Podcasts and Twitter have been very kind to Trump.
Podcasts and Twitter are like shooting the breeze in the pub. You banter, talk some shit, and you get to know the person through the hyperbole and braggadocio.
This is Trump. Even though he’s a teetotaller, he’d be great at the pub, and you wouldn’t take his outrageous statements too seriously.
The measured and careful tone of people like Obama and Harris just doesn’t cut it in the pub. That’s why no politician other than Trump has said anything interesting on Twitter — they can’t.
You can call this the LinkedIn vs Twitter election, really. Harris is particularly vapid and unnatural and scared — a great fit for LinkedIn. Trump, the opposite.
Yes, Trump is bad. And Harris is... what, exactly? We don’t know, because she won’t tell us - not even in friendly interviews. What’s her vision for the country? Middle-class neighborhoods where people take pride in their lawns? The only thing she’s made clear is that she’s fully aligned with Biden. But to the average voter, that means higher prices, DEI in the military, millions of illegal immigrants, organized shoplifting, and a world in chaos.
Voters chose Biden because they were tired of Trump’s 2 a.m. tweets and his endless drama. They wanted normal. That’s not what they got. So now, they’re looking back at Trump’s first term and thinking that, despite the crazy, it wasn’t so bad. Taxes were down, wages were up, inflation was low, and the world was relatively peaceful. For all its problems, 2018 was pretty good.
Not content with attacking Trump - who, frankly, deserves it - the pundits are now going after his supporters. We're told that they're fascists who can never be trusted again. But hoping that Trump2 will be like Trump1 is neither evil nor crazy. And why anyone thinks that replaying Hillary Clinton's "deplorables" campaign will work any better this time is beyond me.
That said, there are good reasons to believe that Trump2 won't be anything like Trump1. First, there are his promises of "retribution." Yes, the DoJ was politicized under Obama and Biden, but it was politicized during Trump1 as well. And continuing the tit-for-tat spiral into insanity is hardly a recipe for domestic peace. Second, there are his tariffs, which he has the power to levy on his own. Manufacturing output dropped over 4% when Trump imposed his much more modest tariffs in 2018. That's because about half of our imports serve as inputs to domestic manufacturing. Should he raise tariffs as much as he's threatened, we could well face a recession. Third, Trump rid himself of many of the "RINOs" who helped pass his legislative agenda. Their replacements - Marjorie Taylor Greene, Lauren Boebert, Matt Gaetz, Mary Miller, et al - are unlikely to be as effective as were their predecessors. Fourth, Trump will probably fill his cabinet with yes-men who won't push back on his crazier ideas. Fifth, he won't outsource his Supreme Court nominations to the Federalist Society again, since he still blames them for not supporting his election claims.
So, Trump2 will probably be worse than Trump1. Will it be worse than Harris1? I have no clue.
Does any system do this? Look at the recent European elections, especially the French even split. The political class has gamed the system so well that all we ever get is malaise and continuation of technocratic elitism.
There is a very obvious opportunity for a party that is economically social-democrat but culturally nationalist to sweep into power, and I struggle to understand why none have done this yet.
Even in Australia when the Libs have ALP on the ropes they sabotage themselves by trotting out the nuclear & abortion spoilers. All Dutton had to do to be PM next year was say he'd lower immigration (even if he didn't mean it) & STFU. Too hard apparently.
While this is true (see McInnes coming out with his get angry call), nobody hates better than the left. Arguably their entire modern policy platform is vengeance against the West.
Most are just following his lead. Trump first said, “I will be your retribution,” at a rally back in March 2023. Trump used his followers for his own purposes on January 6, 2021 and I think that he’s using them again. This isn’t about their retribution, it’s about his.
I suggest that after November the Department of Health and Human Services set up a 1-800-TDS hotline for people in full-blown Trump Derangement Syndrome crises. It´s gonna be serious, but we can overcome it by working together and not being judge-mental!
I guess we have to go to Australia to get excellent commentary on the Trump phenomena.
Top-notch (Oct. 29) post by LW.
Like many people, I find Trump the man not so likable. I sometimes muse he has the personality and character flaws of any other dozen men put together.
But on the big issues---immigration, trade with China and the world, DEI, Israel, government regulation of business, taxes---he seems more right than the option, the mushy Harris.
I am sure like many others, I wish we could have Trump's positions without the Trump. In fact, JD Vance seems like an entirely better deal. (Interestingly, Vance has many of the credentials touted by the Dems---Ivy League ed, non-high-level military service, non-white wife, book author...but is still demonized on the left).
I am surprised to see LW predicting Trump will win the popular vote. I expect a squeaker in the pop vote (percent-wise, though Harris could win by a million or more) and a Trump win in the Electoral College.
Once I learned more about Vance I warmed to him (despite the mandatory "performative conservatism" thrown out to their voters like the abortion thing). He is clearly lining up for a POTUS run in 4 years - regardless of this outcome. He has the charisma to pull it off.
