SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home Liberals: Don’t Even Consider Gloating About Donald Trump

POLITICS APRIL 29, 2011

Liberals: Don’t Even Consider Gloating About Donald Trump

BY THE EDITORS

Now that Donald Trump appears on the verge of launching a presidential campaign, it is worth reflecting on the meaning of this low moment in American political history. Trump is a clown and a buffoon, and the odds of him winning even one Republican caucus or primary appear slim. But there is no denying that Trump has managed to tap into something genuinely worrisome in American politics. Democrats may be tempted to take pleasure in the fact that Trump will likely push the GOP presidential field to the right, and thereby help Obama in 2012. But this would be sheer myopia, and any delight over Trump’s arrival on the political scene is entirely misplaced. The Trump ascendancy calls not for glee, but for serious concern about the state of our country.

It’s true that the media erred in awarding Trump such a large spotlight—did all the cable news networks really have to cover his press conference on Wednesday?—but, at this point, the Trump phenomenon does not seem to be a mere media creation. His popularity (he currently leads in several polls) can no longer be denied. So what is Trump’s appeal? Why do his message and vulgar personality resonate with such a significant percentage of Americans? Trump’s embrace of birtherism has been the most widely discussed aspect of his rise. But this only scratches the surface of the Trump phenomenon.

 

What Trump actually stands for is an exaggerated sense of victimhood. This is the theme that unites his personal style with the political views he has thus far expressed. Are you tired of being pushed around? Are you tired of our country being pushed around? Trump’s political acuity lies in his ability to take these grievances and turn them into politics. His foreign policy views in essence consist of a pledge to bully other nations. China is “decimating our country.” OPEC is imperiling the economy. And ungrateful Libyans and Iraqis are trying to build a society from oil that is rightfully ours. (“We won the war. We take over the oil fields. We use the oil.”) When Bill O’Reilly, in an interview with Trump, seemed taken aback by the idea that we could simply force OPEC or China to do our bidding, Trump appeared surprised that anyone could view international relations as anything more than a contest of machismo. “The messenger is the key,” Trump told O’Reilly. “If you have the right messenger and they know how to deliver the message … you’re going to scare them, absolutely.”

 

Trump’s thinly veiled accusation that President Obama benefited from affirmative action when he applied to college derives from the same theme. This time the victims aren’t Americans as a whole, they are white Americans; but the message—of anger, resentment, and victimhood—is identical.

 

America is currently engaged in three wars. The country faces major economic challenges. Global warming is continuing apace. There is no chance any of these issues can be solved by yelling at foreign countries, or stirring up anger at Iraqis or Libyans or minority applicants to elite colleges. Donald Trump has appointed himself spokesman for some of the nastiest impulses in American politics, and he seems to have a following. The sooner the Republican mainstream rejects him, the better. And we liberals should be cheering them along as they do.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 31 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

31 comments

I can't help feeling that, a month or so down the road, these worries about the meaning of Trump will seem somewhat overblown.

- robertgorton

April 29, 2011 at 1:07am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I can't help feeling that, a month or so down the road, these worries about the meaning of Trump will seem somewhat overblown.

- robertgorton

April 29, 2011 at 1:07am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Nicely said, TNR. There comes a point where one must ignore any short term political advantage his/her party may be able to garner by the other side’s embrace of a laughable sideshow figure and identify the greater damage being done to the reputation of the nation, to the national discourse, and to the ideals of democracy.

- Konstantin

April 29, 2011 at 1:40am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

There is a deep dark problem with Trump's appeal. His status as clown is the thin edge of darkly populist, Palin-like wedge that appeals to, exploits, some of Americans' worst instincts: a know nothing hankering for simplistic solutions, deeply latent and invidious otherism, stupid machismo, and swaggeringly, unreal notions of American might. Plus he's a shamless, self seeking, self promoting con man who personfies the unfortunate merger of mindless, ego-encased celebrity and power.

