Politics by Any Means
By Sean Evans, Chair and Professor of Political Science
Oct 4, 2025 -
Once upon a time, elections decided who would govern. The winning party organized the government and pushed its agenda. The losing party recognized the electoral mandate but used legislative and media tactics to force compromises. The result was policies accepted by most Americans.
Today, the two parties are so far apart that they cannot risk elections deciding policy. Instead, Benjamin Ginsberg’s Politics by Any Means argues that parties use weaponized bureaucracies, lawfare, and violence by proxy to achieve their goals.
Over the past 50 years, we have shifted from two centrist parties to two ideologically divided parties, also split by race, economics, education, and culture. These stark differences make each party fearful of the other gaining power, raising the stakes of politics. Both rely on different media sources, creating echo chambers that idolize their side and demonize the opposition. Gradually, partisans begin viewing their opponents as extremists, then enemies, and eventually threats. This insular mindset justifies radical political actions.
The basis for many of these radical actions is Watergate, which created RIP politics (revelations, investigations, and prosecutions). In 1972, Richard Nixon feared Democratic “dirty tricks,” leading to the “plumbers” breaking into Democratic headquarters at Watergate. The Washington Post uncovered the break-in and broke new stories using information from “Deep Throat,” an FBI assistant director. Democrats formed the Senate Watergate Committee, and eventually, a special prosecutor was appointed, which contributed to Nixon’s resignation.
The RIP strategy was later used against Ronald Reagan in the Iran-Contra Affair, Bill Clinton in the Whitewater and Monica Lewinsky investigations, and Donald Trump in the Russian collusion investigation.
The evolution of these investigations suggests the modern-day goal of RIP is not justice. It is ending the political careers of opponents and delegitimizing them as corrupt.
Now, RIP has evolved into lawfare, which uses legal means to harm political opponents. Post-January 6th, Democrats labeled Trump an insurrectionist, launched Congressional investigations, pressured Biden’s Attorney General to appoint a special counsel who would indict him, and sought to remove him from the ballot. Prosecutors in New York and Atlanta also launched questionable prosecutions to mobilize Democratic voters and disqualify him among Independents.
Trump is now moving beyond setting priorities for the Justice Department to demand that they indict his political opponents. He dismissed one U.S. Attorney for not indicting James Comey, replaced him with someone who did, has pressured the Department of Justice to target other foes like former National Security Advisor John Bolton, and has accused former Presidents Obama and Biden of being guilty of crimes.
Regarding weaponized bureaucracies, the Obama-era IRS targeted conservative nonprofits, Operation Chokehold sought to restrict loans to certain groups like gun dealers, and the FBI wiretapped Trump campaign members in 2016 and pressured social media to silence unfavorable reports about Joe Biden in 2020.
Currently, Bill Pulte, Trump’s housing finance chief, is investigating figures such as Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, Senator Adam Schiff (D-CA), and New York Attorney General Letitia James for potential mortgage fraud. Trump is also providing faster disaster aid to red states, firing bureaucrats, and eliminating or emasculating liberal agencies. Furthermore, state attorneys general file lawsuits to obstruct major political initiatives of presidents of opposing parties.
Finally, politicians from both parties fuel violence by demonizing opponents—calling them fascists, threats to democracy, election stealers, evil, or radicals. These labels inspired Antifa-inspired riots in Trump’s first term and the January 6th Capitol invasion. Unfortunately, individuals with mental illness and grievances are radicalized by these comments in dark holes of the internet to commit acts of violence, like the recent assassination of Charlie Kirk.
Many problems plague this style of politics. It undermines democracy by extending political conflict beyond elections, where citizens have limited influence. It undermines trust in government and the rule of law when prosecutions seem politically motivated. Such prosecutions intimidate opponents, suppress debate, and increase the costs of political criticism. Violent rhetoric and the failure to condemn violence erode democratic norms. Finally, this climate discourages good people from running for office or engaging in civic life.
“Politics by any means” is a politics without guardrails that will slowly descend into illiberalism. If we don’t step back from this style of politics, R.I.P., or “rest in peace,” might be the epithet of our constitutional government.