President Donald Trump engaged in a “blitzkrieg” on the U.S. since his second term started, writes Chauncey DeVega in Salon. It was remarkably effective in changing the nation’s institutions, rule of law and political culture, DeVega states.
But a year later, things have changed and the picture is more complicated.
“Trump has failed to fully consolidate power,” DeVega writes. “With his popularity at an historic low for a president at this point in his term, his unfitness for office is undeniable to all but the most diehard members of the MAGA personality cult.”
That plunge in popularity for the Trump agenda has been a “grossly underreported story,” DeVega writes. That may be because it’s happening in places that are less in the media spotlight of the coasts.
Recent research backs that contention.
DeVega cites Erica Chenoweth, director of the Nonviolent Action Lab at Harvard University’s Kennedy School. That institute claims protest participation in counties that voted for Trump has increased by 60%.
Since those counties are more rural and less populated, the overall numbers are still small. Drawing on data from 2025, she found that, on average, 65 people per 10,000 total have engaged in anti-Trump protests.
But the geographic data is compelling. “Chenoweth’s data shows a notable rise in protests in deep red areas — in some cases, organizers reported, the first anti-Trump events their towns and communities had ever seen,” DeVega writes. Chenoweth likened it to the shift of the Black Lives Matter protests in October 2025, which she said in an Oct. 2025 interview “at the time were the largetand broadest mass mobilization in U.S. history.”
The conclusion Chenowrth draws on this new red state growth in Trump protests: “We do think we’re seeing a shift in the willingness of people in pro-Trump areas in the country to participate in a broader mass movement emerging in opposition to many of his administration’s policies.”
Further research shows anti-Trump momentum in West Virginia, North Carolina and Texas, among other rural areas, DeVega notes. A particular sore point in those areas is the construction of large warehouses to house undocumented immigrants and others. Most of the buildings would be constructed in rural areas.
“Despite the economic argument for their presence, local organizing against them is real and growing,” DeVega writes. “The motivations are mixed. Most notably, there is principled opposition to the Trump administration’s cruelty, and there’s also the “not-in-my-backyard” resistance. But whatever its motivations, the pushback is very real.”
Growing the anti-Trump movement in the rural and red state areas is a key if Democrats hope to capitalize, DeVega writes. “Chenoweth’s research suggests that sustained protests by just 3.5% of the population can produce serious political change.”
That’s enough to swing a tight race. DeVega concludes that the emerging evidence shows that Trumpism isn’t forever. Instead, “The evidence emerging from Trumplandia tells a very different story.”
