To Save the Republic, Pledge Now to Register as a Republican Ahead of the Midterms? I asked Grok.

It's vital to test ideas in unique moments in history. What are yours?

As you’ve noticed if you subscribe, I’ve shifted Sustain What from a prime focus on climate and sustainability questions to addressing how to sustain a functioning democracy. You can’t have the first without the second. With that in mind…

Given the fear-driven paralysis of Republican lawmakers cowed by Trump, what do we do besides march and communicate? I propose one action below, along with Grok’s valuable response.

I shot this weird photo out on the Hudson River near West Point in 2021. We’re not sunk yet (video is at the bottom of the post)

The fear is real. You may have heard Alaska’s Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski tell a crowd this a few days ago (via Anchorage Daily News):

“We are all afraid….. [long pause] ….It’s quite a statement. But we are in a time and a place where I certainly have not been here before. And I’ll tell ya, I’m oftentimes very anxious myself about using my voice, because retaliation is real. And that’s not right.”

You may have read David Brooks’s compelling call for “a comprehensive national civic uprising”:

It’s time for a comprehensive national civic uprising. It’s time for Americans in universities, law, business, nonprofits and the scientific community, and civil servants and beyond to form one coordinated mass movement. Trump is about power. The only way he’s going to be stopped is if he’s confronted by some movement that possesses rival power.

Peoples throughout history have done exactly this when confronted by an authoritarian assault. In their book, “Why Civil Resistance Works,” Erica Chenoweth and Maria J. Stephan looked at hundreds of nonviolent uprisings. These movements used many different tools at their disposal — lawsuits, mass rallies, strikes, work slowdowns, boycotts and other forms of noncooperation and resistance.

These movements began small and built up. They developed clear messages that appealed to a variety of groups. They shifted the narrative so the authoritarians were no longer on permanent offense. Sometimes they used nonviolent means to provoke the regime into taking violent action, which shocks the nation, undercuts the regime’s authority and further strengthens the movement. (Think of the civil rights movement at Selma.) Right now, Trumpism is dividing civil society; if done right, the civic uprising can begin to divide the forces of Trumpism.

If you haven’t watched it, my discussion with a team tracking authoritarian trends and reversals provides vital related insights:

Read and watch

But beyond building a wide anti-authoritatiran narrative, realistically, what can sane Americans do to stop the current slide into a destructive mix of kleptocracy and autocracy? Protest is surely one, and Saturday April 19 is round two of the #50501 #handsoff demonstrations. But if the message is partisan, as Brooks cautions (specifically pointing to the Sanders/AOC road show), that can backfire.

Register Republican?

So what can reduce the fear factor, particularly fears of Republican lawmakers deeply intimidated by Trump and Elon Musk’s threats of midterm primary assaults?

This morning, I explored this while walking dogs with our lifelong Mainer neighbor, an affable but infuriated retired tire dealer.

Our dogs and our neighbor’s lab on a warmer day

Trying to be systematic, I started with the premise that the only path to saving the Republic is one that leads to impeachment of President Trump by the Republican-controlled Congress (and a hope that JD Vance will craftily shape-shift back to being a MAGA critic after that).

That’s a heavy lift indeed, given the almost complete intimidation of federal lawmakers by the threat Murkowski described - specifically fear of MAGA primary challenges funded by Elon Musk and other extremists.

So, I mused, the only way to stem that fear restraining current Republican moderates in Congress from criticizing Trump is to insulate them from MAGA-driven primary defeats.

One way to drive that shift that came to mind would be for a lot of Democrats to pledge now that they are going to register as Republicans well before the 2026 midterms, not in a sneaky way, but loudly pledging to do so as part of the current wave of resistance to Trumpism.

In key districts, maybe this could embolden fearful lawmakers. Look, it’s worth mulling, right? What other strategies have you come up with or found compelling? I’ve opened comments to all subscribers.

What does Grok say about this?

To test my notion, I reached out to Elon Musk’s Grok 3, and I’ve got to say, the resulting conversation made me more convinced than ever that it’s a valuable tool. Here it is on X/Twitter and pasted:

Andy

To prevent GOP members of congress from being intimidated by Maga primary challenges. Should Democrats register Republican to vote in GOP primaries and support centrist candidates?

Grok

Democrats registering as Republicans to vote in GOP primaries could theoretically dilute MAGA influence by boosting centrist candidates, but it’s a risky and ethically murky strategy. Primaries are often low-turnout, so a coordinated effort might sway results in some districts. Data from the 2022 midterms shows GOP primary turnout averaged around 20-30% of registered voters, meaning a small, organized bloc could have outsized impact. However, this assumes Democrats can mobilize enough people without tipping off GOP voters, who might counter-mobilize.

Downsides include legal risks—some states have strict party affiliation rules, and misrepresenting party loyalty could violate election laws. It also risks alienating moderate GOP voters if discovered, potentially hardening MAGA support. Plus, it’s a short-term tactic that doesn’t address the deeper polarization driving MAGA’s influence. X posts from political operatives suggest this idea floats around but lacks traction due to logistical hurdles, with some calling it “clever but impractical” and others warning it could backfire by energizing the GOP base.

A better approach might be Democrats focusing on their own primaries to field strong, broadly appealing candidates and building coalitions with centrists post-primary. This avoids ethical issues and fosters genuine cross-party dialogue. What do you think—could this work, or is it too much of a long shot?

