She could not see the end of the crowd. Standing in the middle of Olvera Street, Priscilla Centeno (‘24) was surrounded by a sea of faces she had never met but somehow felt deeply connected to.  

Her eyes landed on a little girl clutching a cardboard sign that read, “I just want my dad back.” Suddenly, the protest was no longer just about policy or politics—it became personal, intimate, and devastating. 

“These people aren’t criminals,” Priscilla said. “They’re parents. Their children don’t even understand what a border is.” 

In February 2025, thousands filled the streets of Los Angeles, turning the city into the epicenter of growing protests against ICE raids and deportations ordered by President Donald Trump. From the steps of La Placita Olvera, the crowd stretched so far that its end disappeared down the boulevard. 

Priscilla, a Webb alum and second-generation Salvadoran American, joined the protest in L.A. For her, attending the protest was not only about showing support for her community but also about finding a way to manage the fear and frustration. 

“I heard about this protest, and it felt like the only way for me to put my emotions somewhere else instead of just sitting in my room and watching it all happen,” Priscilla said.  

The demonstration escalated as protesters spilled onto the 101 Freeway, halting traffic in all directions. Throughout the protest, participants carried signs with messages such as “Stop separating families” and “No human is illegal.”  

This is the America of 2025.  

Since his second inauguration on January 20th, President Donald Trump has aggressively expanded immigration enforcement policies. In his first two weeks of presidency, ICE conducted raids that led to about 8,200 arrests. Asylum-seeking families that were once promised protection are now shuffled into holding zones across Central America. The promise Trump made to his voters—executing the largest deportation sweep in American history—is becoming grim reality. 

“I had been feeling very overwhelmed and overcome with emotion,” Priscilla said. “When Trump was elected, a lot of people, specifically in the Latin community, were really scared and had the right to be really scared.” 

How did we get here? After years of incremental progress––after a moment when America seemed ready to move beyond its harshest policies––how are we back to tearing families apart? How did America become so comfortable, so quickly, with being this cruel again? 

America’s red wave swept through voting patterns in 2024. Latino (Hispanic) voters—long a reliably Democratic constituency—moved toward conservative candidates in unprecedented numbers. In the 2024 presidential election, exit polls suggested Donald Trump captured around 42–46% of the Latino vote, a record high for a Republican. These numbers were up dramatically from about 28% in 2016 and 32% in 2020. Several factors contributed to Trump’s unprecedented support among Latino voters in 2024, including economic concerns, cultural conservatism, and targeted outreach efforts (“Latinos for Trump”). The Latino electorate is diverse, and Trump’s messaging on jobs and inflation resonated with many. 

Other minority groups also showed modest shifts toward conservatives. Although Black Americans remain overwhelmingly Democratic, exit poll data indicates that the Democratic margin among Black voters narrowed slightly from the Obama era highs.  

Socioeconomic and educational splits also widened in ways that favored conservatism. Voters without a college degree—a group that spans all races—went heavily Republican: 56% of voters without college degrees supported Trump in 2024.  

A segment of minority working-class voters found his message resonant too—Trump’s vote share increased by 8 points among non-white voters without college degrees. For white working-class voters, Trump largely maintained his dominance, winning about 66% of whites without degrees in 2024.  

The combination of increased minority support and retention of the white working class allowed the conservative coalition to expand. Democrats still won most minority votes overall, but the margins shrank enough to give Republicans a winning edge in more areas. 

American politics, in turn, continues to be polarized, with conservatives and liberals more sharply divided than in past decades. The share of self-identified moderates has declined from about 43% in 1992 to 34% by 2024. Over the same period, ideological camps within each party solidified—a record 77% of Republicans now identify as conservative, while a record 55% of Democrats identify as liberal. With this ideological divide, the Republican Party’s base has moved further right, adopting more hardline conservative positions.  

“There are so many people on polar extremes, and not a lot of people who are willing to compromise,” Leia Albornoz (‘25) said. 

Widespread distrust in government and political elites set the stage for outsider candidates. Public trust in the federal government has hovered near historic lows—as of 2024, only about 22% of Americans say they trust Washington to do the right thing most of the time.  

This deep skepticism toward “politics as usual” made an unconventional candidate like Donald Trump appealing to many. 

