If you live in a Blue State, I am asking you if you could please copy and paste my latest post which I have included below, and send it to your Governor! Go to your Governor’s website and locate the contact form and paste and send my proposal to “Preemptively Mobilize Their National Guard”. As a resident of your state, you have more “sway” than I do. Do it for yourself. Do it for your country. Please do it and thank you.
The Democrat Offensive Move:
Blue State Governors Should Preemptively Mobilize their National Guards
By Jody Gorran
1. The Legal and Constitutional High Ground: "State's Rights" as a Shield
This is the most powerful tool in the arsenal. A federalization of a state's National Guard against the governor's will is an extreme act, legally fraught and politically explosive. A blue state's first move should be to anchor its strategy in the principle of state sovereignty.
Play the "State's Rights" Card: Historically associated with conservative causes, the principle that the federal government should not commandeer state resources is a potent argument. A Democratic governor could frame resistance as:
"The President does not have the authority to unilaterally commandeer our state's military forces. Our National Guard answers to the people of [State], and we will deploy them appropriately to support local law enforcement, not to supplant them or create a military occupation. This is about the Constitution, not politics."
Establish Legal Precedent: Have the state Attorney General ready to immediately file for an injunction the moment any federalization order is hinted at. This moves the fight from cable news to the courtroom, where a rushed executive action would likely face serious legal challenges.
2. The Democrat Offensive Move: Preemptive, Targeted Mobilization
This is the key to undercutting Trump's narrative. Instead of waiting to react, the governor acts first, defining the mission and the message.
Define the Mission with Precision: The mobilization cannot look or feel like an "invasion." The governor must announce a specific, limited, and supportive mission that is politically palatable. For example:
"Operation Safe Transit": Deploying National Guard troops to subway and bus terminals to perform bag checks and provide a visible presence, freeing up officers to patrol streets and respond to calls.
"Task Force on Retail Theft": Using National Guard logistics and intelligence analysts to support a multi-jurisdictional task force targeting organized retail crime rings, not shoplifters.
"Support for Forensic Backlogs": Mobilizing Guard personnel with technical skills to help process evidence kits or digital data to clear backlogs in crime labs.
The Crucial Messaging: The governor's announcement must emphasize:
Support, Not Supplant: "These troops are here to support our professional law enforcement, not replace them."
Targeting the Root Cause: "We are targeting organized crime rings and violent offenders, not communities."
State Control: "This is a state-led operation, designed by our state officials for our state's unique needs."
This approach steals Trump's thunder. When he then threatens to send in the Guard, he looks redundant, heavy-handed, and disrespectful of a state-led solution that is already underway. He's playing catch-up.
3. Reframing the "Soft on Crime" Narrative: The "Smart on Crime" Offensive
Simply saying "crime is down" is a losing argument. The perception of disorder is often as powerful as the statistics. The new narrative must be action-oriented and solutions-focused.
Acknowledge the Problem, Then Own the Solution:
"People are right to be concerned about crime and disorder. That's why we are taking unprecedented, targeted action. While others talk about political stunts and military occupation, we are deploying real resources to tackle the real problems: illegal guns on our streets, organized retail theft rings, and ensuring our police have the support they need."
Contrast "Smart vs. Blunt": Frame Trump's approach as a lazy, blunt instrument and the state's approach as sophisticated and effective.
Their Plan: Military occupation, mass arrests, fear.
Our Plan: Targeted support, intelligence-led policing, freeing up officers, and investing in community-based solutions that prevent crime in the first place.
Use the B-Roll: The visual of National Guard troops professionally and calmly assisting police in a specific, logical capacity is powerful. It shows strength and competence without the dystopian overtones of federal troops kicking down doors.
4. Potential Pitfalls and How to Avoid Them
This strategy is high-risk and must be executed flawlessly.
Avoid the "Occupation" Visual: Troops must be in supportive roles. They should not be conducting patrols, making arrests, or acting as a standing army on street corners. This is the line between "support" and "martial law."
Coordinate with Local Leaders: The governor must have the buy-in from the mayor and police commissioner. A public dispute between a mayor and governor over tactics would be disastrous and prove Trump's point about Democratic disarray.
Set a Clear End Date: The mobilization should be presented as a "surge" with a defined objective and timeline (e.g., "90 days to disrupt these criminal networks and clear the forensic backlog"). This prevents it from looking like a permanent militarization.
Conclusion: The Democrat Strategic Summary
A blue state can absolutely stand up to this by:
Playing Offense, Not Defense: Seize the initiative by mobilizing the Guard first, on your own terms.
Wrapping the Strategy in the Constitution: Use "state's rights" as a legal and rhetorical shield against federal overreach.
Reframing the Narrative: Shift from "crime is down" to "we are taking smart, aggressive, and targeted action to make you safer."
Contrasting Competence with Chaos: Position the state's plan as precise and effective, while framing Trump's proposed approach as a chaotic, unconstitutional overreaction that would solve nothing.
By doing this, a blue state governor transforms from a defendant in Trump's political theater into a strong, proactive executive protecting their state from both crime and federal overreach. It turns a major vulnerability into a demonstration of strength and competence.
See what New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham is doing to preemptively use her state’s National Guard: https://www.cnn.com/2025/08/17/us/national-guard-new-mexico-deployment
Sounds like you want democratic governors to militarize and create police states. Great way to lose more votes! we do not need any federal troops in our cities regardless of who puts them there. I do not think this is a good idea. They should find ways to protect federal workers who are being de-unionized, create more housing and better education systems and make health care more affordable and accessible. Granted all difficult to do but they should do it on the state and local levels as best they can. This will lower crime and homelessness. Bringing in untrained military people with or without weapons is just asking for violence. Incarcerating people en masse has been proven to be ineffective. Draconian drug laws also do not work. Systemic problems in society are caused by bad systems, bad implementation, policies that only help the rich and racism. Trying to do what trump wants to do before he does it strikes me a a backwards way of thinking and implies you agree with at least some of his policies. If we start messing with national guard troops willy nilly we will just start a civil war. I’m not opposed to fighting below the belt and I’m in many instances tired of turning the other cheek and I agree we need to start fighting fire with fire more and more but this idea feels too confrontational and could escalate in a bad way. Just my opinion, I’m no expert!