Blue Bloods and real life current US politics; how does the Reagan family view Trump?

Over the last several weeks I became reacquainted with this TV show due to it being on in the background, often while doing something else. (It turns out some household chores do not require a great deal of focus so the background can become more than background.) It became almost real to me – as if the family could exist in real life, and once I even dreamed of witnessing one of those Sunday family meals. (Yes, I genuinely woke up remembering an exchange with entirely fictional characters; a really realistic political discussion with fictional characters!)

But then I gave it way too much thought and tried to determine how the different characters of this very established New York family would view the 45th president of the United States. While the family is often monolithic in approach to matters of criminality, a good deal of the drama is manufactured by different characters focusing on different aspects of law and of enforcement. In addition, in today’s polarized zeitgeist, if a show is going tackle an issue so complex, it might be a good idea to take all the possible views in order to retain as many viewers as possible. The last consideration I thought was significant is that this group of people have co-existed with Trump in New York for a long time before he was in, then out of office.

I can see three possible realities:

  • They are comprised of conservative law enforcement family members and except for possibly a married into the family (Eddie) universally behind Trump. Not quite flag waving MAGAs, but hold the ship, support the cause, Oath- Flag- and Country supporters with wrinkled noses.
  • They know he was a slimy criminal when he lived in the city and have never liked or supported him. While Ruby Red Republicans in almost all matters- they find Trump repulsive and never supported him. In fact they are shocked anyone was crazy enough to vote for him in even a primary election let alone a general election.
  • A bitter divide that only the love of a good family can tolerate. Henry has become a FOX News Republican who doesn’t care if Trump IS a criminal. He is, by God, our leader and we must support him in all . . . Erin is a typical progressive who sees the evil Trump does (routinely) and despises him (and might know things through the DAs office to support her views). Danny flops every other day sometimes admiring his practical way of addressing problems- but sometimes incensed by the blatant criminality. Jamie sees it as an indictment of our entire system where the systems and guardrails are insufficient and is most concerned with correcting the system itself so it can survive the next nefarious White House occupant. He is entirely indifferent to Trump now that he is out of office. But Frank - - - Francis Xavier is instinctively and institutionally right in all moral matters and has an ability to see things beyond the mortal coil. (He will not quite often but sometimes, take a stand that is inexplicable at the beginning of an episode-- but which proves to be right and moral and correct and even wise by the time the episode ends.) While he is occasionally wrong in small or procedural matters, he always gets the big moral conundrums one-hundred percent correct. In this last scenario, Frank has to hate Trump personally, but perhaps respects the office which gives him a perfect opportunity for his best move – a contemplative scowl. (The this is vexing and complicated look which he does so very well.)

To make this as true to the show and the characters as possible, here is the set-up:
Nicky Reagan-Boyle is serious enough with a guy to bring him to Sunday dinner. During the course of the meal, or while helping to clear dishes before dessert, he mentions that Trump is the most evil man alive and should be in prison. The entire room goes silent, stops what they are doing and turns toward him - - - -

What happens next? I am sure the much better writers and story tellers here can come up with better stuff than my thoughts above.

There’s no conflict if everyone either likes or hates Trump, so why both either making an episode about it. Your third scenario is the only one worth exploring.

It would not be that hard to manufacture some conflict.
Let’s say the new boyfriend hates Trump, but the family universally supports him. There are harsh words spoken and at least one of the family puts their finger in the boys face and tells him he is full of it. The boy excuses himself and Nicky is upset with the rest of the family for not seeing past this one flaw-- that she adores [strike through] supports Trump also, but she liked that boy. She tells them they were not even polite to her guest and they should be ashamed of themselves.

Mother Erin is conflicted, she wants to support her daughter, but . . . Uncle Jamie has an experience in the street and realizes not everything is as black and white as it seems at Sunday dinner. Henry is even more stubborn than usual and influences many to remain supporters of Trump

Nicky misses a Sunday dinner, Frank asks her to come by the office. Much exposition happens as opposing views are articulated with both sides admitting there is room for other views.

Jamie and Eddie decide to support Nicky and have a meal with her and the boyfriend. He is able to make them think about new possibilities. They reluctantly consider his view in a non-personal way and have to admit to some facts.

Even Anthony gets into the act. He checks up on the kid behind Erin’s back and finally reports that that he is a good and sincere kid, volunteers at nursing homes and homeless shelters, good grades, no arrests. “I don’t care for his politics Erin, but he is a good kid.” he eventually says.

Baez influences Danny into seeing things from any other point of view than his own (a well worn path for those two). Danny admits there are two sides to every story but does not change HIS OWN view- just accepts that the kid is entitled to a contrary view.

By the end of the episode, Erin, Jamie, and Eddie are almost convinced (or just halfway convinced). But they have moved their own views. Danny is devoted to protecting the kid’s right to hold and speak a contrarian view. Henry pulls the kid aside, tells him that he doesn’t understand shit about how the world really works – but sincerely apologizes for being a jackass about it at first. He declares that in this house, all politely stated and well reasoned views are allowed . . . even if they are not adopted. Henry and Danny’s boys remain loyal Trump supporters due to identity politics. Frank is wise and largely silent with a respect for a boy who cares enough about his granddaughter to risk the Lion’s Den again.

Depending upon other considerations – let us assume there is some law enforcement and some New York power struggles also going on (as in every other episode of the show), this arc could resolve in three episodes, or six episodes, a whole season (which seems unlikely- they have never been that committed to real life issues) or even a cut down version that does not last past one episode (which would be a disappointment for me).

But my question was meant to be:
For those who have some familiarity with the characters (I have never known anyone from New York), what are these characters views likely to be, and how strongly would they hold to them??

I’ve been impressed that they could portray a family of cops and keep national politics out of it. The show is a lot less dated this way (who wants to binge-watch it a decade from now and watch the family fighting about one of Trump’s tantrums?).

And it allows a leftie like me (“F*ck The Pigs!” has mellowed into “Demilitarize the Police!”) to really enjoy watching every week.

You make good points here.
Aside from that, do you have a feeling for how any of them may view the current situation?