It was against this backdrop that Trump positioned himself as a political outsider vowing to “drain the swamp” of corrupt, out-of-touch elites, tapping into voters’ frustration with both parties’ establishments.  

“First off, change is what people want,” Gavin Hamilton (‘27) said. 

His blunt, anti-elite rhetoric resonated with those who felt voiceless or betrayed by career politicians. The notion of a “silent majority” of traditional Americans being ignored by liberal elites has historical precedent—Richard Nixon invoked this idea in 1969, and the phrase reappeared in Ronald Reagan’s and Trump’s campaigns. Trump built on this legacy, becoming the face of far-right America, representing the “new right” in its most brutal and radical form. 

“I feel like the Republicans have a unified leader at the moment,” Gavin said. “They are entirely unified behind Trump. But the Democrats don’t have that—they are running almost an older form of politics, whereas the Republicans are pressing a new form of politics, almost a kingship, but pressing old theologies.”  

The rise of far-right politics in recent years can be partly understood as an outcome of a cultural backlash against progressive social movements and what some saw as the excesses of “woke” culture. Many Americans grew wary of the perceived censorship of speech and thought in media, academia, and online platforms.  

“I think [DEI became a political flashpoint] because of our lack of communication and ability to talk across differences and sit down instead of canceling each other,” said John Choi, Director of Culture and Community. 

There was a pervasive sense that people could be publicly shamed or lose their jobs for a single mistaken comment. Surveys found that 71% of Americans believe political correctness silences important discussions and 58% feel the current climate prevents them from saying things they believe.  

“In general, we’ve seen conservative perspectives not being really shared very openly in a lot of independent schools, even though they do exist,” Mr. Choi said. 

This atmosphere of enforced sensitivity (“wokeness” in conservative terms) became a prime target for conservative politicians. They tapped into public resentment by positioning themselves as defenders of free speech and “common sense” against an overzealous progressive culture.  

Donald Trump embodied this stance. He railed against political correctness and cancel culture in speeches, framing them as threats to American values. 

“We want free and open debate, not speech codes and cancel culture,” said Donald Trump at South Dakota’s 2020 Mount Rushmore Fireworks Celebration. 

By leading an “anti-wokeness” campaign, Trump and conservatives attracted voters who felt alienated by rapidly changing cultural norms and language. The result was a right-wing mobilization, with more moderate Americans drawn into the conservative camp. 

The primary aims of progressive movements and Democratic initiatives throughout the early 2020s—from fighting racism and promoting social justice to expanding diversity programs and implementing pandemic restrictions—got overshadowed in the political arena by a growing feeling among many voters that the pendulum had swung too far.  

“Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) has become sort of associated—wrongly—with a political agenda in a certain political group, and I think that’s suffered because of that,” Mr. Choi said. “There has been so much focus on the language and the agendas behind the language rather than ultimately what’s the most important thing, which is that everybody feels that they have a place in a community.” 

In fact, the widespread anger at perceived “woke” changes helped propel Trump’s comeback—Trump came to represent society’s reaction to the excesses of the left ideas in the preceding era. 

To his voters, Trump—with all his flaws—represented a forceful corrective swing of the pendulum. The dynamic worked like this: as progressive voices grew louder and leftward policy changes gained visibility (on race, gender, climate, etc.), a growing number of Americans yearned for an antidote, someone who would push back and restore what they considered “normalcy” or traditional values. 

Identity politics became a central theme in debates over cultural change, too. While identity politics on the left focused on addressing historical inequalities experienced by marginalized groups, conservative leaders like Donald Trump tapped into a form of white identity politics, framing demographic shifts and progressive values as a threat to traditional American life. 

No political shift happens in a vacuum. By 2024, voters had experienced not only four years of Trump but also four years of a Democratic administration under Biden.  

“Biden did a lot in the last four years, but there could have been a lot more initiatives and bills passed,” Leia said. 

As much as the Republicans did to attract voters, the Democrats’ own actions (and inactions) also contributed to the conservative resurgence. By 2025, the Democratic Party was grappling with internal challenges, from stagnant leadership to weak messaging. 

After winning the White House and Congress in 2020, Democrats had a mandate to enact change. They did pass significant legislation (a COVID relief package, a bipartisan infrastructure bill, climate and healthcare investments via the Inflation Reduction Act), but many voters were dissatisfied with their impact. Other signature Democratic promises stalled altogether.  

