrats are mobilizing and will fight back to make sure everybody knows exactly who is responsible for one of the worst bills in our nation’s history.” Representative Rashida Tlaib described the bill as “disgusting” and “an act of violence against our communities,” insisting “Republicans should be ashamed for saying ‘just get over it’ because ‘we’re all going to die.’ They are responsible for the 50,000 people who will die unnecessarily every year because of this deadly budget.” “There is no sugarcoating this. This is a dark day for our country,” echoed Senator Raphael Warnock. “Republicans in Washington have decided to sell out working people. As a result, millions will lose their healthcare and many millions more will see their premiums go up. Rural hospitals and nursing homes across Georgia will be forced to close. Children will be forced to go hungry so that we can give billionaires another tax cut.”
Elsewhere, Democrats have consistently predicted economic calamity, railing against President Trump’s stewardship in general and tariffs in particular, despite that progressives have been clamoring for more government revenue for decades. Shortly after President Trump announced his broad tariff policy last April, former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi combined both ideas in a press conference, saying “The Trump Administration’s ineptitude is tanking our economy in a self-inflicted disaster that leaves hardworking Americans bearing the brunt of the pain. Make no mistake: President Trump’s senseless tariffs are driving prices higher, draining retirement savings, look at 401(k)s, and pushing us to the brink of recession. Here in San Francisco, Trump’s economic policies are hurting small business owners and their employees by instilling fear and uncertainty. But business has enough uncertainty as it is when you go forth. You don’t need civic uncertainty of this magnitude. Across the country, working families could see their costs go up as much as $4,600 a year. The largest tax hike on American families in history.” At the time, she concluded “With the Trump tariffs fully in effect – and again, all the uncertainty – now you see it, now you don’t. Well maybe so, maybe not. San Franciscans will pay more for groceries, shoes and clothing, household necessities, auto parts, recreational items, you name it. While Trump doesn’t care about the pain of the American people, he should have recognized the fear that he is causing, and that House Democrats are gathering across the country to stand united against his reckless economic policy.” A few months later, the left-leaning Center for American progress built on these ideas and combined them with the unlawful angle, insisting there was such a thing as a “Trump Turbulence Tax” which was destroying the economy. As they put it, “Trump administration policies have raised costs for working- and middle-class Americans—an effect that has been compounded by a ‘Trump Turbulence Tax,’ which is the cost imposed on consumers and businesses due to the president’s irrational, unpredictable approach to policymaking and running the government. The president’s pursuit of tariffs—with its shifting rationales, arbitrary formulas, and repeated changes to deadlines—exemplifies how the Trump Turbulence Tax is disrupting nearly every aspect of the U.S. economy, leading businesses to delay investment and hiring, increasing costs for businesses and consumers, and undermining the faith in the rule of law that is the bedrock for ongoing investment in the American economy.” According to their figures, these costs were huge, a $2,400 “short-run average loss in income per household,” a $400 increase in the cost of financing a car, and a 6% to 13% in the cost of something as simple as consumer cookouts.
These and similar claims lead to the proclamation that America was facing an affordability crisis, one that was entirely President Trump’s fault, but something funny happened on the way to economic oblivion, namely the economic oblivion never actually happened. Since Speaker Pelosi made her statement about everyone’s 401k’s and other retirement plans, the stock market has exploded. The Dow finished the year up 13%, the S&P 500 up 16%, and the Nasdaq up almost 20%, gains that have continued early into 2026. Simultaneously, prices have not increased as predicted. November’s “surprising” inflation report, the latest one available, showed the smallest increase since 2021, 2.7%, much lower than economists expected. In some cases, particularly in energy and other commodities, prices have been falling and are predicted to continue falling to the lowest level in years. As NBC News recently reported, “For the first time since 2020, the annual average price of gas is projected to fall below $3 a gallon in 2026, the price-tracking group GasBuddy said in a new report Tuesday. At $2.97, GasBuddy’s projected average for the year is 13 cents below the average price per gallon nationwide in 2025, which was $3.10…The last year that average annual gas prices nationwide were as low as GasBuddy projects for this year was 2020, when the Covid pandemic kept millions of Americans working from home and schools largely virtual.” They went on to project that the average family will spend almost $700 less on gas than they did in 2025. “It’s not a return to ultra-cheap fuel, but for the first time in a long time, the wind is clearly behind drivers’ backs,” explained Patrick De Haan, GasBuddy’s head of petroleum analysis. “If the market avoids major surprises, sustained averages below $3 per gallon could become commonplace in the year ahead.”
