We are within a month of the next election and I admit to concerns related to the outcome of the election and what might happen in the next few days. It has been a dark period in the history of this country with actions taken by the government that are concerning both in how these actions represent the values of this country and what these actions tell me about those who support or, at the least, remain mute in response. Day by day, new violations of decency seem to occur. Today, it was a raid on the Washington home of my Representative supposedly related to her status as a legal citizen and accusations that a Democratic candidate from a different state feigned an illness while spending time being treated for a mental condition.
Aside from the juvenile and vile behavior of our President, my concern is that Trump and the MAGA movement have challenged something more fundamental: the expectation that political leaders must accept electoral defeat, respect constitutional limits, and govern for people who did not vote for them. The 2026 midterms will determine whether Congress meaningfully resists this approach to power or gives it greater freedom to operate. That makes this election a decision point.
The Record We Cannot Ignore
Any honest assessment must begin with Trump’s response to losing the 2020 election. He sought to overturn the result rather than accept it. His efforts to remain in power, and the January 6 attack that followed, cannot be reduced to another partisan controversy. When a leader rejects the laws that guide this country, the question becomes whether institutions and political allies will enforce them or let personal loyalty displace democratic accountability. How can elected politicians or voters, no matter their typical party affiliation, ignore what we all saw and continue to experience as obvious lies.
The Question Is Accountability
Courts, Congress, law enforcement, and the civil service have different responsibilities, but none should exist merely to fulfill a president’s personal wishes. Presidents are entitled to pursue their agendas through lawful means. They are not entitled to replace public accountability with personal obedience. The difference is crucial. In many cases, the President should not act without the expected approval of Congress and Congress should act to fulfill its responsibility.
A party that demands loyalty to a leader over loyalty to constitutional obligations can help turn temporary abuses into lasting practices. If restraint carries political penalties while loyalty brings advancement and financial benefits, the incentives point toward more concentrated power, even after the individual who established those incentives leaves office.
The Stakes Are Human
Immigrants facing government action need due process. Political opponents need protection against retaliation. Religious minorities need equal treatment. People whose freedoms become campaign targets need more than assurances that the majority means well. Disagreements about immigration enforcement, reproductive freedom, or LGBTQ rights are real. But beneath them lies another question: will government power remain subject to rules that protect everyone? Racism seems to have become acceptable with some openly claiming people with a certain religious affiliation are of lesser value and don’t belong in this country.
What I Want to Defend
I try to express myself here and elsewhere in a manner that is respectful and factual. This is the way public speech and our rights as citizens are supposed to work. This is also difficult given the tactics others and supposed leaders employ and the natural tendency to respond in kind. Just a few more weeks and hopefully more mature individuals will be able to put the country back on a solid footing.