- basman

April 29, 2011 at 2:45am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I'm an American living in Australia. For a while now I've been reflecting on why Australian politics should be so sane relatively speaking when on an individual level Australians are, to my eye just as likely as Americans to be stupid, ill-informed, selfish and/or crazy. There probable isn't any one answer. Take your pick between Aus's small population, parliamentary form of government that punishes individual grandstanding viciously, mandatory voting for all citizens, rigid campaign finance rules or any of a hundred other fators. Whatever it is, I wish we could find some of it in America. At the moment I'm on a vacation trip to Hawaii, and yesterday was with my family listening to NPR in the car. Trying to explain the birther movement and Trump's reinvigoration of it to my Aussie wife I began to feel atively embarrassed. For my country, I mean.

- AaronW

April 29, 2011 at 5:21am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Well said.

- hkaye

April 29, 2011 at 6:58am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Is his appeal really any more of a bad sign than the appeal of Bachman or Palin, or the longstanding popularity of Glenn Beck?

- miceelf

April 29, 2011 at 8:20am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

What we are observing is nothing other than proto-fascism of which Trump is but the latest in the line of tribunes that includes Palin and Bachmann. What was the driving force behind early Nazism other than an inverted and hyper-inflated sense of victimhood at the hands of the actually powerless?

- roidubouloi

April 29, 2011 at 8:47am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

We should probably be glad that the Republican field of candidates is full of jerks and con artists. The worst thing that could happen is for a sane, well-spoken—but still extremely conservative—candidate to emerge. That sort of person would win the votes of many of the malleable independent voters that both sides need to attract. Until the GOP becomes a respectable party once again (if that's even remotely possible at this point) let the circus continue. To answer Aaron W.'s question, I think the answer does lie largely in Australia's parliamentary system. America's founders wanted to establish a government that was unlike that of Britain's, so they created a legislature that has become a dysfunctional monster, made even worse by the Senate filibuster rule. I think this nation would probably be much better off with a multiparty parliamentary system.

- DAVIDDREIER@EARTHLINK.NET-old

April 29, 2011 at 8:52am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Absolutely. If the Republican Party has fallen so far that an obvious Media demagogue like Trump can actually be the FRONT RUNNER, then there's something severely out of balance with the American Republic. And no, it wasn't the MEDIA that created the Trump Candidacy, it was TRUMP who created it. That doesn't mean it isn't a Media side-show. Just because the Media is being used by Trump doesn't mean they get a free pass. We MUST get the Fairness Doctrine back, and soon. Otherwise rationality in American Politics will continue its downward slide.

- AllanL5

April 29, 2011 at 8:59am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Since "Celebrity Apprentice" is already signed on for the Fall, and ads are being sold for it right now, I regard Trump's campaigning as an elaborate PR ruse to gain visibility and watchers for his TV program. Most of the media, very much including TNR, are falling for a scam. When he takes any of the legal steps towards a Presidential campaign, NBC would have to give other candidates equal time. I predict this will never happen. Free publicity such as Trump is currently getting is too good a deal for the legendary deal-maker to turn down.

- JackR

April 29, 2011 at 9:08am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If the media didn't give this clown a platform, which it has for decades, no one would know who he is. The media does deserve most of blame here. Miceelf is correct though, why is Trump any more a bad sign than the likes of Palin or Beck? I find them more worrisome than Fish Face.

- tmmats

April 29, 2011 at 9:22am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

miceelf hits the nail on the head - we are merely seeing in Donald Trump a continuation of the tea party themes of racism and resentment that have been a large part of the Beck, Palin, Hannity and Limbaugh brands for several years now. These people appeal to the least educated and vulgar rednecks in the country - a hard core 10% or more that make up perhaps 25% or more of the GOP. Republicans have courted these people, and now they own the party, just as the evangelicals and fundamentalists did in the 90's. In Franklin Graham, we see the merger of the religious right with the racist resenters, the easy morphing of the cross into a tea bag. The editors are correct. This is not good for America. What else is new? Neil

- purcellneil

April 29, 2011 at 9:27am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Well said. In essence, political and business acuity are similar. Granted, a success in one will not always be able to succeed in the other. But as George Washington Plunkitt said, "I seen my opportunities and I took 'em." It may not count for everything, but there is a common talent. Trump is absurd, but the opportunity he has recognized is chilling. Yes, it converges with that of Palin and Beck, which is a reminder that while individual demagogues may flame out, a darker popular desire is not abating.

