Every schoolchild knows the story of George Washington’s resignation at the end of the Revolutionary War. Washington, the winning general who secured the independence of the United States, solemnly stepped down from his position. This action would set the standard that once one’s term in office is over, that person will leave and let the nation decide what different way they wanted to govern themselves. Washington would go on to reluctantly serve as the first president, and when he knew his time was over, he once again showed his character by stepping down and peacefully transferring power to the next president. Each president thereafter has respected the same precedent, assuming the choice to leave office was their own, and not forced by resignation or death.
That is until the election of 2020. Having lost, President Donald Trump was faced with a choice: accept his loss solemnly and peacefully pass power to Joe Biden – perhaps with a chance at trying for office again in 2024 – or press forward with a conspiracy that he had not lost, and try every effort, privately via his campaign and with his powers as president, to keep a grasp on power. We all know which option he chose. When it came time to do his one job as an outgoing president, he utterly failed to live up to the moment.
This election cycle has certainly handed us many topics of debate. How is the economy doing? Where do Americans stand on the participation of non-traditional Americans in society? How do we as Americans handle changes in society? Which parties are truly responsive to the concerns of the average American? What do we think is important in regards to the character of a leader? How should the government respond to globalism? Do the candidates even have a grasp on the issues?
I could spend a lot time discussing all these things. I choose not to here, not because they’re not important – they are – but because without maintaining the firm principles on which the republic was founded, we as voters risk losing our ability to direct how we will respond to all of these issues.
Some Caveats and Background
Let me first be clear here. I am not saying that Trump, or any candidate, doesn’t have a right to challenge the results if it seems like there were issues. They do, and the Trump campaign and some states did sue over they saw as fraud and the counting of ballots. Over 60 lawsuits were filed in the weeks after the election, including in state courts, federal circuit courts, and the Supreme Court. The campaign and states ultimately lost all of these suits, or they weren’t heard, for various reasons. A vigorous legal campaign was waged and any campaign should be allowed to do that.
Yet, that’s not where it stopped. At the same time these lawsuits were being conducted, the Trump campaign and allies were pressing state legislatures to overturn the results, pressuring some election officials and governors to conduct investigations or “find” more votes for Trump, to declare certain votes invalid, and in some states for the electors to send false certificates of electoral votes to Vice President Mike Pence, hoping he would accept them as the true ones, even if Trump had lost in that state. It was a deeply complicated and multi-factored effort, starting before the election with insinuations by Trump that the the results would be illegitimate, and ending on January 6 with the riot at the Capitol. I could continue on with everything that happened, but journalists and politicians have already done this in great detail, so check out those reports if you’re interested in learning more.
So if the effort to overturn the election had stopped with the lawsuits, that would be one thing. If Trump had at that point conceded the election, I (and I imagine many others) would probably remember the 2020 election as contentious but ultimately one that was well-handled. That’s not what happened.
Why It’s Important
As I argued earlier, maintaining the peaceful transfer of power is perhaps the most important plank of our republic, because it shows that even when we disagree strongly on the direction of the country, the result of a vote will be respected and that there is an understanding that responsibility for driving that direction now lies with someone else. If we vote back in Trump, it’s only going to send the message that this isn’t the way our country intends to govern, that instead will we return to more base instincts, to achieve power by any mean necessary.
Granted, I’m not assured anything will prevent Trump himself from trying again. It’s just not in his nature to accept a loss; for Trump, not winning is not an option. If he does lose next week, he will try to gum up the works again, though this time he will have a tougher road when it comes to counting the electoral votes, with recent changes to the law and the fact he won’t have influence on the person counting them, VP Harris, or the government. Instead, most of his effort will have to be at the state level, pressuring allies there to overturn the votes, and in the legal system.
Rather, the effect of returning Trump to office will be to embolden future candidates who may not be as open with their intentions as he is to to overturn the result. Knowing the voters will accept such behavior even if does not succeed, it is more likely that we will see future incumbents invoke every measure to try to stay in power and prevent their opponent from taking office. It may not work, but they will try.
Now, I like to think that our institutions will prevent an attempt to overturn an election, but I also think they haven’t fully been tested just yet. 2020 was a big test, and those institutions did succeed then, but a return to office will allow Trump and his inner circle four years to try and weaken them. I don’t subscribe to the idea that Trump will hold onto power after the 2028 election because he’ll try to cancel the next election or something like that, though it may not be for a lack of argument that he should be allowed to serve additional terms via a repeal of the 22nd Amendment. However, he will try to make it easier for the next generation to try again.
If it does work, it’d be very bad for the concept of representative governance. Do people think it’s difficult to buy groceries and to pay rent or a mortgage? Do they not like how the military is used or how foreign policy is conducted? Are jobs more difficult to come by? Well, if an incumbent (or even a non-incumbent) can just convince enough people in power to overturn the results and keep that nominee in power or promote them into power despite the actual results, now voters will be stripped of their ability to dictate the direction of the country.
Voters won’t be able to effectively choose the person that they think can best lead the country because one candidate with the ear of members of Congress or state officials may be able to get into office regardless of the will of the electorate. That is bad news for everybody, because now it will mean the country will be governed at the whims of someone who wasn’t truly elected. It won’t be the people’s government anymore but one made up of whoever can convince those in power to overturn an election and whoever goes along with the scheme.
In some cases, voters may not know it’s happening. Trump is really loud and open with his intentions, but a future candidate may be able to work quietly behind the scenes, turning the situation to their favor. Such brazen corruption will likely breed more corruption and, as events have shown us, the president of that time won’t be removed because of an abuse of power since a president’s own party is not likely to vote to impeach them. There will be no effective way of stopping them, other than the constitutional limit on number of terms in office, assuming that remains into the future (term limits are actually less popular among ambitious politicians than you’d think).
The Path Forward
In order to prevent this future, a strong message must be sent now, that no, we will not allow someone like Trump who tried to overturn an election back into office. You don’t have to support the policies of the Harris to send that message, or even like her. I don’t like many of her political positions and I don’t really have any opinion about her as a person. In fact, I’ve mostly voted Libertarian in past elections and a lot of my own political positions more closely align to those of that party.
If Harris isn’t your thing, you don’t have to vote for her. You don’t have to vote for either Trump or Harris. You can vote third party or only vote for Congressional and state offices. That said, I do think the best way to preserve the principle the peaceful transfer power is that Trump receives fewer electoral votes than Harris, which realistically means that she would become president.
Perhaps if Republicans hold the House and take the Senate, it will mean strong opposition to her policies. I’m typically in favor of a split power situation anyway. In addition, Congress should look to strip the executive of many powers it has granted to the office in recent decades. Both opposition to the president in office and restoring of Congressional power mean that any one person inhabiting the office of the president just isn’t as scary a proposition should they act corruptly, and it’d restore balance to the branches a bit.
Call it a cliche, but now really is the time for choosing. To choose whether America will continue its 250 year tradition of peacefully transferring power, or to choose a future where candidates will try to hold onto power. I hope we choose wisely.