Donald Trump does not like protesters.

During his campaign, he accused Hillary Clinton of paying protesters to show up at his rallies. He said the protesters who interrupted his rallies would be arrested and their lives ruined. After his election, when thousands of demonstrators marched in cities around the country, he dismissed them as “professional protesters, incited by the media.”

So it’s fair to say that, at the very least, the incoming president will be irked if hundreds of thousands of them show up to his inauguration. (“Small numbers of protesters today — either paid to be there, or sore losers who can’t accept reality,” a tweet might read. “Sad and very unfair!”) Just annoying the thin-skinned future president may be enough to motivate his opponents to stand outside in the cold on Jan. 20. But for those who hope to meaningfully undermine the Trump administration, the plan for the day’s big protest is alarmingly scattered.

The flagship Inauguration Day protest is being coordinated by Act Now to Stop War and End Racism Coalition, or ANSWER. The group organized Iraq War protests that drew thousands in various cities, according to news reports, and tens of thousands according to ANSWER. It has secured permits for a portion of Pennsylvania Avenue and Freedom Plaza, where it estimates more than 20,000 protesters will show up on Jan. 20.

“The purpose of direct action is to create a situation so crisis-packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation.”

ANSWER has been advertising and fundraising for this protest since November. Despite the long lead time, the group has not communicated with protesters about what to expect, how to stay safe, how to protest effectively, how to talk to media, what is good and not good to write on a sign, or what to do if you are confronted by a delirious Trump supporter who is feeling extra empowered on their special day.

The biggest problem, however, is that the protest lacks a coherent message.

“This movement must announce itself to the whole world, loudly and visibly,” read an email to supporters that said the protest’s goal was “systemic change.” In another email to supporters, ANSWER said the purpose of the Jan. 20 protest is “to send a message that racism, sexism, and xenophobia will NOT ‘make America great again.’" Another email cited “the lives of millions of immigrant families, the core rights of Muslims in America, the right of women to control their own bodies, basic civil liberties and civil rights, and the protections and treaties aimed at limiting carbon emissions and saving the planet and the human family from extinction” as the reasons for the demonstration. In other words, the message is a list of progressive causes that would be relevant in a protest against any Republican on any given day.

The goal of the protest is to “stop the Trump agenda,” Yasmina Mrabet, an organizer in DC, told The Outline. She said to go look at Trump’s agenda, take the opposite of that, and that would equal ANSWER’s message with this protest. She gave some examples: “smash labor protection, privatize huge parts of the public sector and hand it all over to Wall Street hedge fund operators to make profits,” “eviscerate women’s rights,” and “rapidly expand the military,” among others. ANSWER also wants to “expose a system that is based on the exploitation of the many for the benefit of the few,” and send the message that “there is widespread dissent across America and that Trump does not have a mandate.”

ANSWER was criticized for trying to attach too many other issues to its anti-war campaign. It seemed like the same thing might be happening again. By contrast, last week Bernie Sanders sent an email to his supporters urging them to rally in cities on Jan. 15 to send one message: “Save Health Care.” Republicans want to vote to repeal the Affordable Care Act as soon as next week and have already taken a Senate vote that set the process in motion, so a protest around this is timely, targeted, and actionable.

Protests do not have to be ultra-targeted in order to be effective, but lack of focus can be a movement’s undoing. The Occupy Wall Street protest in New York and other cities temporarily captivated the media. They drew huge numbers. Celebrities started stopping by the camps. The phrase “the 99 percent” took hold. But when people said, Okay, you have our attention, now what do you want? the protesters didn’t really have a good answer. The movement fizzled after that.

Protests do not have to be ultra-targeted in order to be effective, but lack of focus can be a movement’s undoing.

“It became clear that they could not articulate a clear set of goals and demands,” said Sarah Maddison, an associate professor of politics at the University of Melbourne who co-wrote a book about social movements called Activist Wisdom. “That movement ended up experiencing that backlash and losing credibility in the eyes of a lot of people … they were trying to do something novel, but it didn’t easily translate into a message that could be understood.”

Maddison thinks the protests around the inauguration don’t necessarily need to articulate a set demand. There is little doubt that the protests will pull large numbers of people, so the media coverage that protests live and die by is already in the bag. Large numbers will also allow for nice photos and make it more difficult for the new president to dismiss them as plants. The protests will signal to Americans, citizens of other countries, and the incoming administration and Congressional Republicans that the new president is not popular with everyone, and his words don’t perfectly represent the country.

That’s all pretty lofty, though, and there are so many things that could go wrong. It would be easy for the incoming administration to paint protesters as unserious, scattered, motivated by nothing more coherent than hatred for Trump.

A single physical altercation, an ill-considered quote to a reporter, or a tweet from the new president could overtake the movement’s diffuse message.

Martin Luther King Jr. and proponents of agonistic democracy believe tension is necessary for change, and protests create tension. “The purpose of direct action is to create a situation so crisis-packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation,” King wrote. But the country is already tense. Do we need more tension? How do we know what is “creative” or “constructive tension” versus “violent tension,” which King explicitly said he worked against?

I asked James Jasper, author of Protest: A Cultural Introduction to Social Movements and a professor of sociology at CUNY, if he thought the inaugural marches would accomplish much. “Probably not,” he said in an email. “There were enormous environmental and peace protests during Reagan's first term, but they did nothing to change his policies. The sad truth is that most social movements fail to affect policies. Some manage to change public opinion though, usually very slowly.”

“The sad truth is that most social movements fail to affect policies.”

Mrabet, from ANSWER, noted that this protest is only the beginning of what ANSWER hopes will be a robust anti-Trump movement over the next four years.

“We plan to build on the energy that people have and continue to find ways to expose the way that the system is functioning and to raise the consciousness of the masses and to hopefully mobilize bigger and bigger demonstrations,” she said.

The protesters will also be shoulder to shoulder with Trump supporters who are there to celebrate. The vitriol of the campaign — lock her up, fake news, basket of deplorables — wasn’t so long ago. The fuse is lit. I asked Mrabet if she thought there was any reason to worry about violence or people making ill-considered comments to reporters. Past protests have always been peaceful, she said, and protesters will tell reporters why they’ve come, which is ideal.

I asked if she had any advice for protesters who plan to go to DC. “If there were two things I would stress, it would be get there early and wear warm clothing,” she said.