Progressive Activists Urge Democrats to Embrace McConnell’s Obstructionism to Counter Trump
Faced with what they perceive as President Donald Trump’s aggressive dismantling of the federal government, progressive activists are shifting their focus, directing their energy towards pressuring congressional Democrats to adopt a more confrontational strategy. Their plea? To emulate the tactics of former Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, a figure typically reviled by the left.
While this might seem counterintuitive, the rationale is clear: activists believe that Democrats, the party to whom they pledge their votes, are most susceptible to their influence. A groundswell of anger is building amongst progressives who feel their elected representatives have failed to mount a meaningful resistance against Trump’s policies, including mass firings of federal employees, the closure of government agencies, and the appointment of underqualified individuals to key positions. These activists argue that Democrats must learn from McConnell’s playbook of effective obstructionism.
Recent rallies in Brooklyn, New York, saw grassroots organizers targeting Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, demanding they do more to impede or halt Trump’s efforts to reduce the federal workforce and cut foreign aid programs. These protests serve as a warning to the Democratic establishment: intensify the fight or face primary challenges from the left in the upcoming elections.
Jodi Jacobson, a reproductive rights activist who has mobilized her 64,000 followers on Bluesky, the social media platform favored by those opposed to Elon Musk, to target Democratic primary candidates, echoes this sentiment. "They’re more inclined to listen to their donors or their consultants than their constituents," she says. "I’m extremely frustrated by the Democratic leadership. They’re doing almost nothing, saying almost nothing."
James Bruffee, a public school teacher and member of Indivisible BK, a local chapter of a grassroots organization formed in 2017 to oppose Trump’s policies, shares this frustration. Indivisible BK co-organized the anti-Schumer rally with the New York City chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), a party with a track record of supporting successful left-wing primary challengers, like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s stunning defeat of then-House Democratic Caucus Chair Joe Crowley in 2018.
These groups are advocating for Democrats to employ obscure stalling tactics in the Senate, such as demanding quorum calls to ensure a majority of senators are present on the floor and forcing slow procedural votes. They are also urging the party to take bold action in Congress, including threatening to shut down the government if Republicans refuse to curb Trump’s actions.
"If you’re in the minority, you’ve got to use the tools of the minority," asserts Ezra Levin, co-executive director of Indivisible. He points to McConnell’s tenure as an example, highlighting his unwavering opposition to Democratic presidents. During Barack Obama’s first term, Senate Republicans rarely cooperated with Democrats and frequently invoked the filibuster, effectively requiring a super-majority to pass legislation. This strategy stymied Obama’s ability to achieve bipartisan victories and weakened the Democrats’ perceived effectiveness, contributing to the Republican surge in the 2010 midterm elections.
"That guy is a vicious, brilliant tactician and knew exactly what tools were available to him, even though he was in a much smaller minority than what the Democrats hold today," Levin says, recalling his time as a congressional staffer. "I would ask Senate Democrats to imagine that they are Mitch McConnell in the minority, and then do what he would do."
Schumer, however, believes the key to blocking Trump’s proposals lies in the House of Representatives, where Republicans hold a narrow 217-215 majority. He argues that convincing swing-district Republicans to oppose Trump’s agenda is the most effective strategy. He reiterated this point on a recent call with thousands of Indivisible members.
"I appreciate the energy that is spreading across the country as the true reality of Trump’s awful, radical agenda is felt by average Americans," Schumer said in a statement. Jeffries’ office has not responded to requests for comment.
Some observers feel Democrats are struggling to define their response to Trump’s agenda. "I’m trying to figure out what leverage we actually have," Jeffries said in February. "Republicans have repeatedly lectured America – they control the House, the Senate, and the presidency. It’s their government."
At Trump’s recent joint address to Congress, Democrats attempted to demonstrate that the government is not solely Republican. However, their strategy lacked unity. Some Democrats boycotted the speech, others held signs with messages such as "Save Medicaid" or "This is Not Normal," some wore pink, and some heckled. Rep. Al Green was ejected for shouting that Trump has no mandate, and ten Democrats voted with Republicans to censure him.
"They’re flailing right now," said House Speaker Mike Johnson. "They want to fight all of us. And so, they debase themselves by showing up on the House floor and acting like children. It’s sad."
The obscure Senate tactics championed by progressive activists include denying unanimous consent and deploying quorum calls. The Senate officially requires a quorum of 51 members to conduct business. By repeatedly calling for quorums or even staging walkouts, Democrats could temporarily prevent any legislation from passing.
The routine business of the Senate often involves bypassing procedural steps through unanimous consent requests. If a Democratic senator objects to such a request, Republicans would be forced to engage in time-consuming roll-call votes, debates, and motions. Activists argue that Democrats should use this tactic to slow down the legislative process and limit the amount of legislation Republicans can pass before the midterm elections.
"There are any number of things senators could use to muck up the process," says Jacobson. She believes that all nominees with fringe views, a lack of experience, or accusations of sexual assault should be subjected to holds, forcing Republicans to endure a painful confirmation process.
Some progressives initially took a step back from activism after Trump’s victory. However, Trump’s actions, including firing thousands of employees, punishing law enforcement officials involved in investigations into his alleged crimes, and eliminating the U.S. Agency for International Development, galvanized them.
Despite unified Democratic opposition, they were unable to block the confirmation of Trump’s controversial Cabinet nominees. Veteran Democratic strategist James Carville has said his party is "overwhelmed" by Trump’s aggressive actions.
Columnists for outlets like The Guardian and The Atlantic have criticized Democrats for being "spineless" or "acting too normal." A recent poll revealed an all-time low approval rating for congressional Democrats, even among Democratic voters.
Activists argue that Democrats should have used their available tools to fight against unqualified nominees, even if they were ultimately unsuccessful. For example, Senate Democrats delayed the vote on Russell Vought, the author of the Project 2025 policy playbook, by speaking for 30 hours about their opposition to Trump and Vought’s plans. While Vought was eventually confirmed, the delay served to highlight their opposition.
In response to the USAID shutdown, Sen. Brian Schatz placed a blanket hold on State Department nominees, but that will only delay their confirmation.
"The procedures in the Senate depend on the votes that you have," said Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin. "If you need 60 votes, we’re in a pretty strong position. If you need a simple majority, we’ve lost a few of those votes."
Liberals see an opportunity in the upcoming continuing resolution to keep the government running. They are suggesting that Democrats refuse to pass the budget unless their demands are met, including restoring funding to USAID and removing controversial figures from their positions.
While no Democrat in Congress has publicly endorsed all of these demands, some have stated that they will only vote to fund the government if the bill includes provisions to ensure Trump spends the money required by law.
Congressional Republicans have rejected any restrictions on the Trump administration. Instead, they are seeking to grant the president even greater power over spending.
The Trump administration argues that he is simply fulfilling his campaign promises. "77 million voters elected President Trump to eliminate wasteful spending, make federal agencies more efficient, and appoint outsiders to his Cabinet," said White House spokesperson Anna Kelly. "He will continue to act on the American people’s mandate to effectively steward taxpayer dollars and improve the lives of families across the country."
Ultimately, Kelly is acknowledging that elections have consequences.
When asked about the Democrats’ plan, Jeffries said the goal is to regain control of Congress in the next election. "We’re going to win in the midterms, and we have no choice but to be successful in the midterms," Jeffries said. "But we’ve got to get through the first 100 days, then the first year, and then, of course, get to the midterm elections."
