Dems must 'push back hard' on one Trump change set to dominate 2026: expert

The Democratic Party must "push back hard" against a prevailing narrative that Donald Trump could make the focus of 2026, a political analyst has warned.

Chauncey DeVega believes the Republican Party has controlled the narrative on "moral" outrage and that shifting this in favor of the Dems must be a priority this year. Writing in Salon, DeVega suggested, "Today’s Democrats and the mainstream liberals and progressives have surrendered the moral language — if not the entire moral front in the larger political battlefield — to the right-wing."

"To save themselves, as well as America’s multiracial, pluralistic democracy, they must push back hard. Technocratic arguments about public policy will not do this work."

DeVega went on to suggest the party and its commentators are currently "babbling" and need to hone in on tougher, moral language to counter the frequency of Trump's statements.

She added, "Currently, Democrats and the broader pro-democracy movement lack fluency in moral language; they are mostly babbling. This year and beyond, they need to quickly learn to speak moral language fluently — and with conviction."

That "conviction" is necessary, she argues, because of how "MAGA's most loyal supporters" view the Democratic and Republican parties. DeVega suggests there is a "designated enemies" image the Dems must overwhelm this year.

She wrote, "The Age of Trump and American neofascism have been greatly empowered by this framing, where Democrats, liberals, progressives and other designated enemies are not just to be disagreed with but are instead deemed to be evil, demonic and the poison in the blood of the nation."

Part of the "moral" take would be to "defend democracy", with the columnist suggesting the "moral contract" of democracy is at risk under Trump's administration.

"Democracy is not just a noun; it is something we do," DeVega wrote. "When we defend democracy, we are taking moral action. We must remember: Democracy is a moral contract. Despite historical flaws in practice, it rests on the foundational claim that individuals have the right to choose their government and hold it accountable."