Sorry mate, if LHO is a joke I don't get it... My screen name is just short for Frederick Roth. Insightful observation for calling Trump's policies being better than his actual person.
Funny thing about W & V is their military service was in both cases mostly "cosmetic", Walz for bein a full-bird sergeant in the reserve, Jaydot for mil journalism. (Private Joker?) Trump + RFKJ would have been a hoot.
Agreed: there is no way I see Trump willing the aggregate majority.
Of course! Yes its Lee... I enjoy sardonic humour. Such earnest innocence in that face, a far more flattering image than the Trump shooter's. In many ways LHO actually embodies today's pathologies. I imagine the the 60s must have felt just like today does with the social conflict and "right side of history" activism.
Interesting insights. Still I am surprised - perhaps I should not - that the pro-Trump argument that is presented revolves entirely around cultural issues. Not a single line is devoted to the damage that tariffs - Trump’s favourite word in the dictionary - would inflict to the economy or the consequences of massive unfunded tax cuts. Does the author implies that when it comes to the economy Trump voters are supposed to take him neither literally nor seriously? Or that they are so much absorbed by cultural issues not to care? Or that they simply do not understand?
I have often pointed out that if a foreign leader the US doesn't like wins an election under the same circumstances Joe Biden did, they get sanctions.
The presidential candidate getting more votes than the rest of their party's federal candidates is nothing new. A common observation by poll workers is the number of people who only vote for President and don't vote for anything else. But usually there isn't the gap like Biden had.
“Trump’s supporters treated what he said seriously but not literally, while his opponents treated his words literally but not seriously.”
In an article full of insights, this stood out for me, Lorenzo. A great turn of phrase, and a key point that underpins the schism in perception.
Ta. I wish I could claim credit for the phrase, but alas. The link identifies the original source.
Podcasts and Twitter have been very kind to Trump.
Podcasts and Twitter are like shooting the breeze in the pub. You banter, talk some shit, and you get to know the person through the hyperbole and braggadocio.
This is Trump. Even though he’s a teetotaller, he’d be great at the pub, and you wouldn’t take his outrageous statements too seriously.
The measured and careful tone of people like Obama and Harris just doesn’t cut it in the pub. That’s why no politician other than Trump has said anything interesting on Twitter — they can’t.
You can call this the LinkedIn vs Twitter election, really. Harris is particularly vapid and unnatural and scared — a great fit for LinkedIn. Trump, the opposite.
Great summary. I've seen the stark contrast on LI vs Twitter. It makes me wonder if I'm in two different universes.
Yes, Trump is bad. And Harris is... what, exactly? We don’t know, because she won’t tell us - not even in friendly interviews. What’s her vision for the country? Middle-class neighborhoods where people take pride in their lawns? The only thing she’s made clear is that she’s fully aligned with Biden. But to the average voter, that means higher prices, DEI in the military, millions of illegal immigrants, organized shoplifting, and a world in chaos.
Voters chose Biden because they were tired of Trump’s 2 a.m. tweets and his endless drama. They wanted normal. That’s not what they got. So now, they’re looking back at Trump’s first term and thinking that, despite the crazy, it wasn’t so bad. Taxes were down, wages were up, inflation was low, and the world was relatively peaceful. For all its problems, 2018 was pretty good.
Not content with attacking Trump - who, frankly, deserves it - the pundits are now going after his supporters. We're told that they're fascists who can never be trusted again. But hoping that Trump2 will be like Trump1 is neither evil nor crazy. And why anyone thinks that replaying Hillary Clinton's "deplorables" campaign will work any better this time is beyond me.
That said, there are good reasons to believe that Trump2 won't be anything like Trump1. First, there are his promises of "retribution." Yes, the DoJ was politicized under Obama and Biden, but it was politicized during Trump1 as well. And continuing the tit-for-tat spiral into insanity is hardly a recipe for domestic peace. Second, there are his tariffs, which he has the power to levy on his own. Manufacturing output dropped over 4% when Trump imposed his much more modest tariffs in 2018. That's because about half of our imports serve as inputs to domestic manufacturing. Should he raise tariffs as much as he's threatened, we could well face a recession. Third, Trump rid himself of many of the "RINOs" who helped pass his legislative agenda. Their replacements - Marjorie Taylor Greene, Lauren Boebert, Matt Gaetz, Mary Miller, et al - are unlikely to be as effective as were their predecessors. Fourth, Trump will probably fill his cabinet with yes-men who won't push back on his crazier ideas. Fifth, he won't outsource his Supreme Court nominations to the Federalist Society again, since he still blames them for not supporting his election claims.
So, Trump2 will probably be worse than Trump1. Will it be worse than Harris1? I have no clue.
The US political system is not offering up good alternatives to voters.