- STTaylor

April 29, 2011 at 9:30am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

roidubouloi hits it on the head. We are used to being at the top of the international food chain, in part because of intelligence and hard work, in part because of good luck in location, natural resources and heritage. The world is running out of oil, water, and other resources. The world is grossly overpopulated. The world is full of people in places such as China, India, and Brazil who have learned that if they educate themselves and work hard, they can (at times literally) eat our lunch. Just for fun we are also set upon by suicidal fanatics who counter our military superiority by their willingness to become suicidal attackers. Our laurels are faded, rusty and prickly and not a good place to rest. About all that is left is to feel aggrieved and petulant and look for scapegoats and Donald trumps the other people voicing our grievances so far. Welcome to the future. It isn't what it used to be, and it isn't very welcoming.

- skahn

April 29, 2011 at 10:06am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Quite literally, carnival barkers object to being compared to Donald Trump: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/28/carnival-barkers-slam-obama_n_854702.html

- miceelf

April 29, 2011 at 10:37am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I agree with the basic premise here, but I'm not sure about the timing. It might be better for all if we give the Republicans enough rope to hang themselves with. Certainly, a Trump presidency would be a global catastrophe. He would either be forced into a humiliating about face on Jan 21 2013, or he would lead the US into oblivion. He's clearly an egomaniac--a Silvio Berlusconi at best, Juan Peron at worst. But that presidency ain't gonna happen. In the meantime, wouldn't the rational world be better if we let this clown play around a little more, and discredit the ignoramus wing of American politics just a little longer? A few "have you no shame?" moments during the primary campaign, or maybe a 75:25 defeat at the polls could do some long term good for American politics.

- gwcross

April 29, 2011 at 10:42am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

A paranoid hard right minority has probably always been with us. We've seen the Wallace candidacy, the John Birch Society, Joe McCarthy, HUAC, the KKK, Know-nothings, etc.

- stedojo

April 29, 2011 at 11:51am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I would not like to vote for Donald Trump but if he gets the nomination I will vote for him. Comparing the "vulgarity" of Donald Trump with the known anti-Semitism of Obama I will take Donald Trump any day. At the Democratic convention when Obama spoke I dreamed of voting for him for President. Since then like everybody else I found out that his Spiritual mentor was pastor Wright, definitely an anti-Semite. Wright associated with Farrakhan, another one if ever there is one! Both went to visit Khadafi in Libya. Obama was an organiser of the Million men march when the multitudes cheered Farrakhan live on TV every anti-Semitic rant. I survived the Shoa and would never vote for an anti-Semite of his supporters. I left my 40 year Democratic party disgusted. I am now an independent. How can anyone vote for Obama, the apprentice sorcerer who screws up the whole Middle East calling Islamic extremists "moderates!" Assad he regarded up to a week ago as a moderate so he return an ambassador to Damascus. Since then Assad has not stop killing his opposition in Syria. Who is stupid enough to again vote for Obama?

- Poupic

April 29, 2011 at 11:51am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

AaronW - as your situational opposite, I've also reflected on that. However I think the main two items are compulsory voting and the lack of the presidential system. The former prevents what happened in the 2010 midterm. And on the latter, while I know this is going to make a number of people see red, but the presidential system doesn't appear to have a lot to recommend it. They're typically unstable (even France is on what, it's 5th republic) - the US appears to be the exception to the rule in that it hasn't collapsed yet. There aren't too many other presidential republics about which that can be said, which contrasts starkly with Westminster governments. However it's not like some of the underlying problems don't exist in Australia; see for example the relationship with the Exclusive Brethren and the Libs.

- Nari224

April 29, 2011 at 11:53am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

A lot of handwringing here over a minor media bubble involving a shameless clown who will most likely get nowhere once more serious Republican candidates commit. Let's give this silliness a few more weeks before calling for a constitutional convention. Does the last paragraph of the editorial reveal that hysteria is the dominant emotion operating at TNR? Global warming gets the pole position in their list of pressing problems even though warming reached a plateau in 1998 (only two of the last thirteen years have been as warm as 1998). The editors need to get a hold of themselves.

- kcrichmond

April 29, 2011 at 11:57am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

let's see who the republican nominee is before we decide that trump is the worst it can get...

