The Curious Question of “Trump Interpretation”Donald Trump is no stranger to controversial statements, in fact it has been the cornerstone of his political persona, deliberately causing shock, outcry and offence to ensure the spotlight never drifts too far away. He also enjoys a strange position in politics whereby these statements are either accepted at face value or interpreted through a prism depending on the political leanings and loyalties of the listener. His detractors point to the exact words he uses to warn of the autocratic tendencies he admires and wishes to emulate, whilst his supporters selectively claim that Trump should not always be taken at his word, or that his comments are made in jest. This was a feature of the 2016 and 2020 campaigns where he frequently “joked” that he would not commit to a peaceful transfer of power as the only way he could lose the election would be if it was somehow fixed against him. The reality behind these “jokes” was clear for all to see after the election defeat in 2020 as he frantically tried every possible angle to discredit the result and stay in power. This tendency to “say the quiet part out loud” has appeared again this past week, as Trump spoke to a Christian Audience in Florida. He told them: “Christians, get out and vote, just this time,” he said. “You won’t have to do it anymore.” “You got to get out and vote. In four years, you don’t have to vote again,” he added. “We’ll have it fixed so good you’re not going to have to vote.” This is not a comment in isolation, as Trump has often floated the idea of a three or even four term Presidency, most recently referencing the “almost 16 year” Presidency of FDR when addressing the NRA convention back in May. To those who fear the autocratic tendencies of a man who has shown flagrant disregard for the institutions of democracy on multiple occasions this is yet another example of Trump openly stating his intention to move America from democracy to dictatorship. For those that support Trump, the interpretation is that a Trump presidency will have put America onto a track that any future Democrat could not replace and ruin, hence why their vote would not be required in future. Senator Lindsey Graham is one of these such voices, a man whose opinion of Trump seems to change as often as the weather. Before Trump won the election in 2016 Graham had unflatteringly described him as “A race baiting, xenophobic, religious bigot”, “The most unelectable Republican I’ve seen in my lifetime” “A kook, crazy” A jackass…Shouldn’t be commander in chief”. After his victory however, he changed tack and described him as “my President…doing a fantastic job…(and) deserves the Nobel peace prize”. After the election loss in 2020 he told Trump “not to concede” and claimed to have “no confidence in the outcome” and that there “was a civil war brewing”. This did not last however on January 6th Graham changed tack again, stating on the senate floor that Biden and Harris had been elected fairly. Perhaps the presence of a growing mob outside the doors to the Capitol building had persuaded Graham that promoting baseless claims of election fraud and promising to “fight for those that fight for us” was not the best way to safeguard American democracy. So what did Graham make of Trump’s comments this week? Threat to democracy or nothing of the sort? As you may expect the chameleonic Senator chose to interpret Trump’s words not as a signpost to dictatorship, but as a positive development: “He’s trying to tell the Christian community and anybody else who’s listening [that] the nightmare that we’re experiencing will soon be over. Give me four more years, and I’m going to right this ship called America and pass it on to the next generation,” “We will have democracy, god willing, for a very long time in this country, but what President Trump is trying to tell people — ‘I did it once, I can do it again. These problems can be solved, but you got to go in a different direction,’” In many ways Trump embodies the very definition of the archetypal scapegoat figure. For his supporters he is a blameless figure with broad shoulders able to wear the accusations of his detractors for the good of his people. For his opponents, he is the embodiment of the worst impulses and many ills of society, the mirror for the collective sins of the tribe and collective shadow made flesh. This reality allows Trump to continue to say whatever he wishes without fear of consequence, knowing that his words will be interpreted in different ways depending on the listener. My view is that Trump knows and exploits this reality, constantly pushing the limits of acceptability to prize open the Overton Window for political discourse, all the while destroying norms and degrading the institutions that a democratic system relies upon to function. In other news, the ongoing conflict in the Middle East continues and threatens to expand into a wider regional war with between Israel and Lebanese based militia Hezbollah. Israel has promised a strong response after accusing the group of killing 12 children and teenagers in a rocket attack on a football field in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, a claim denied by Hezbollah. This occurs as the backdrop to a visit from Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu to the US where he addressed congress and spoke with both Trump and Harris. This offered a glimpse into the potential differing political realities of a Trump or Harris victory for Netanyahu. Harris has a tightrope to walk, attempting to restore some integrity with Democratic voters who are supportive of Palestinian statehood and feel let down by the Biden administration continuing to fund and arm Israel, whilst also not alienating Jewish voters, donors and influential Israeli lobby in Washington. Her criticism of Israel’s conduct in the ongoing war in Gaza, and claim that she “would not be silent on Palestinian suffering” was instantly seized upon by Trump who stated in a meeting with Netanyahu “I actually do not know how a person who is Jewish can vote for her, but that is up to them.” The dual assassinations this week of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran and Hezbollah commander Fuad Shukr in Beirut risk a dangerous conflagration of the ongoing conflict. By the time a new President takes power next January, this conflict may have escalated into a wider regional war that ties the hands and limits the options of whoever occupies the Oval Office. This serves as a timely reminder that the election result in November has profound and far reaching global consequences, with interested parties watching from every country on the planet. Keep an eye out on my Instagram and TikTok in the next few days to hear me discuss these points in further detail!
|
