US Analysis: He Poisoned and Divided America. Now He’s President-Elect

6
18

Liam Kennedy of University College Dublin writes for The Conversation:


It’s over: Donald Trump will be the 45th President of the United States. The election that elevated him to this office has been brutal, ugly and bizarre. It has poisoned the well of American democracy, and the toxins it has introduced are unlikely to disperse anytime soon.

See US Special: Your Alternative Election Night Live Coverage
EA Full Election Coverage

Trump has eagerly led a mass abandonment of civility and reason, breached social proprieties and political protocols, and normalised prejudice and brazen dishonesty.

The nation is now so divided that Democrats and Republicans are unable to agree on what constitutes factual reality. Dark rhetoric implying violent retribution against “certain groups” courses through the air. How did it come to this? When historians look back at this election what will they make of of the Trump campaign and its legacy? Will it be remembered as a one-off, or will they pronounce him an agent of a revolution in the Republican Party – or indeed, in America at large?

In truth, the sickness this election has brought to the surface has been brewing for a long time. Trump is a symptom, not just a pathogen. He has shown a genius for channelling the grievances and insecurities of those disaffected by economic and social changes in the US – primarily, though not solely, working-class whites. With this uncanny skill, he has magnified a form of identity politics the Republicans have long been using to appease and mobilise their base.

This experiment in political engineering began in earnest back in the early 1990s. It was until recently an insidious thing, usually advanced via dog-whistle tactics. Trump has picked it up and turned into a blunt instrument as he doubled down on his pursuit of a core white vote and eschewed any serious appeals to minorities.

But on a structural level, Trump’s victory is every bit of a piece with the way American politics now works. There’s abundant evidence that the choices of the US electorate are increasingly shaped by demographics, but there are underlying cultural dynamics at work too. This picture of extreme divisions is why getting out the core vote, rather than changing wavering voters’ minds with earnest appeals, is the ultimate device for winning an election.

The resulting focus on polarised core groups has exacerbated the crippling polarisation that wracks the US today – and the increasingly intense contempt in which Democrats and Republicans hold each other. Again, Trump did not create this divisive partisanship, but he has eagerly inflamed and manipulated it to his own ends.

The Trickster

None of this means he will in fact serve the interests of the people who’ve elected him. Trump embodies that most American of American archetypes: the huckster or “confidence man”, a figure with a long history in American culture, dating from at least the early 19th century. He is a charlatan whose schemes invariably fail. In the end he skips town, leaving those he has scammed to learn their lesson.

The confidence man is often a comic figure. He crops up in Herman Melville and Mark Twain’s satirical depictions of a rampantly commercial republic. Sometimes he’s no more than a fast-talking, comic disrupter – think Sergeant Bilko or even the Cat in the Hat.

But the confidence man comes in darker manifestations too. He not only plays with other people’s trust, he abuses it to rob or demean them. Tricksters like Trump tell people what they want to hear, articulate desires not commonly expressed, and capitalise on their gullibility.

The Trump campaign was just such a trick. The disaffected and angry among the American electorate are Trump’s mark, his suckers. All he asked was that they trust him.

To his supporters, enraged by a dishonest, manipulative “Washington”, Trump “tells it like it is”. Many of them have lost faith in public institutions, and despise the country’s elites – and yet, in their search for an honest champion, they have gladly invested their confidence in Trump.

Onward and Downward

Never mind the gridlock that has dogged the government during the Obama administration – what’s coming now will be deeply ugly. Trump’s campaign has radically upped the ante for distemper and dysfunction. The Republicans, who apparently still hold both the House and the Senate, will continue to throw red meat to Trump’s angry base. They might do well to recall Trump’s own idea: “You’ll have to have riots to go back to where we used to be, when America was great.”


Trump announces his candidacy (Justin Lane)

Trump is an opportunist, not an ideologue – and he certainly isn’t driven by deep political convictions. Some claim he didn’t actually intend to make a protracted and successful run for the presidency, that he was seeking to promote his brand on the cheap, and that his ego simply took over once he was hijacked by his own success. Perhaps – but this overlooks the fact that he several times considered a tilt at the presidency, and it probably overstates just how much his campaign relied on improvisation and happenstance rather than something genuinely knowing.

While many found Trump’s approach risible even to the end, it was strikingly effective from the off – and, while he stumbled many times, the underlying instinct to “go low” became a distressingly effective strategy.

What’s the lesson of all this? The historians will one day be able to offer a longer view on that one. Right now, I suggest that Trump’s victory should remind us just how fragile the social and political order we take for granted is – and how quickly an advanced democracy can be dragged into barbarism.

The Conversation

Related Posts

6 COMMENTS

  1. The impoverished white working class is a minority. Trump won by a good majority, so he must have appealed to a great many people who are not in that group.
    .
    Or Hillary repelled a majority more than Trump did.

    It will be interesting to see what happens in the Republican party. They have not been exactly supportive of his campaign.

    One thought: at least it isn’t President Palin.

  2. DEMOCRATS HAD A WINNER BUT OPTED INSTEAD FOR THE WORSE TEAM TO FACE TRUMP
    .
    When Hillary chose to seek the presidency, she effectively closed the door to other Democrats though Bernie tried. Many of her “flaws” were manufactured (that “Crooked Hilary” nonsense) but others were real and not fixable. Sounding like a schoolmarm, she can’t impress blue collar types. Lacking charisma and fire, she couldn’t handle the gut appeal of a demagogue like Trump. Had she not chosen a running mate with the same flaws, she might have pulled off a close one.. Even when he lies to blue collar types and knows it, Trump always sounds like he deeply believes what he says. Hillary lacks credibility.
    .
    Had Hillary chose not to run, I suspect Bernie would have stayed out of the race in favor of Elizabeth Warren. Warren had exactly what Hillary and Kaine lacked: charisma, fire, the ability to create real enthusiasm ( not apathy) among Democrats, and a unique ability to excite blue collar folks despite her academic and legal background.. She is no schoolmarm. She’d not have started with the negative baggage of Hillary or Trump. No one could better undermine Trump’s claim to be “a successful businessman capable of managing our economy” with biting humor. Imagine Hillary trying to match that.
    .
    As the nominee Warren would have beaten Trump in a landslide. As a vice presidential choice, I have no doubt she could have made enough difference in several close states. The rule that vp choice don’t make a difference would not have applied in this race which was sunique.
    ,
    Hillary relied too much on dislike for Trump and too little on offering things that appealed to blue collar workers and doing so in a heartfelt, convincing way. A positive message (“I’m for mom and kids” ads) repeated endlessly wasn’t worth a single vote. Who isn’t? As one analyst noted, Democrats have come to rely too much on “boutique issues” like gay rights while virtually ignoring issues important to workers.
    .
    Winner yesterday also included Vladimir Putin, the Koch Brothers, the coal industry,white supremacists and and trumpists in the FBI.

    • As the nominee Warren would have beaten Trump in a landslide.

      You might want to give up predictions RT. You said Hillary would beat Trump in a landslide. You’ve also been predicting massive Sunni terrorist attacks on the Russian mainland for 18 months.

Leave a Comment