By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Protests in Washington D.C. are urging Congress to prevent President-elect Trump’s inauguration, citing the 14th Amendment’s disqualification clause for those who engaged in insurrection. While some legal experts argue this action is constitutionally permissible, based on Trump’s actions surrounding the January 6th Capitol riot, the movement, “14th Now,” is unlikely to sway Congress, which intends to certify the election results. Despite legal challenges in state courts, the Supreme Court prevented states from barring presidential candidates, leaving the question of Trump’s eligibility unresolved. Trump’s transition team maintains he will serve all Americans.
Read the original article here
Donald Trump critics are planning a protest in DC aimed at preventing him from assuming power. The core idea is to leverage public pressure to convince lawmakers to block his ascension, citing concerns about his fitness for office and potential threats to democracy.
This plan, however, faces significant hurdles. The belief that a sufficient number of Democratic members of Congress could object to Trump’s taking office based on his actions is a key element of this strategy. However, the feasibility of this approach is highly debated, with skepticism expressed regarding the likelihood of enough Democrats aligning on such a course of action.
Many believe this strategy is unlikely to succeed, arguing that it’s too late for such measures to be effective. The contention is that previous opportunities, such as impeachment votes and timely legal action, have been squandered, leaving this protest as a symbolic gesture rather than a viable path to blocking Trump’s return to power.
The perception that the political system has already had ample opportunities to prevent Trump’s return, and failed, fuels pessimism about this protest’s chances of success. Numerous missed opportunities, including the failure to secure sufficient Republican support for impeachment and other accountability measures, are cited as evidence for this belief.
The protest’s potential impact on the broader political landscape is also a point of contention. While some argue the protest can raise awareness and possibly influence public opinion, others see it as merely performative, unlikely to significantly change the outcome. Concerns are raised that such an action might even inadvertently energize Trump’s base.
Furthermore, significant concerns are raised about the potential for violence and escalation. The possibility of clashes between protestors and Trump supporters, along with the response from law enforcement, adds an element of unpredictability and risk to the planned demonstration.
Even if the protest itself gains traction, its effects on the political process are uncertain. There is a general feeling that lawmakers have already made their positions clear, and the protest is unlikely to alter their decisions. The belief is widespread that this action is largely symbolic, with limited practical impact.
Skepticism extends beyond the likelihood of the protest achieving its goal. There is also a pessimistic outlook about the broader political climate and the potential for effectively countering Trump’s influence. The feeling that the political system is fundamentally incapable of preventing Trump’s return is a recurring theme.
Some commentators go so far as to suggest that this protest represents a misguided approach and a futile attempt at stopping an inevitable outcome. They propose that resources would be better directed toward preparing for the challenges of a potential Trump presidency, rather than engaging in what they see as a hopeless endeavor.
The overall sentiment is one of deep disillusionment, not only with the possibility of this specific protest succeeding, but also with the broader political system’s apparent inability to effectively restrain Trump. The prevailing feeling is a profound sense of resignation that Trump will return to power.
Underlying this pessimism is a broader criticism of the actions, or lack thereof, by various political players. Many feel that Democrats haven’t been sufficiently proactive and that Republicans have shown a willingness to overlook Trump’s behavior. There is a widespread sense of betrayal by the political establishment.
Beyond the immediate focus on blocking Trump’s return, the discussion extends to broader concerns about the health of American democracy. The perception that the system is failing to effectively address serious threats is a key driver of the ongoing anxieties and the deep sense of unease.
Despite the prevailing pessimism, the organizers and participants believe that the planned protest remains necessary as a statement of principle and a mobilization of opposition to Trump. They maintain hope that the protest can act as a catalyst for further action, even if it doesn’t directly prevent Trump from taking office.
The overwhelming sense, however, remains that the protest is ultimately a symbolic gesture in the face of what many perceive to be an insurmountable challenge. While the intent might be commendable, the chances of success appear slim to non-existent in the eyes of many.