“It’s just hard to stand with what [the Democratic Party] does sometimes because I don’t really see much getting done,” Leia said. 

This created a narrative (also pushed by the GOP) that Democrats “talk big but do little.” By 2024, even Democratic-leaning voters were frustrated that problems like student debt, affordable housing, and climate change were not being solved fast enough. In short, there was a visible difference between Democratic rhetoric and results, which conservatives exploited. 

“I think that it was an absolute failure of the Democratic Party to get Trump to even have the possibility of getting reelected,” Leia said. “The fact that he won the way that he won is a disgrace to what the Democratic Party has been working on for the past four years.”   

After his own election defeat in 2020, Trump managed to frame Biden’s presidency years as proof of what happens when the left is in charge: economic troubles, border chaos, and global embarrassment.  

“We now have this $34 trillion debt ceiling because we’ve been helping others more than we’ve been able to help ourselves, and we are seeing the effects of that today,” Gavin said. “I think that’s also the reason why the right has gained steam—we have dug ourselves a hole, and we’re looking for a way out.” 

Each of those issues was exaggerated in Trump’s telling, but his narrative resonated with voters who had similar perceptions. Thus, even some who were skeptical of Trump personally in 2016 or 2020 came around to supporting him in 2024 as a reaction to disappointment with the Democrats. 

The Democratic Party’s messaging also struggled to strike a chord with crucial segments of the electorate. Many democratic leaders became hyper-fixated on climate legislation, gender identity debates, or diversity programs—important matters, but arguably abstract compared to kitchen-table concerns.  

“[Democrats] are trying to be progressive and do new things, but it’s very difficult if you don’t have a vision to back it up,” Gavin said. 

Feasible issues like rising living costs, crime, and affordable housing often seemed sidelined by national Democrats in favor of abstract discussions of equity. With this gap between messaging and lived experience, many voters who might have supported Democrats in the past no longer felt the party was delivering real improvements in their lives.  

“Democrats often lose sight of what’s really important in times of need,” Leia said. 

In contrast, Trump’s blunt, brash manner—breaking political norms and “telling it like it is”—convinced supporters that he was authentic and on their side.  

His “Kamala is for they/them, President Trump is for you” campaign especially resonated with voters who felt Democrats were prioritizing abstract debates over everyday problems, as it cast Harris’s stance on taxpayer-funded gender-affirming surgeries for inmates against Trump’s focus on everyday concerns, 

“Trump is so confident in his values and stances; they may be really extremist, at times just wrong and full of prejudice, but it’s a stance, and that’s something that people can get behind,” Leia said. 

Many supporters appreciated that he was willing to say things they felt other leaders would not. His anti-elitist, anti-establishment posture is a core element of populism—casting the “ordinary people” against a corrupt elite—and Trump used that sentiment all the way to the White House.  

“In the most basic way, Trump has shifted [the Republican Party] towards a far more populist, American-centric perspective,” said Stefanie Graefe, humanities department faculty. 

It’s important to note that Donald Trump’s populist strategy also leveraged xenophobic rhetoric to galvanize support, particularly focusing on anti-immigrant sentiments. He used dehumanizing language, fearmongering and attributing societal issues to immigrant populations.  

“Trump isn’t really known for giving background and information and context,” Priscilla said. “It’s strictly fear-mongering and xenophobia, and it’s very effective.” 

Donald Trump has also used hatred as a populist tactic. He united his supporters through shared hostility toward immigrants, creating an “us vs. them” narrative that strengthens group identity through fear and resentment. This strategy rallies people not just around policies, but around common “enemies”. 

“What Trump does best is that he takes the hate out of people, and that causes a lot of division,” Leia said. “When you take the hate out of people, there’s no willingness to understand, no willingness to compromise and fully empathize with the way that other people do things.” 

In essence, Trump managed to mix populist themes with standard Republican policy objectives—and this combination helped him connect with conservative voters.  

Trump had a grasp of cultural symbolism: he frequently spoke about respecting the flag, standing for the national anthem, supporting the troops and police, and defending gun rights and religious freedoms. Such themes have historically been popular in rural communities where institutions like the church and the military are at the core.  

