Fighting Fire with Fire: A Path to Democratic Decline

In late November, The Daily Show host Jon Stewart declared democratic norms the “last refuge of losers.” This view, which has gained traction among the left following Donald J. Trump’s victory in the 2024 election, poses a profound danger to the republic. Democratic norms are more than just “good behavior,” they are the glue that holds a system of self-government in place. Without them, we risk a political race to the bottom where the country itself becomes the ultimate loser.

Democratic norms are the unwritten rules and shared expectations that guide political actors in a democracy. These norms serve as guardrails, ensuring peaceful political competition, respect for institutions, and stability during periods of intense disagreement. While formal laws define legal requirements, democratic norms determine what is socially acceptable and morally expected in a healthy democracy.

While not the first president to violate norms, now-President-elect Trump did so flagrantly and often without consequence. His first term culminated in his refusal to accept the 2020 election results and the subsequent assault on the Capitol by his supporters. As Trump’s popularity endured, many Republican politicians adopted his disregard for norms, resulting in a sharp rise in candidates refusing to honor election outcomes. Democrats contrasted their respect for American democratic norms with the actions of Trump and his allies. However, following their electoral defeat, many Democrats now argue for abandoning norms and the constraints on power they represent.

In his segment, Stewart called on Democrats to “fight like Republicans” and start exploiting “loopholes” to wield government power more aggressively. Providing examples, Stewart criticized former President Barack Obama for not bypassing the Senate to forcibly appoint a Supreme Court Justice and similarly chastised President Joe Biden for respecting a decision of the Senate parliamentarian. He dismissed the idea of the American government as a system of checks and balances as purely theoretical, describing it instead as a set of “rules, loopholes to those rules, and norms.” Stewart argued that the rules are so complex and convoluted that they can (and should) be bent to accomplish whatever left-wing politicians put their minds toward.

Many within the Democratic establishment appear to share Stewart’s views. Earlier this month, Axios reported that several elected Democrats had tired of their party’s “pearl-clutching” concerning democratic norms. The piece highlighted Democratic strategist Mike Nellis, who recently posted on X that “It’s time to stop playing nice. We need to stretch the limits of what’s possible and be as ruthless as Republicans when it comes to using every tool at our disposal.”

Adopting this approach would prove ruinous for the country. When politicians respond to norm violations with bad-faith actions rather than condemnation, they create a culture of escalating brinksmanship. Each side feels justified in pushing boundaries further, retaliating for the other’s actions. Observers have already highlighted how President Biden’s recent decision to pardon his son has legitimized unsubstantiated claims from the right about the justice system’s politicization. Trump responded immediately, suggesting this precedent justified his intent to pardon individuals involved in the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Undoubtedly, some political actors will violate democratic norms regardless of others’ actions or condemnations. However, when opposing politicians respond in kind, the political landscape devolves into a destructive competition to subvert institutions for partisan gain. Over time, this dynamic erodes the foundational pillars of democracy. Institutions once tasked with impartial governance become tools of partisan warfare, used to attack opponents rather than serve the public good. As trust in these institutions deteriorates, the public begins to view them as illegitimate extensions of partisan agendas rather than as neutral arbiters of justice or governance. Unchecked, this escalation creates a feedback loop: Administrations weaponize their authority, using the tools of government not to hold wrongdoers accountable, but to shield their allies and punish adversaries. For example, powers like the presidential pardon may become routine instruments to protect loyalists from legal consequences, further undermining the principle of accountability. Political actors will feel emboldened to push boundaries even further.

The breakdown of norms raises the stakes of every election, fostering an environment where losing becomes intolerable. Both sides justify extreme measures—legal, procedural, or outright illegal—to secure power and prevent their opponents from governing. This inflames polarization, invites political violence, and accelerates the decay of democratic governance. Eventually, politics transforms into an existential struggle for dominance, with each side seeking to entrench their hold on power permanently, often at an enormous cost to civil liberties, public trust, and the very idea of self-governance.

Much like athletes shaking hands after a game, democratic norms exist to uphold the integrity of competition and mutual respect among participants. Stewart is correct that respect for our constitutional system of government—and the unwritten rules that sustain it—is essential to safeguard the rights of the “losers” and prevent the oppression of the minority by the majority, which James Madison famously warned against. The fact that some politicians violate these norms does not justify abandoning them; instead, such breaches are reason to recommit to the very standards that sustain our republic and keep it resilient.