Does any system do this? Look at the recent European elections, especially the French even split. The political class has gamed the system so well that all we ever get is malaise and continuation of technocratic elitism.
There is a very obvious opportunity for a party that is economically social-democrat but culturally nationalist to sweep into power, and I struggle to understand why none have done this yet.
Even in Australia when the Libs have ALP on the ropes they sabotage themselves by trotting out the nuclear & abortion spoilers. All Dutton had to do to be PM next year was say he'd lower immigration (even if he didn't mean it) & STFU. Too hard apparently.
Also, a lot of Trump supporters want him to be vengeful. There is a lot of anger and rage building up.
While this is true (see McInnes coming out with his get angry call), nobody hates better than the left. Arguably their entire modern policy platform is vengeance against the West.
Most are just following his lead. Trump first said, “I will be your retribution,” at a rally back in March 2023. Trump used his followers for his own purposes on January 6, 2021 and I think that he’s using them again. This isn’t about their retribution, it’s about his.
Bang on about the dynamics. It's the primary school bully antics during recess without the overt threats to beat up the kids who won't join the gang.
It's fascinating that this election has one candidate about the culture, the other about the country.
I suggest that after November the Department of Health and Human Services set up a 1-800-TDS hotline for people in full-blown Trump Derangement Syndrome crises. It´s gonna be serious, but we can overcome it by working together and not being judge-mental!
I guess we have to go to Australia to get excellent commentary on the Trump phenomena.
Top-notch (Oct. 29) post by LW.
Like many people, I find Trump the man not so likable. I sometimes muse he has the personality and character flaws of any other dozen men put together.
But on the big issues---immigration, trade with China and the world, DEI, Israel, government regulation of business, taxes---he seems more right than the option, the mushy Harris.
I am sure like many others, I wish we could have Trump's positions without the Trump. In fact, JD Vance seems like an entirely better deal. (Interestingly, Vance has many of the credentials touted by the Dems---Ivy League ed, non-high-level military service, non-white wife, book author...but is still demonized on the left).
I am surprised to see LW predicting Trump will win the popular vote. I expect a squeaker in the pop vote (percent-wise, though Harris could win by a million or more) and a Trump win in the Electoral College.
But the polls can be off, so who knows?
Once I learned more about Vance I warmed to him (despite the mandatory "performative conservatism" thrown out to their voters like the abortion thing). He is clearly lining up for a POTUS run in 4 years - regardless of this outcome. He has the charisma to pull it off.
Fredo....or should I call you LHO?
Verily, I prefer a Vance-Walz ticket. Those two guys should have hopped ship and run independently together.
Sorry mate, if LHO is a joke I don't get it... My screen name is just short for Frederick Roth. Insightful observation for calling Trump's policies being better than his actual person.
Funny thing about W & V is their military service was in both cases mostly "cosmetic", Walz for bein a full-bird sergeant in the reserve, Jaydot for mil journalism. (Private Joker?) Trump + RFKJ would have been a hoot.
Agreed: there is no way I see Trump willing the aggregate majority.
Sorry for my use of initials. Unless I am mistaken, your avatar is a Marine snapshot of the alleged presidential assassin.
I enjoy your commentary.
Verily, Vance never crawled out of foxhole under enemy fire.
Of course! Yes its Lee... I enjoy sardonic humour. Such earnest innocence in that face, a far more flattering image than the Trump shooter's. In many ways LHO actually embodies today's pathologies. I imagine the the 60s must have felt just like today does with the social conflict and "right side of history" activism.
Dems are voting against
🤯TRUMP😱
We are voting against Them.
There’s a difference.
Interesting insights. Still I am surprised - perhaps I should not - that the pro-Trump argument that is presented revolves entirely around cultural issues. Not a single line is devoted to the damage that tariffs - Trump’s favourite word in the dictionary - would inflict to the economy or the consequences of massive unfunded tax cuts. Does the author implies that when it comes to the economy Trump voters are supposed to take him neither literally nor seriously? Or that they are so much absorbed by cultural issues not to care? Or that they simply do not understand?
Also, folk see the cultural issues as existential in a way they do not see the economic issues as being.
The lack of salience of such economic policy issues is striking. A sign of the dysfunction of the US media and political system.
There are many opinions on international trade.
Worthy non-orthodox authors include Michael Pettis and Dani Rodrik.
I can tell you from personal experience, the Detroit story is an ugly one.
The destruction of the US industrial base has been purposeful. The cure, if possible, will not be pretty or quick.
I have often pointed out that if a foreign leader the US doesn't like wins an election under the same circumstances Joe Biden did, they get sanctions.
The presidential candidate getting more votes than the rest of their party's federal candidates is nothing new. A common observation by poll workers is the number of people who only vote for President and don't vote for anything else. But usually there isn't the gap like Biden had.
Proportionately, Joe Biden’s gap was lower than Secretary Clinton’s.