TRUMP'S 2020 LAUNCH

• It wasn’t a surprise, but this week Trump took off the wraps on his 2020 election strategy. Racist incitement against immigrants now extends to mob chants of “send her back” against four members of Congress, women of color and citizens of the USA. And that is parlayed into Trump’s relaunching of McCarthyism, the “red scare”, to condemn the Democratic Party as “unAmerican”.
• All the boasts and distortions about Trump’s economic performance will be called on, but that won't suffice. His weapons of choice are racial tropes to inflame his fans and a  McCarthyite assault on the Democratic Party. He hopes to frighten and split the Democratic Party while he keeps the GOP together in subservience to him.
• Tom Friedman has set off a chorus of alarm, understandably horrified by what Trump’s reelection would mean for America and the world. He’s right that how the Democrats campaign in the months ahead is crucial. But all-out war between “centrist and progressive” democrats would just give Trump his best chance. History has lessons, too often forgotten. Divide and conquer is the formula; keep the opposition divided and at each other’s throats.

Democrats and a majority of voters who want Trump out are never going to speak with one voice, except on that imperative. Nor should they. We need debate, we need dissent, we need ideas and fresh thinking more than humankind ever has. We can’t let Trump frighten us into surrendering our exercise of public discourse.

Is there a way to keep a relentless focus on ousting Trump while preventing  differences of opinion and outlook from fracturing a winning democratic coalition?

It's difficult and complicated, but we can hope that some of the following attitudes take hold. There has to be mutual and genuine respect for everyone's commitment to defeating Trump whether calling themselves "liberal" or "progressive" or without a label. As far as I'm concerned, that goes for Friedman even though I disagree with his suggested course. It also should go for most of the potential nominees who advocate significant social change rather than settling for an illusary return to pre-Trump "normalcy". Some have already begun to have an impact on public consciousness and  concern about income inequality, climate change and job creation, the many dimensions of racism, and more. Some have brought to center stage the obligation of the superwealthy to give back a share to lower the income gap and fund public advances in critical areas of human need.

 Friedman advises tabling big ideas until after the election is won. Obama proved that a vision is critical to winning. His experience also proved that the vision won't guide the ship out of the harbor as long as it is anchored to the military-industrial-finance complex and is the target of GOP sabotage.

So let's not let Trump scare us into self-censorship of thought , speech and hope. We can survive differences of opinion. Democracy can't survive without them.

Meanwhile, solidarity calls out to every decent human being. Whatever bent or persuasion, we can't be silent while immigrant families are brutalized in prison camps. We can't allow the four Congress women to stand alone while incitement to racist violence flows from the White House into into Trump's raging election spectacles.

Given the circumstances and the time of day, it should be expected that common ground can be found across the wide democratic political spectrum whoever wins the nomination. So may it be with a clear public majority.