Daily Herald opinion: The loyal opposition: Let us hope Trump can build statesmanship into his legacy, even in a divided nation

Here we are. Half the country reveling today in joy, the other half crestfallen in despair.

Here we are. Our urban centers still painted blue. Our wide rural expanse still colored red.

Such are the reflections of the polarization that grips our nation, now without doubt more sharply than at any time in the past century. There always have been divisions, regional differences in opinion, cultural and class distinctions that affect perspectives. But they are so much more deeply felt these days.

In the 2004 Democratic Convention Speech that turned Barack Obama into a national figure, the U.S. Senate candidate famously said, “There's not a liberal America and a conservative America. There's the United States of America.”

If only that were that demonstrably true.

Winners always have been happy, and losers always have been down. But not, it seems, with the depth of simultaneous elation and depression of 2024. We're old enough to remember that even in the wake of the disputed election of George W. Bush in 2000, Al Gore's supporters, though upset, grudgingly wished Bush well and saw they had a stake in whatever success he might achieve in the White House.

Do Donald Trump's adversaries wish him well with the same genuine hope? Since many critics see in Trump a threat to the democracy, if not world order, likely not. A president who conspired to try to remain in office despite defeat, who has vocally undermined virtually every institution that serves as the country's foundation, who began his campaign with a vow of retribution is not apt to receive the good faith from vanquished critics that his supporters argue is duly owed to him.

If Trump wants unity — and we hope he does; we certainly do — the obligation to work for it is his, not his opposition's to blindly provide it. The “loyal opposition,” as the expression goes, is duty bound to be loyal to the country and to its values, not to any person. It is possible to do that even while advocating for policies and actions different from those pushed by the powers in control.

Trust is earned, not bestowed.

In some quarters, you hear talk of Trump's “landslide.” Certainly, it was an impressive victory, the first time he garnered a majority of the popular vote in three campaigns. The first time he won the popular vote, for that matter. But it would be a mistake to describe it as a landslide. Ronald Reagan collected 525 electoral votes in 1984, garnering 58.8% of the popular vote for an 18.2-percentage-point margin over Walter Mondale. That was a landslide.

In the latest count of the unofficial returns, Trump polled 295 electoral votes with 50.7% of the popular vote, for a 3-percentage-point advantage over Kamala Harris. That margin likely will narrow slightly by the time the final returns are in. It is a clear victory, but it is not a landslide. Rather, it is a signal that the country remains sharply divided.

There are many factors involved in Tuesday's election results, and pundits, politicians and vested interests will no doubt examine them, but the fundamental explanation is this: Generally, throughout our history, incumbent administrations have never survived economic struggles. Almost never. Go through the list. Herbert Hoover, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, George H.W. Bush. All done in by bad economic winds.

Had President Joe Biden and the Democrats wanted to survive inflation, they needed to do a better job early in his term of explaining the causes, how it was a virtually inevitable aftermath of a global pandemic. They needed to explain that and keep explaining that. Early, long before elections were on the horizon. And they needed to overtly respond to it and to show empathy for those struggling with it.

Instead, the Democrats assumed Trump was unelectable, assumed the country would not elect a felon who had left office in disgrace. And Biden behaved as though if he did not talk about inflation, no one would notice it was taking place. By the time Harris was running, it was too late to counter the inflation message.

Inflation elected Trump, not widespread hopes for radical change.

Trump has claimed a mandate, but his victory was narrow. Half the country has given him no such mandate. Still, with a majority in the Senate, one likely to be won in the House, and a presumption of immunity granted by the Supreme Court, he will have the power to behave as though the mandate is real.

For the country's sake, we hope he would aim for a better legacy — one of a statesman, not just a divider. If not, the loyal opposition will have to provide the guard rails that otherwise have been removed.