Further, according to a 2022 analysis by the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, “Gas prices and household inflation expectations are closely correlated,” “large spikes and declines in gas prices are associated with similar movements in inflation expectations. For example, as gas prices rose from $2.64 per gallon in February 2010 to a peak of $3.91 per gallon in May 2011, inflation expectations simultaneously increased from 2.7 percent to 3.8 percent. Both series declined together for the latter part of 2011. More recently, gas prices and inflation expectations have both spiked even more notably.” The analysis also found a correlation between gas prices and consumer sentiment. Although not perfect, when gas prices rise, consumer sentiment falls, but when prices fall, sentiment rises, making everyone feel better about their personal finances and the overall economy. As they put it, “The decline in consumer sentiment that accompanies rising gas prices can amplify the effects of high gas prices on consumption. High gas prices reduce the amount of discretionary income that households can spend after purchasing the gas they need. On top of that, high gas prices also make consumers fear that a recession could be coming, leading them to reduce consumption as a precaution and putting a damper on economic activity.” While none of this is to suggest economic challenges do not remain, particularly in the job market, it does indicate that perceptions could change rapidly in President Trump’s favor, especially backed by more money in people’s pockets and an overall growing economy, but Democrats will be seen to have fought against each and every initiative that led to the change. In other words, they will be able to take credit for none of it and perhaps even worse, have opposed all of it complete with predictions of dire consequences.
The same is true on the international front, which might not have as much impact on voter’s minds than their own pocket book, but does contribute to the overall sense of confidence and strength essentially for people to feel the country is on the right track. In less than a year, President Trump has secured the border, authorized bold actions against rogue regimes in Iran and Venezuela, presided over a military that executed them with an almost unbelievable level of skill, and secured a fragile peace in the Middle East. Throughout it all, Democrats have insisted these actions were both illegal and certain to bring about a global conflagration, potentially the start of World War III, meaning they will be able to take credit for none of the potential success internationally either. While what happens beyond our shores is not likely to be determinative in the midterms, conservative author and Editor in Chief of HotAir.com, Ed Morrisey had it right yesterday in my opinion when he compared the collapse of President Biden’s poll numbers after our ignominious defeat in Afghanistan with the potential for an increase in Trump’s approval in the opposite scenario. He asked, “If military and strategic incompetence can create a permanent crater on job approval, what impact could a demonstration of military and strategic mastery have?” To answer that question, he quoted Brad Todd, a CNN commentator, who noted “Now, President Trump’s goal is to try to make this be the springboard to his numbers recovering in a similar way. I think he’s going — to do that, he’s going to have to enunciate a plan for how — what success looks like next and how we get out.” As a result, Mr. Morrisey concluded “Donald Trump has a real opportunity for a transformative boost with his success in seizing Nicolas Maduro, but that he has to stick the landing for it to work,” adding that ‘The best bet for Trump, therefore, is to remain bold and to deliver a long-term positive change in the region with this action.” I would further add that long-term positive change doesn’t need to be restricted to Latin America. If reports are accurate, the Iranian regime is teetering and should it fall, it could be another inflection point. Ukraine and Russia are also inching closer to a ceasefire, likely accelerated by the action in Venezuela, representing another opportunity. Taken together, there are the pieces for the impression of America winning like we have not seen since at least the Gulf War, if not earlier, and yet Democrats want none of it.
Ultimately, they are betting entirely on hatred of President Trump and a disaster of any kind. Given they have been predicting that disaster for the past year and it hasn’t yet arrived, it seems unlikely to happen as they insist. If that’s the case and the economy continues to improve, they will have locked themselves in a box entirely of their own making. Especially when they are essentially replaying the same strategy that cost them the 2024 election, one voters have already roundly rejected despite their perpetual outrage, it will be more well-deserved than anything else.
Confessions of a Conservative Atheist 