President-elect Donald Trump is shown on Jan. 15, 2024, arriving at a caucus night event in Des Moines, Iowa. It’s time to pull the curtain back on public statements Rhode Island elected officials have made about Trump’s victory in the Nov. 5 election. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
Was the election of Donald Trump for president a death knell for democracy? Or was it merely a routine, if disappointing, electoral defeat from the Republican party?
If you’re looking for answers from local elected officials in Rhode Island then you might be confused. In the days since the presidential election, comments from many high-profile Democrats have been vague, uninspired, and strikingly at odds with their pre-election warnings. And given how severe that pre-election rhetoric was, the lack of a clear message represents a credibility crisis for Rhode Island’s dominant party.
On Wednesday afternoon, Nov. 6, Gov. Dan McKee, who had published a Boston Globe op-ed in January calling this the highest stakes election in American history, released a statement emphasizing the importance of local politics. “We must now calmly move forward with civility and respect to ensure Rhode Island remains a place of opportunity and inclusivity for all,” McKee said. There was no mention of Trump and no references to the “tyranny,” “dictatorship” or “authoritarian regime that legitimizes violence” that McKee had warned of earlier in the year. Beyond stating that his administration won’t help carry out Trump’s proposed mass deportations, he hasn’t shared specific plans to address the president-elect’s policies.
Sen. Jack Reed shared a post-election statement that was slightly more blunt, but still left much to be desired. Reed — who the week before the election had warned that Trump will “act like a fascist” if elected — issued a statement on Nov. 6 reminding the incoming administration that the “presidency is not a monarchy.” Added Reed: “The government exists to serve, protect, and represent the people — not retribution and revenge.” He included no details of how he plans to back up those words.
Our congressmen’s words have been even more listless.
U.S. Rep. Seth Magaziner ran for reelection with a campaign plank of “Protecting Our Democracy” that specifically condemned Trump’s actions on Jan. 6, 2021. He has said, “Trump’s Project 2025 would gut the EPA and take us back to the old days of acid rain, water that you can’t drink, and air that is toxic to breathe,” and Trump’s “radical plan to take away Americans’ constitutionally protected rights and freedoms is wrong for America.” Yet his 92-word post-election statement on the morning of Nov. 6 included only a vague vow to stand up to the executive branch when necessary to defend people’s rights and freedoms. “I will work with any administration of either party when it is in the best interest of Rhode Islanders,” Magaziner said. Since then, he has called Trump’s nomination of former Reps. Tulsi Gabbard and Matt Gaetz to high-powered administration positions “dangerous.”
U.S. Rep. Gabe Amo had said that world leaders and other people abroad are “worried about Trump.” He tweeted that Trump “cares more about campaign donations from oil tycoons than the fate of future generations and the health of our planet” and said that the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent rubber-stamp of broad presidential immunity “bulldozes the essential idea that presidents are bound by the same laws as every other American.” Yet his late morning statement on Nov. 6 felt like a postcard from an earlier, less rancorous era. “I hoped to turn the page on the divisiveness we heard and saw,” Amo said. “Our nation’s leaders will need to move forward with the intensity of our convictions to strengthen our democracy, protect our freedoms, and have an inclusive future.” His post-election posts to X — chats with ambassadors, visits with veterans, and stops at small businesses — look a lot like business as usual.
After reading these materials, I was left with questions. First, what do these officials plan to do specifically to address the dangers that they were so eager to warn voters about? If you’re going to tell voters about the fascism and tyranny your opponent represents, they’re going to rightfully expect a plan when he wins. Anything less is a failure of leadership.
I also have broader questions about trust.
Why is a situation that was so dire a few weeks ago now just disappointing, as McKee, Amo, and Magaziner all called it? Which version of you — pre-election or post-election — are we supposed to believe? If you suddenly see Trump’s election as far less concerning than you did in October, as these ho-hum statements suggest, voters deserve an explanation for why that is. (This disconnect goes all the way to the party’s top leaders. Since the election, both President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris have told people that it will be OK after months of warning just the opposite.)
If you’re going to tell voters about the fascism and tyranny your opponent represents, they’re going to rightfully expect a plan when he wins. Anything less is a failure of leadership.
For our elected leaders, I also have a reminder.
People are feeling anxious right now. In the days after Trump’s election, calls from LGBTQ youth to mental health crisis lines soared, immigrant advocates and women’s groups steeled for battle, and the ACLU vowed that it would fight impending policies with its “full firepower.” A ProPublica editor warned his staff, “We face the biggest test of our professional lives…We may be harassed. We may be sued. We may be threatened with violence.” A public health law professor from Arizona State said Trump’s return raised an array of concerns and predicted “Millions will needlessly suffer.” At such a moment, many Rhode Islanders are looking to you — to anyone, really — for assurances. This isn’t a moment for playing it safe.
Thankfully, our region’s post-election messaging wasn’t all underwhelming. In a lengthy post-election Facebook post, Providence Mayor Brett Smiley, acknowledged that many are feeling “sad, and scared, and hopeless,” and vowed that in the capital city, “We’ll use our laws, our ordinances, our city policies, and every tool at our disposal to protect everything that makes our city so special.”
On X, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse was appropriately fiery, calling Trump a “felon, a liar and a cheat. Later, in a TV interview, he told Dems to prepare for an “absolute tsunami of corruption coming out of this new administration”
I was also impressed by U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, who, within day’s of the election, published a TIME essay titled, “Here’s the Plan to Fight Back.” Warren began: “To everyone who feels like their heart has been ripped out of their chest, I feel the same. To everyone who is afraid of what happens next, I share your fears.” She proceeded to share a detailed plan, involving Congress and the courts, for facing what she called Trump’s “lawlessness,” “unprecedented corruption,” and “abuses of power.”
Her essay was a model of what was largely missing in the Ocean State: an honest reflection of what people are feeling, a consistency between pre- and post-election communications, and a detailed vision for what happens next. She also used a word missing from any of the local statements I saw: “urgency.”
If our local officials believed their own pre-election warnings, they would be wise to follow her lead.
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.