This blog post was written by Teri Kanefield and originally published on her blog.
In a pandemic, a president like Obama would try to save lives while minimizing damage to the economy.
Trump doesn’t care about saving lives or the “economy.” He cares about maintaining power. The desire to maintain power (and his need to fake invulnerability [and invincibility]) explains today’s Twitter storm. If you missed it, here’s a sampling. He fired off more than 125 Tweets along these lines:
“Obamagate” refers to the “scandal” of Obama targeting Trump and Flynn and unleashing the “Russia hoax.” You get the idea.
Trump can’t manage the pandemic the way Obama would have.
- He doesn’t know how
- He isn’t equipped (he spent 3 years dismantling the government and appointing people “loyal” to him instead of experts)
- Using the government to help people goes against the GOP ideology.
People are amazed that Trump is doubling down on the strategy that caused the Republicans to lose the midterms, the recent Wisconsin election, and bleed support since then.
In fact, doubling down is his best option.
Consider what would happen if instead Trump suddenly tried to do an about-face and handle the pandemic the way a rule-of-law leader would. He would fail miserably.
Trump isn’t that kind of leader. He doesn’t know how to be. Moreover (and this is important) his base would lose interest in him if he tried to be a rule of law president like Obama. He’d cease to be their hero, the strongman doing battle with their enemies, fighting the “Deep State” and socking it to the libs.
Without his base, he’s nothing.
So he has two options:
- Double-down and keep his base excited,
- or try to act like Obama and fall short.
He can’t out-Obama Obama. His base doesn’t want a rule of law leader. They want a rule breaker.
This is the same reason Democrats shouldn’t try to “fight like” Republicans. They’ll never do it as well. If Democrats try to compete in the arena of “who fights dirtiest” they’ll lose. You can’t out-Herod Herod.
What’s amazing to people who favor rule of law (as opposed to cult of leadership) is that according to every objective measure, Trump’s handling of the pandemic is a colossal failure—yet he retains more than 40% approval.
That’s because a lot of people reject “objective measures.” They want the myth of the strongman.
Trump also retains better than 40% support because he has a firm grip on what’s left of the GOP, and he has a well-oiled propaganda loop.
Doubling down is therefore the smarter strategy. By doubling down, he can retain the support he has, and try to expand that.
If he tries to be a rule of law president, he STILL won’t win over Rule of Law people. He has already burned his bridges with people who prefer rule of law.
Trump’s tirade this morning followed the same formula he’s been using for years— times ten.
- Embrace conspiracy theories
- Make himself the victim of an insidious plot to destroy America.
- Call any reporting he doesn’t like “fake news”
Most alarming:
- Hint that he will engage in outrageous, rule-breaking actions:
Promising to break rules and norms does two things:
- It stokes his base. They think: “Our team will win! Yay! Trump is the Strongman who will Trample the Libs!”
- Second, it causes panic meltdown in the opposition.
Now consider what this tweet accomplishes:
Trump supporters see it and think: “Wow! Trump really IS all powerful!”
[Most] Republicans see it and think, “I’d better toe the line! Trump will win and I want to be on the winning side.” (That’s what hierarchical thinkers care about.) [Rule of Law Republicans and the Lincoln Project are exceptions. By the way, the Arizona Eagletarian, who generally is solidly Progressive, embraces coalition thinking and those two subsets of Republicans]
A tweet like that also keeps people from remembering that the GOP lost the midterms by 8 points and they lost in Wisconsin, etc. etc. It keeps people from remembering that the GOP have not only been steadily losing elections, they’re losing support.
NYT: Trump’s *own polling* shows him losing to Biden among seniors by a double digit margin. https://t.co/iYRUvycdbz
— Josh Kraushaar (@HotlineJosh) May 9, 2020
A tweet like that [the one claiming Democracy in America is dead] advances a narrative that helps Trump and moves people out of the world of facts into myth.
Consider this: Thomas Rid, an expert in Russian disinformation tactics, said that the extent of Russia’s interference in the 2016 election was “designed to be overestimated.”
The desire to be overestimated makes sense when you think of this from a gangster mentality. If people overestimate you, they think you are more powerful than you are. Your supporters will fall more quickly in line. You enemies will give up and despair. [He's NOT more powerful than an American electorate that Rises UP and strengthens the institutions that serve as foundation for society that depends on truth and fact.]
It’s dangerous to underestimate Trump by assuming that he’s just stupid and crazy. It’s equally dangerous to overestimate him.
If I were Trump and wanted to destroy democracy and install a leadership cult, I’d try to goad the Democrats into fighting like Republicans. I’d also try to persuade them that I’m winning so they would just melt down.
On the other hand, if I wanted to save Democracy I’d tell everyone to work on getting their absentee ballots, and getting every Trump critic they know to work on getting their absentee ballots. Winning in Nov. will not solve all of our problems, but it’s a necessary first step.
This is the way a rule of law person thinks:
Jay Colorado hit the nail on the head, and in fact, gave me the idea for the title for this blog:
When a strongman fakes being invulnerable or invincible, he gets his followers to fall in line, and scares his opposition into accepting his dominance.
Trump is, above all, a conman. That’s why he has so many people persuaded he’s invincible even after the GOP lost big in Wisconsin.
Here are two phrases I’d like to ban on social media.
The first is: “I sure hope you’re right and the election isn’t stolen.”
When someone says, “We’d better hope. . . ” or “I sure hope . . ” I hear passivity and even privilege. I hear: “I hope lots of people are out there working on this.”
The real danger is voter suppression, when people are persuaded not to vote. Active Measures in 2016 was mostly about suppressing the vote, persuading people there was no point in voting, and that HRC was just as bad as Trump, etc. Stacey Abrams formed Fair Fight to fight voter suppression.
There are groups out there working to fight voter suppression. We shouldn’t be “hoping.” We should be “working.”
The other “logic” I’d like to debunk is: “Trump is acting like he knows he’s going to win. So he must know he can fix the election. So he must know the fix is in.”
If the fix was in, why didn’t he fix the midterms, or the recent Wisconsin election, or the other elections the GOP lost in the past 4 years? If the fix was in, what was the point of Operation Ukraine Shakedown (which failed, by the way.)
Had Operation Ukraine Shakedown succeeded, we’d all believe that Ukraine decided on its own to open an investigation into the Bidens, which would have given the false narrative credibility.
Operation Ukraine Shakedown was launched shortly after the GOP lost the midterms in 2018, because the writing was on the wall.
Of course the GOP will try every trick in the book in November. But why would the tricks work in 2020 if they didn’t work in 2017, 2018, or 2019?
The tricks won’t work if everyone [That's YOU and ME] does their part.
Rant over.
(That was quite a rant!)
Oh, and yes, I had a lovely Mother’s Day. I hope every mother felt honored today.
*****
The Arizona Eagletarian thanks Teri Kanefield for this timely, incisive essay. Teri is a criminal appellate attorney and a historian, besides being a mother.
No comments:
Post a Comment