Newspaper article

Supporters Make Explicit What Trump Tries to Keep Ever-So-Slightly Unstated

Newspaper article

Supporters Make Explicit What Trump Tries to Keep Ever-So-Slightly Unstated

Article excerpt

A cynical old joke goes like this. Question: How can you tell when politicians are lying? Answer: Their lips move.

Another version, sometimes told about politics, sometimes about acting, sales work or life in general, goes like this: The secret to success in politics is sincerity. If you can fake that, you've got it made.

Notwithstanding the need to fight against excessive cynicism, and acknowledging the widespread perception among her detractors that Hillary Clinton is a liar of epic proportions, Donald Trump's success at faking sincerity is a staggering achievement.

To my eyes, Trump has elevated lying and doubletalk to new heights. He lies, then he doubles down on the lie, then he changes it to a slightly more convenient lie.

The journalistic sites that check the accuracy of politicians' statements are full of examples. Yet Trump dispatched his last Republican rival by labeling him "Lyin' Ted," and moved on to attacking "Crooked Hillary" as a "world-class liar."

And it works for him. There is little doubt in my mind that, to those who admire and support him, part of Trump's appeal is that in an age so-called "political correctness," when certain truths are censored, Trump tells it like it is.

To me, this isn't right at all. Telling it like it is means, for starters, getting your facts right. Trump's relationship to factuality is casual at best, contemptuous at worst. Telling it like it is also means that when you get your facts wrong, and this is called to your attention, you retract, apologize if necessary, and try harder to get your facts right in the future. Trump has made a virtue of never retracting or apologizing. I gather that, among some of his supporters, this passes for some kind of strength. To me, it's the opposite.

Anyway, not to dance around the point too long, many Trump critics believe that Trump's whole shtick relies heavily on thinly coded appeals to various forms of racial, gender and religious prejudice, the kind of not-quite-explicit but easily decoded messages that in past cycles have been called racist "dog whistles," referring to the kind of whistle that dogs can hear but humans cannot. To me, communicating in dog whistles is also the opposite of telling it like it is.

So I just wanted to call attention to a smart piece in Wednesday's New York Times that explores this. Times reporter Nicholas Confessore makes the rude connection between support for Trump and racism, sexism, Islamophobia. Trump, who has publicly claimed to "the least racist person," courageously declined to be interviewed for the story, so the piece lacks his input, which would surely have clarified everything.

But the cool thing Confessore did was talk to people in the alleged target audience, white males who not only harbor resentments over the perceived decline in white male dominance of America, but who were willing to make explicit what Trump tries to keep ever-so- slightly unstated, including some who appreciate his knack for sending out a message that they take as sympathy for their grievances but for maintaining a level of deniability necessary to remain politically viable. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed


An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.