Stop Pretending—Democrats Aren’t Fighting Hard Enough: Our Job Is Responsible Citizenry

The Jack Hopkins Now Newsletter #374

You’ve heard the line before: “We’re doing everything we can.” It’s repeated so often by Democratic leadership, it might as well be tattooed on a press secretary’s forehead.

After every extremist power grab, every constitutional face-slap, every authoritarian flex from the Trump camp—there it is. Like a national lullaby.

“We’re doing everything we can.”

No, you’re not. Not even close. And the dangerous part isn’t just the inaction—it’s that you’re creating a false sense of inevitability by pretending otherwise.

In this moment, when the foundations of democratic government are being attacked not by foreign actors but by elected ones, inaction equals surrender.

This issue of JHN outlines a sobering truth: Democratic leaders are not using every legal, institutional, or narrative weapon available to them. And if they don’t start now, they may not get another chance.

Oh… one more thing before we dive in.

Every time this kind of critique is leveled…someone inevitably shows up with the same tired plea: "Stop attacking Democrats! Why are you doing this?!"

That response is not only irrational—it’s irresponsible. Criticism rooted in strategy… urgency…and a demand for performance isn’t an attack. It’s accountability.

And if you think party loyalty should come before the literal survival of our democratic system…then you are part of the problem.

The obligation of every democracy-loving American isn’t to act as a cheerleader for elected officials—it’s to serve as a check on their complacency. Holding power to account is not disloyal.

In fact, it’s one of the clearest expressions of patriotism and responsible citizenship. If leaders are underperforming during the most dangerous threat to democracy in modern U.S. history…silence isn’t loyalty—it’s surrender.

We aren’t demanding perfection. We’re demanding urgency. We’re demanding that those in power use the power they have. Anything less is a half-measure in the face of a five-alarm fire.

I decided to do something different. Since I have an excellent idea of the kinds of deflections some people have to contend with, such as the one I will be presenting below, I thought I’d go ahead and address those now.

Q&A: Anticipating the Deflections

Q: Why don’t you run for office, if you know so much, hotshot?

A: Because I have no desire…no political background…no campaign infrastructure…no billionaire donors…and no illusions about how that system works.

Running for office isn’t the only—or even the best—way to create impact.

What I do have is a platform…a laptop, phone, and a deep sense of urgency. And I’m using those tools to push the people who already have power to do what this moment demands.

We don’t need more politicians. We need more pressure on the ones we’ve already got.

Q: It’s easy to write about this, but shouldn’t YOU be doing more?

A: Fair question. And here’s the honest answer: I ask myself that every day. This writing—this platform—isn’t a performance. It’s part of a strategy. But I don’t confuse words with action.

That’s why I use this platform to push…provoke…and activate those with the levers of power—and to reach people like you who can amplify…organize…and demand.

I’m doing what I can with what I have. We all have a strength or some talent. This one just happens to be mine.

And if you think this is just talk…then take the energy it stirs in you—and go do more than I ever could. That’s the point.

Q: Why should we expect them to take the kind of risks these actions would expose them to with someone as vengeful as Trump?

A: Because that’s the job. Leadership isn’t about minimizing personal risk—it’s about accepting it in service of something greater. The moment someone chooses public office…especially in a time of democratic crisis…they sign up for more than ribbon cuttings and interviews.

They sign up to defend the country—even when it’s uncomfortable…even when it’s dangerous.

Trump’s vindictiveness is real. So is the threat to democracy. But if that fear causes paralysis…then those leaders are in the wrong business.

We don’t need placeholders—we need protectors. And history will judge them not by how safe they played it…but by whether they stood between the Republic and collapse.

Q: Why do you think our leadership isn’t doing more?

A: Because in many cases…they are trapped in the culture of caution. They’re prioritizing the illusion of normalcy…the comfort of precedent…and the optics of civility over the raw demands of the moment.

Many are career politicians who’ve spent decades learning how not to rock the boat—and now…when the boat is sinking…they’re still worried about their posture on deck.

Others are tethered to consultants and donor networks who discourage anything that might risk re-election. It’s not always malice. Sometimes it’s fear. Sometimes it’s inertia.

But whatever the reason…the result is the same: half-measures when the moment demands a full-throttle fight.

Q: Aren’t you just trying to stir trouble?

A: No—and asking that question misses the point entirely. Stirring trouble for trouble’s sake is cheap. What I’m doing here is far more uncomfortable: I’m holding a mirror up to a party that says it’s fighting for democracy…while often choosing optics over action.