- sephirothic77

April 29, 2011 at 12:58pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Your position is dangerous and myopic, kcrichmond. I would give anything if the media gave climate change just 2% of the coverage it has granted Trump in the last few months. Climate change is a moral issue, an economic issue, a national security issue, and the most important issue in the world if civilization would kindly push to make war obsolete and look beyond the life expectancies of the world's current inhabitants.

- Konstantin

April 29, 2011 at 1:12pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Good article. Trump, apparently, has learned what early 20th Century politicians learned, and what 21st Century politicians have apparently forgotten: nothin' like good ole fashion' nationalism to get people whooped up and on your bandwagon. Nationalism has several advantages: 1. Unifies the people (behind the politician) in the face of external "evil" (real or percieved, or constructed). 2. Taps into one of the deepest and most gruesome and dehumanizing flaws in our nature: the desire to be part of a superior group, different from and superior to other human beings. Politics will, sadly, always be vulgar. Because it's about power.

- jdolson12

April 29, 2011 at 1:12pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

kcrich, global warming deserves to be treated as a pressing problem. It seems like you have been taken in by deniers wresting false conclusions from the data. There has been no 'plateau' in warming. Look at the graph------during all decades there are year to year fluctuations which are meaningless. It's quite significant that the fifteen hottest years on record have been since 1995. Nine of the ten hottest years have all been since 2000----1998 was the only year before 2000 to make the list. To argue that global warming has reached a "plateau" since 1998 just because that one year was particularly hot is either dishonest, stupid, or both. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrumental_temperature_record#Warmest_years

- rjb9

April 29, 2011 at 1:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

- I realize this isn't as simple a they lose-we win though he seems to be poison for the GOP. However, your weak case ("... [Trump] appears on the verge of launching...") appears to be lifted from Cheney's case for panic-war. Moreover, there is a third option if we reject celebrating the opportunity he presents but refuse to dignify the creep as a right now threat. See, we had a problem with a stray cat who sprayed our door every day, after we fed him! I didn't know what Felix was thinking so I asked our cats. They said he was stupid but strays are especially selfish. They agreed, "Felix needs you to stop his cycle of eat-spray or he may ratchet it up to dumping. Ignore him, for your own good". We did, he moved on. Try it your way but I heard Don earns $43.28 every time his name is used. Ask yourself: What if he's in it for the money? (Or food?)

- michaelg

April 29, 2011 at 1:18pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I was curious which way Poupic was leaning given Trump's candidacy over other, more palatable pro-Jewish Republicans. Glad he put that one to rest!

- wildboy

April 29, 2011 at 3:42pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

A far worse catastrophe would be for this nasty, brutish, racial, (keep filling in the adjectives as long as you desire) streak to continue to fester largely unseen through countless more election cycles until it finally erupts into some unbearable catastrophe. At some point this particular type of evil will have to be exposed if it is ever to be neutralized and expunged.

- cspencef

April 29, 2011 at 4:46pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

what's so hard to understand? this is the party of glen beckistan, saracuda, hannity, faux noise, etc. etc. trump is a natural progression.

- jjanit

April 29, 2011 at 5:08pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

@Nari224 - actually, the Presidential system for the Executive Branch has a lot going for it, so much so that it is actually the preferred (by a majority of countries) system world-wide. The Westminster System for the Legislative Branch, however, seems to be the preferred and (IMHO), the better one. Our major problem right now is that we're stuck with a 2-party system. In any sane country, the more liberal/moderate Repubulicans would have de-camped long ago, and joined up with their Blue Dog Democrat compatriots, and formed a whole new party. Which, would be far healthier for everyone. Unfortunately, without major structural reform in our political system (including serious reform in how the states allow ballot access to candidates), we're screwed. And, consequently, get folks like Trump (or, historically, George Wallace).

- trims

April 29, 2011 at 7:23pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I agree with trims. There is a structural/cultural/legal problem in the U.S. that prevents, at key moments, the reshaping of the political landscape. Moderate Repubs are trapped in an elevator with the loopy fringe but there's no obvious alternative. Just to emphasize: it's not a great idea to have a phantasmagoria of parties dissolving and reforming like some sixties acid trip, but you can go too far in the opposite direction and freeze the system's natural defenses.

- ironyroad

April 29, 2011 at 10:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close