Thus, Trump knew his electoral base and said what they wanted to hear.  

Trump also masterfully used social media to speak directly to people, bypassing traditional media filters. His constant presence in the news cycle meant his talking points (from building the wall to criticizing NFL players kneeling) dominated public debate. 

It is important to note that beyond rhetoric, many conservatives supported Trump for substantive policy reasons.  

Evangelical Christians, for example, overwhelmingly backed Trump in 2016 and 2020 because he promised to champion pro-life policies and religious liberty. He fulfilled a core campaign promise by appointing three conservative justices to the Supreme Court, which helped achieve overturning Roe v. Wade in 2022.  

Business owners appreciated his major tax cut package in 2017. Gun rights advocates valued his support of the Second Amendment. Traditional GOP voters who might have been skeptical of Trump’s style were ultimately won over by these tangible conservative accomplishments.  

But this messaging, while effective in rallying support, came with alarming consequences. The same boldness that drew voters to Trump also underpins the extreme policies now defining his second term. What once felt like strong leadership has evolved into a threat to the future of the country itself. 

An argument that Trump’s movement is better than Democrats’ stagnation and that Trump is a natural compensation for years of historical indecisiveness and inaction––ceases to be convincing once we familiarize ourselves with the vast scope of Trump’s plans. Under Trump’s leadership, the U.S. is actively rolling back rights, stoking anti-LGBTQ+ policies, defunding diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, and embracing authoritarian governance tactics. 

“What happened to human decency?” Leia said. “I feel like that’s a sentiment a lot of people will relate to now.”  

Donald Trump’s second inauguration in January 2025 started a wave of new conservative policies across the U.S. government. As expected, Trump set daily deportation quotas for ICE offices, disabled the CBP One app, a tool previously used to schedule asylum appointments, and even attempted to end birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents.  

“Right now, you can go to an ICE facility just for simply being undocumented––it doesn’t mean that you’ve committed any other crime other than simply being here,” Priscilla said. 

The administration also pressured Central American countries, including Panama and Costa Rica, to accept migrants deported from the United States, making these nations hold areas for immigrants who cannot be deported directly to their countries of origin. 

“Trump has kept up with a more recent tradition of using executive orders to bypass the congressional system, but it seems to be far more egregious than it used to be,” Ms. Graefe said. 

A centerpiece of Trump’s 2024 campaign was a pledge to carry out the largest domestic deportation operation in American history. Since returning to office, he has directed ICE to ramp up arrests of undocumented immigrants nationwide. 

“Many people genuinely think that Trump is only attacking rapists, murderers, and drug lords,” Priscilla said. “There’s a lack of awareness of people who don’t understand that the Trump administration has defined anyone crossing the border without legal documentation to be a criminal.” 

Despite Trump’s aggressive immigration agenda, deportation numbers have lagged behind expectations—but only for now. This slowdown is largely due to bureaucratic restructuring within ICE, not a lack of effort. As leadership changes take effect and enforcement mechanisms ramp up, deportation numbers are expected to climb. 

Trump’s 2025 agenda has aggressively advanced conservative positions on domestic social issues, from gender and LGBTQ+ policies to education, race, and abortion. One of his early moves was an executive order on “Defending Women from Gender Ideology,” which legally redefined gender in federal policy as strictly binary and based solely on immutable biological sex assigned at birth. This directive instructs all federal agencies to interpret “sex” as either male or female only, rolling back recognition of transgender and non-binary identities in the federal government. 

“The anti-LGBTQ+ legislation and the Trump administration has put a big emphasis on questioning whether or not queer identity is valid,” Leia said. “It’s really disheartening to see this questioning of identity, even though it’s so blatant and real, and there’s a very real population, very real statistics. And the administration just chooses to ignore it.” 

Trump has signed an executive order directing federal agencies to end all DEI initiatives. This order mandated the cessation of “equity-related” grants and contracts across the federal government. The administration warned that institutions failing to comply could face potential loss of federal funding. 

The return of MAGA to the White House has brought a shift in U.S. foreign policy priorities. On day one, he withdrew the United States from the Paris Climate Accord (again) and halted all remaining U.S. obligations under global climate pacts.  