If that creates discomfort…good. Democracy doesn’t die from too much urgency. It dies from silence…inertia…and the fear of being called “divisive.”

Q: Shouldn’t we be acknowledging what people like Jamie Raskin, Jasmine Crockett, and Eric Swalwell are doing, rather than calling out leadership for not doing enough?

A: Absolutely—we should recognize the fighters. Raskin, Crockett, Swalwell, and a handful of others have shown what urgency…clarity…and righteous defiance look like.

But the fact that they stand out so clearly is exactly the problem.

When only a few members of a caucus rise to meet the moment with that kind of fire… it tells you everything you need to know about the rest.

This isn’t about tearing anyone down—it’s about refusing to normalize underperformance while the stakes couldn’t be higher.

Praising the few shouldn’t become an excuse for protecting the many who are phoning it in.

Q: Stop, Jack! Why are you doing this, Jack!?

A: Because this moment demands truth…not comfort. I’m doing this because the stakes are too high for half-measures and political theater.

I’m doing it because someone has to say what many are too afraid to say out loud:

That failure to act decisively in the face of creeping authoritarianism is a betrayal of every person who’s ever fought to preserve this democracy.

This isn’t about posturing. It’s about demanding better—from leaders who can do better, must do better…and haven’t been.

Q: Who, specifically, has said “We are doing all we can do”?

A: You may not hear those exact words into a microphone—but let’s be honest: when leadership consistently stops well short of what is legally…tactically…or institutionally possible…that is the message.

Silence and inaction speak just as loudly as any podium statement.

If the house is on fire and someone is holding a hose but refusing to turn on the water…you don’t need a transcript to know they’ve decided not to fight.

Q: Personally, I love what you do...and how you go about doing so. What drives you?

A: Thank you. What drives me is simple: I refuse to sit quietly while this country slides into authoritarianism under the false cover of "normal politics."

I was raised to believe that if you have a platform and you see a threat…you speak.

You act. You provoke. I’m driven by a mix of moral obligation…rage at injustice…and a belief that ordinary people can force extraordinary change if they’re armed with the truth and a reason to fight.

I don’t want to look back years from now and say, "I wish I had done more." I want to know I emptied the tank.

Okay…having gotten that out of the way…let’s get into Part I

PART I: THE MYTH OF MAXIMUM EFFORT

Let’s start with the most dangerous narrative Democrats are perpetuating: that they’ve exhausted all options.

No. They haven’t. Not legally. Not tactically. Not culturally. Not institutionally.

They’ve exhausted the politically safe options—the ones that don’t spook donors or ruffle the feathers of bipartisan brunches.

But democracy doesn't care about your comfort zone. It’s either defended or it isn’t.

Pretending that a few press conferences…some strongly worded tweets…and the occasional DOJ request amounts to wartime footing? That’s not leadership. That’s brand maintenance.

PART II: WHAT THEY COULD BE DOING—BUT AREN’T

Let’s break it down. Here are several major areas where Democrats could…right now…be engaging in full-spectrum resistance—and simply aren’t.

1. Relentless, Coordinated Litigation

The GOP learned this years ago: courts are the battleground…not the fallback.

Conservatives file lawsuits preemptively…strategically…and relentlessly. Where is the Democratic equivalent?

• Emergency injunctions in every state where federal overreach is suspected.

• Coordinated multi-state lawsuits through Democratic attorneys general to block authoritarian mandates.

• Ethics challenges against federal judges who consistently rule in favor of extreme policies without justification.

• Continuous filings to jam courts and delay unlawful actions. Flood the system—legally.

Right now…legal creativity is coming almost entirely from the right. That’s not an accident—it’s a strategy.

2. Aggressive Use of Congressional Oversight

Democrats in Congress have subpoena power…investigatory authority…and the ability to dominate the news cycle—if they choose to.

• Open hearings into coordination between extremist groups and elected officials.

• Subpoena social media companies to uncover potential government interference in platform moderation.

• Use every procedural tool—motions to compel…contempt citations…budgetary holds—to drag truth into the light.

• Coordinate timing and themes so hearings don’t disappear in the noise.

The GOP used Benghazi to weaponize perception for years.

Democrats won’t even schedule consistent hearings on election sabotage or judicial corruption.

