This gives Trump almost a free ride.
Moreover, any chance that there might be some rogue NeverTrump Republicans in the Senate who might come out against Trump has been largely discouraged by Trump's reasonable behavior, his conservative appointees, and to a large degree the immature behavior of his detractors on the left. Who would want to associate themselves with all the whining, and recounts, and sore loser actions from the Democrats? Certainly no Republican what wants on a decent committee or wants to be reelected.
Wouldn't the Democrats love to force Trump to nominate an entire cabinet of people who require at least eight Democrats to be on board? There would be no Jeff Sessions, there would be no Betsy DeVos, there would be no Tom Price, there would be no "controversial" conservatives.
The reality is that it's become very obvious with these particular nominations, that Trump does plan to basically "undo" as much of what President Obama tried to put into place as they can. Many of his nomination are 180 degrees from what "had" been in place.
- Jeff Sessions is said to want to enforce the laws. Especially laws on immigration. This works to undercut the current refusal of our Federal Government to enforce
somemanymostany immigration laws. - Betsy DeVos is all about alternative schools, and school choice. She is being steadfastly opposed by the Teachers unions and others who want to keep the status quo in place.
- Tom Price was the Republican who actually "wrote" the main alternative to Obamacare. He quite obviously is in place to guide a "repeal and replace" of Obamacare.
- Both Mark Pompeo and General Flynn were critics of most everything Obama and everything Clinton. Clearly they plans to move both the Military and the CIA towards a more aggressive poster in fighting terror and international threats. This would be a large shift from the current poster of standing aside and watching.
This quite obviously scares the shit out of the left (as well it should). The problem is that the Democrats put all of their efforts to get their left wing agenda "in place"... and put little or no effort in ensuring the success of said agenda. Implementing your agenda is not an accomplishment in and of itself. It has to be shown as successful and backed by a majority of voters, so that those voters continue to vote for people who will keep it in place. But the Democrats didn't ensure success, they didn't' garner success, and they didn't win the election.
The Democrats "could" have had many more safeguards to their agenda, had they been able to do more to control the leadership of the executive branch. As it stands, they gave up that right when they decided to alter the Senate rules to remove the ability to filibuster Cabinet appointees. Live by the sword, die by the sword.