Andy

Your proposed alternative, having Democrats focus on their own primaries, wouldn’t lead to the kind of Republican shift necessary to boost odds of impeachment, which is currently the only remedy to end this MAGA presidency.

You’re right that Democrats focusing on their own primaries doesn’t directly shift the GOP toward centrists who might support impeachment. To address the goal of boosting impeachment odds by countering MAGA influence in GOP primaries, Democrats registering as Republicans could, in theory, help. In open or semi-open primary states (e.g., Wisconsin, Michigan), where voters can choose either party’s ballot, this is legally feasible. In 2022, about 15% of GOP primary voters in key swing states were independents or crossover voters, per exit polls, showing some precedent for outside influence. Supporting centrist GOP candidates less loyal to a MAGA president could increase the pool of House Republicans open to impeachment—currently, only a handful of GOP reps (e.g., those in swing districts) might even consider it, based on their voting records.

However, the strategy hinges on execution. MAGA voters are highly motivated, often turning out at 2-3 times the rate of moderates in GOP primaries. Democrats would need precise targeting, picking districts with weak MAGA candidates and strong centrists, plus enough crossover voters to tip the scales—potentially 5-10% of the primary electorate. X chatter from GOP strategists suggests they’re hyper-vigilant about “RINO hunting,” so any whiff of Democratic meddling could galvanize MAGA turnout or lead to legal challenges in states with strict party rules (e.g., closed primaries like Florida or Pennsylvania).

The bigger issue is impeachment math. Even with a few more centrist GOP reps, you’d need 218 House votes and 67 Senate votes. Current House composition (as of April 2025) is roughly 220-215 GOP, and the Senate is 53-47 GOP. Flipping enough GOP votes for impeachment requires a seismic shift—likely 20+ House Republicans and 15+ Senators, assuming all Democrats align. Historical data (e.g., Nixon’s era) shows impeachment support grows only with overwhelming public pressure (70%+ approval for removal) or undeniable evidence of crimes. X posts from political analysts suggest public opinion on impeachment is stuck at 45-50%, far short of that threshold.

Ethically, this crossover tactic could also erode trust in elections if exposed, potentially entrenching MAGA’s narrative of a “rigged system.” A less fraught alternative might be Democrats amplifying centrist GOP voices through coalitions or public campaigns, indirectly pressuring MAGA from within the GOP’s own ecosystem. For example, funding ads that highlight GOP dissenters could embolden anti-MAGA factions without direct voter manipulation. What’s your take—could crossover voting realistically move the needle enough, or is impeachment a pipe dream without a bigger catalyst?

Andy

You’ve laid out a compelling argument for a less fraught alternative. And obviously working to boost broad public support for impeachment is a key need as well. Thanks.

Grok

Glad I could help clarify the options. Boosting public support for impeachment is definitely critical to shift the political math. If you want to dig deeper into strategies for building that broader support or other ways to pressure MAGA from the outside, just let me know!

Let me know what you think!

These days I keep thinking back to this bizarre scene I recorded on the Hudson River in 2021 (the flag was planted on a shoal). We’re not underwater yet, but we’re getting there.

I have to add a dose of muted optimism via

James Fallows

, who wrote this today:

The tide turns

We’re now nearly three months in. Trump himself keeps moving as quickly and spasmodically as ever. But history appears to be speeding up on the other side as well:

-It was barely two weeks ago, on March 31, that Cory Booker began his 25-hour marathon on the Senate floor, showing Democrats how it might look to shake things up and do more than express “concern” about the Trump onslaught.

-It was just a day later, on April 1 even as Booker was still talking, that voters in Wisconsin gave their landslide win to Susan Crawford in the state supreme-court race.

-And just the day after that, on April 2, when Trump declared his sweeping “Liberation Day” tariffs on much of the world.

-And just the day after that, on April 3, when world financial markets began their historic plunge, to be interrupted only as Trump has backpedaled on his tariff claims.

-Not even two weeks have passed since millions of people turned out, on April 5, in all 50 states and DC to protest the Trump-Musk demolition of the government.

-It was just one week ago, on April 10, that the Supreme Court ruled 9-0 against Trump-team claims in the Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia deportation case. All nine of them—Even Alito! Even Thomas!—decreed that the Trump team needed to “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s return to the US from the Abu Ghraib-style captivity in El Salvador.

-It was only three days ago, on April 14, that the nation’s oldest and richest university said “Hell, no!” to demands that it become a Trump/Doge vassal state.

-And just yesterday, April 16, a US Senator flew to El Salvador to see his wrongly imprisoned constituent. Then, after initial stonewalling by the Trumpite regime in El Salvador, Senator Chris Van Hollen succeeded in meeting Abrego Garcia today, April 17.

Which momentum is stronger and swifter? The assault on institutions? Or their defense? We can’t know. But before the day ends (here in California), and in the spirit of real-time resistance chronicles, here are a few highly dissimilar developments that I’ll itemize rather than fully explain.

What they have in common is people and institutions understanding the value of banding together, rather than waiting to be picked off one-by-one. And their combination of high principle and nitty-gritting practicality.

Maybe we’ll look back on these as signs. For now, they’re today’s list.