Following Donald Trump’s surprising triumph in the 2016 elections, people from all walks of life joined together across the United States, taking part in groundswell demonstrations. They formed a plethora of activist clusters resisting against Trump’s proposition to repeal the Affordable Care Act, reaching out to their representatives through a steady influx of phone calls and digital correspondence.
Fast forward eight years later, and despite the fact Trump once again claimed victory, renewed vigor can be seen in groups with progressive ideologies. Triggered by the election results, a wave of Americans have flocked towards the umbrella of diverse online and physical collectives, which strive to challenge Trump’s legislative agenda via due legal and parliamentary processes.
Lately, strategy discussions are resonating with a vibrancy reminiscent of the 2017 era, drawing in numerous volunteers readily willing to take up the mantle of public office or support impending legal battles. Activists on the ground purport that individuals are seeking practical endeavours to tackle Trump’s incoming second-term strategies, such as the mooted large-scale removal of illegal immigrants or obliterating the Department of Education.
Ezra Levin, instrumental in the creation of the progressive charity ‘Indivisible’, revealed that a staggering 11,000 individuals attended the post-election commentary call organized by Indivisible the day after the vote, while a crowd of over 40,000 joined another call scheduled a week later to roll out a fresh edition of the Indivisible Guide. Attendance numbers such as these had not been witnessed since 2017.
Karen Skelton of Greensboro, North Carolina reported that although some members of the Guilford County Indivisible group she is part of needed respite following the election, there was a surge of new people keen on becoming involved.
Heather Meaney-Allen from Williamsburg, Virginia acknowledged that her Indivisible chapter, known for its consistent public mobilization over the years, is already receiving inquiries from people yearning to affiliate with her group. Desperate times are invoking a sense of urgency and a call to arms.
However, the incoming Trump team perceives these dissenting activists as jeopardizing democracy, interpreting their actions as a direct challenge to the established order. In response, public servant Lisa Gilbert argues that instead of spontaneously assembling in the streets as was the case in 2016, the diverse bodies of groups are now coordinating their efforts to ensure all avenues of political participation are attended to.
Gilbert believes that the focus this time isn’t solely on protests and liaising with law-makers, but rather extends to monitoring the ethical conduct of Cabinet participants and instigating legal proceedings, hence efficiently capitalizing on collective energies.
The response Run for Something has elicited, says Litman, is an affirmation of the need for a robust infrastructure, despite disappointing election results. While many liberal advocates do admit they are indeed too startled and emotionally overtaxed to indulge in political activities presently, they assure that they will be equipped to participate once Trump enters office.
Nearing retirement, Liz McGeachy from Norris, Tennessee declared that the Norris Area Indivisible Group would reconvene in January. Ironically, she likened this hiatus to the break she undertook after Trump’s victory in 2016, proclaiming resolutely that the group had no plans of disbanding or retreating, but rather needed a period of tranquility and mourning.
In parallel, Sherry Kloha from Bemidji, Minnesota indicated that since election day, nearly 20 individuals expressed an interest in joining the Indivisible Bemidji team, adding to its 300-strong mailing list. For now, the group is taking a brief hiatus after an election that she feels has momentarily thrown them off course.
In the follow-up to the vote, members gathered for a convivial evening at a local bed and breakfast on November 13. As they sipped wine and savored appetizers, they discussed recent events and concluded that the fight was far from over. It is clear that these individuals demonstrate an admirable resilience, echoing their common sentiment: there is too much worth fighting for.