Donald Trump’s State of the Union proved you have to fight dirty against him
For years, Democrats have leaned on Michelle Obama’s famous line, ‘When they go low, we go high.’
As an ethos, it’s noble and dignified, but it’s also politically nullifying – because in the current climate dynamic, those who live by it may occupy the moral highground, but they don’t control the battlefield.
Thus for so many years now we’ve seen Donald Trump’s Republicans define the narrative, while Democrats take solace from the fact that they’re playing by the rules.
That ‘go high’ mentality confers moral superiority, sure, but it does not confer power. And as we all know, power is basically all that matters in politics.
For the best part of a decade, I have watched two sides of the same Democratic party navigate this exact issue.
Last night’s rambling, record-breaking State of the Union Address brought the divide between those two sides into sharp focus.
Because what we witnessed on Tuesday was not about a speech, Trump’s strongman leadership, or even the USA.
It was about a Democratic party at a crossroads. One side committing to the ‘We go high’ rules. The other embracing the chaotic liberation of ‘When they go low, we raise hell’.
Treading a well-worn path was Chuck Schumer and Elizabeth Warren, applauding at points, rising politely, behaving as though this were just another presidential address.
Except it wasn’t. It really wasn’t.
Because blazing an unrepentantly contrarian trail were Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib refusing to play Trump’s game – choosing instead to respectively boycott, protest, and reject the absurd spectacle.
But parts of the Democratic Party still responded as though this were a serious policy address delivered in good faith.
Vice Chair of the Senate Ethics Committee and senator of almost 16 years, Chris Coons, said he hoped for a ‘brief and unifying speech’.
To expect brevity and unity from Donald Trump is like expecting to win a gunfight with a bunch of flowers.
He attempted to speak solemnly – for a record-breaking 107 minutes in total – about law and order, and the threat of immigrants poisoning American communities.
It’s pretty galling to hear a man with 34 criminal convictions who’s been found liable for fraud and sexual abuse lecturing the country about morality.
And when he declared that the first duty of the American government is to protect citizens, I could only speculate about who exactly that applied to.
Because American citizens have been caught up in raids by Trump’s aggressive Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers.
A situation where armed federal agents in tactical gear and balaclavas turn up at homes before dawn, plunging entire communities into paralysing fear and sometimes targeting the wrong people.
More than 68,000 people have been taken into custody. More than 30 have died.
I could go on, but the point is that the gap between his rhetoric and reality is – and always has been – titanic.
What approach should the Democratic Party take to address Donald Trump's political tactics?
-
Maintain dignity and the 'go high' ethos
-
Adopt a more confrontational approach
-
Combine both strategies for balance
Donald Trump is a political force who thrives on rewriting the rules. The speed at which revered institutions have bent, broken, caved and capitulated in his second term has been breathtaking.
He has never operated within norms, nor does he fear outrage, or retreat when scolded – we have the whole of his first term to know that.
Anyone still clinging to the idea that behaving properly, respecting institutions and demonstrating civility will somehow restore normality are delusional.
It would be pure folly to think that a strongly worded letter, or a show of bipartisanship, might inspire him to change course.
It hasn’t worked up to this point. It’s not working now. It will never work.
That was proven even before Tuesday’s speech, when Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer pleaded with Trump to ‘make his case’ on potentially striking Iran.
We all know that any action in the Middle East will mirror his Venezuela raid, and almost his entire foreign policy – chaotic, violent, and potentially illegal.
So to resort to cliché, it’s crunch time. This Democratic generational divide is undeniable, and it’s necessary. It’s not about style. It is about diagnosis.
Because while I have deep respect for the older guard of centre-left American politics, from Biden to Warren, who have contributed immeasurably, their time was forged in a different political era.
The younger generation of Democrats is often caricatured as theatrical, unserious and untested, but it instinctively grasps that standing up to applaud, nodding along to platitudes, and expressing disappointment at the lack of unity simply feeds the illusion that any of this is somehow normal.
They recognise that Trump is not an irregularity that can be corrected by etiquette and the modelling of good behaviour.
Instead, they understand that they need to match his force, clarity and narrative, upholding their principles while also getting down in the dirt to fight.
The rest of us have already realised that times have changed. The question has never been about whether Trump will change. It’s whether the Democrats will.
Don’t get me wrong, I am not arguing for a race to the bottom. Lord knows Trump has already kickstarted that.
But we need to recognise this cohort of younger Democrats for what they are: the only feasible route to success and the only realistic chance of strategic dominance the party so desperately needs.
The Democrats can keep the slogan. But in 2026, ‘when they go low’ cannot mean surrendering power to keep peace. It has to mean getting in the arena.
Do you have a story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing Ross.Mccafferty@metro.co.uk.
Share your views in the comments below.