Trump appointed Elon Musk to lead the newly established Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), tasking him with streamlining federal operations. So far, Musk’s aggressive cost-cutting measures have led to significant reductions in the federal workforce, inevitably raising concerns about the impact on the country’s public services.  

Trump also issued an order to pull the U.S. out of the World Health Organization (WHO), criticizing the WHO’s handling of COVID-19. Trump also signed Executive Order 14169, titled “Reevaluating and Realigning United States Foreign Aid,” initiating a 90-day pause on all U.S. foreign development assistance programs to conduct a comprehensive review. 

Donald Trump’s return to power is not just a setback for progressive policies—it is a catastrophe for global stability, democracy, and even America’s own future.  

“Instead of debating how we run this country, we are debating people’s lives now,” Leia said. “We are talking about whether people deserve to be in this country or not, or alive or not, or receive healthcare or not.” 

The U.S. used to be the progressive power that people looked up to; now, it is rapidly becoming a reactionary mess where book bans, transphobia, and conspiracy theories are shaping policy. 

“We need a politician who’s willing to look past party differences and be able to compromise,” Gavin said. “We need a flexible president who can unify our country and ultimately the world.” 

Trump’s nationalist, short-sighted, ego-driven agenda threatens to unravel decades of diplomatic progress, weaken U.S. leadership on the world stage, and leave the country more isolated, economically vulnerable, and morally bankrupt than ever before. 

The entire governing philosophy of Trump’s presidency is based on the idea that America can thrive by militarily, diplomatically, and economically walling itself off from the rest of the world. 

“In terms of foreign policy, his approach is something we haven’t seen before for at least 50 to 60 years,” Ms. Graefe said. “Particularly, more isolationist and—as his philosophy suggests—America First, as he would brand it.” 

In reality, his approach is nothing more than a toddler’s temper tantrum dressed up as foreign policy.  

His hostility toward alliances like NATO, his open disdain for the European Union, and his eagerness to cut off USAID move America away from global leadership. This is not just a betrayal of America’s allies (especially Ukraine)—it is a direct invitation for authoritarian regimes like Russia and China to fill the void. 

“America First was about taking care of ourselves before we can take care of the rest of the world,” Gavin said. “At the same time, Trump never said anything about shredding our relationships with everywhere else.” 

What Trump and his nationalist supporters do not understand is that if the European Union is weakened, the West as a whole is weakened, making it easier for countries like Russia and China to exert influence. Trump’s nationalist idea—a world where America is an isolated empire that dictates terms to everyone else—is not just unrealistic; it is’s suicidal for U.S. foreign policy. 

Trump’s open hostility toward the European Union—an institution primarily created to ensure peace and stability in Europe—is a clear indicator of how little he knows about international politics. While past presidents worked to strengthen ties with Europe, recognizing the EU as a crucial economic and security partner, Trump treats it as an enemy simply because it doesn’t bow to his every whim. 

At the same time, by demonstrating his cozy relationship with Vladimir Putin, cutting off aid and pressuring NATO allies to scale back their support to Ukraine too, Trump is actively enabling Russia’s expansionism, ignoring war crimes, and signaling to every U.S. ally that America can no longer be trusted.  

Under Biden, the U.S. led efforts to supply Ukraine with weapons and aid, ensuring that a sovereign democracy could defend itself from an authoritarian invasion. Trump, meanwhile, could not be prouder of his idea to force Ukraine into a peace deal that would hand Putin everything he wants, all while gloating about how little he cares for the lives of Ukrainians. 

Trump’s policy on Ukraine is a treason to the very idea of American leadership. Eventually, if the U.S. fails to defend its allies, trust in its support for regions like Taiwan, Poland, the Baltics, and other vulnerable areas will completely erode. 

While the U.S. was once “the global policeman” shaping the world order through smart diplomacy and aid, Trump’s America is walking away from that role, throwing away decades of investment in democracy and peace around the world. 

Under Trump, America is no longer the world’s progressive leader—it is a paranoid, regressive, self-destructive shell of what was formerly the world’s greatest country. When America abandons its role as a stabilizing force, the world becomes a far more dangerous place too—with authoritarians like Putin and Xi Jinping taking advantage of America’s ignorance. How much irreversible damage will Trump do before people realize it is too late?