3. Maximizing State-Level Power

States like California…New York…Illinois…and Michigan have wide Democratic control. These states could:

• Pass firewall legislation to shield their residents from federal overreach (think: reproductive rights…data privacy…immigration support).

• Allocate funding to rapid response legal defense against unconstitutional federal actions.

• Establish state commissions to investigate federal abuse of power.

• Explore Article V state-level strategies—not to pass amendments…but to test legal boundaries and delay federal interventions.

Right now…red states are writing the future. Blue states are reacting to it.

4. Narrative Domination and Counter-Propaganda

The right has mastered narrative warfare. The left still acts like facts speak for themselves. They don’t. Not in this media climate.

• Launch counter-disinformation war rooms that act as rapid response units to every Trumpist lie.

• Train surrogates—not just politicians, but veterans, doctors, clergy—to carry aligned, emotionally resonant messages.

• Develop short-form video campaigns tailored to platforms like TikTok and YouTube to reach younger, disengaged voters.

• Build an independent media coalition to amplify underreported wins and expose power grabs.

Controlling the narrative doesn’t require controlling the truth. It requires showing up with discipline…consistency…and volume.

5. Civil Society Pressure and Institutional Resistance

Not all resistance needs to come from elected officials. But they can activate it.

• Encourage unions, universities, and nonprofit networks to use their institutional weight to push back on anti-democratic policies.

• Support organized boycotts and economic resistance campaigns.

• Help state and local governments prepare for non-cooperation strategies with federal enforcement efforts that violate human rights.

History shows that coordinated defiance works. But it requires leadership willing to say, "Defy."

6. Unconventional Political Tools

• Use strategic resignations to deny quorum or slow legislative railroading.

• Launch recall campaigns against vulnerable far-right local officials.

• Push for bar complaints and license challenges for lawyers who aided in Trump-era illegal actions.

• Explore Section 3 of the 14th Amendment litigation to disqualify insurrectionist candidates from the ballot.

Are these nuclear options? Yes. That’s what you reach for when the Constitution is under siege.

PART III: WHY “WE’RE DOING EVERYTHING WE CAN” ISN’T JUST FALSE—IT’S DANGEROUS

When Democrats say they’re doing all they can, they don’t just lie to the public. They demobilize it.

People stop organizing. They stop donating. They stop watching. Why? Because they believe their leaders have it covered.

In reality…many Democratic leaders are:

• Risk-averse

• Conflict-averse

• Donor-sensitive

• Media-dependent

They confuse visibility with effectiveness. But the hard truth is:

Visibility without action is just theater. And we don’t need actors. We need firebrands.

This performative leadership style creates a deadly illusion that the threat is manageable…that democracy is stable…that the worst is behind us.

It isn’t. And it won’t be—unless the party facing that threat gets serious.

PART IV: WHAT REAL LEADERSHIP WOULD LOOK LIKE

• Daily war room briefings with tangible tactical goals.

• A public heat map showing actions taken…actions pending…and legal fights launched.

• Real-time resource allocation to hotspots—both media and legal.

• Empowering local leaders with messaging kits…talking points…and rapid response tools.

Leadership is offense…not defense.

It’s creating the terrain—not reacting to it.

If one side is playing chess and the other is playing charades…we already know who’s going to win.

Believe me when I tell you The Heritage Foundation has been…and continues to be playing master-level chess.

Trump? No. He’s a “beginner at checkers.” He’s thought his way into a lot of messes, but it has always been someone else…that has thought him out of it.

However, this time he’s been provided with the master-level-chess blueprints for getting democracy into trouble…because folks in organizations like The Heritage Foundation…and others…knew he was deranged enough to carry out those plans.

FINALLY: NO, THEY’RE NOT DOING EVERYTHING THEY CAN

And we need to stop pretending they are. Because that narrative is costing us time…momentum…and lives.

Summary:

• These are not campaign strategies…they’re power strategies.

• They are not dependent on holding the presidency or supermajorities.

• They require will…not permission.

• They are still available—but only if Democrats have the guts to use them.

There is more to be done. There are legal levers not pulled. There are media battles not fought. There are tools sitting in drawers while the house burns.

The question isn’t whether Democrats have the ability to fight back harder. It’s whether they have the will.

And if they don’t, it falls to the rest of us to make them feel the fire.

Not later. Now.

If you liked this, don’t just nod—fuel it. Become a paid subscriber and help turn this platform into a pressure campaign with teeth. Words matter. Action matters more. Let’s move.

Warmly,

Jack

Jack Hopkins