Donald J. Trump and the Politics of Democratic Dysfunction

Political Power and Social Theory, 2023

Most analyses of Donald Trump's presidency stress its uniqueness. For many commentators, the "crisis of democracy" refers to Trump's January 2021 coup attempt and his other authoritarian machinations. Some analysts speak of the "Trump effect" on the Republican Party. Yet in most respects Trump is an extreme expression of longstanding patterns. Trump's style of demagoguery draws from the historic repertoire of the Right, while most of his policies as president were consistent with those of his predecessors. The Democratic Party, meanwhile, appears incapable of stopping the spread of far-right politics, largely because the party is unable and/or unwilling to deliver major redistributive reforms. Trump and Trumpism are symptoms of this deeper systemic crisis.

Neoliberalism in 21st Century Politics: Klein, Lacan and the Working Class, 2023

Donald Trump’s election to the United States presidency has been no doubt one of the most defining moments in recent political history, and has been the subject of considerable scrutiny and analysis from a plethora of political and academic sources. Described as “the most shocking election upset in American history” (Ferguson et al. 2018, p1) and an “American Tragedy” (Remnick, 2016). The aggressive, polarising and often offensive means in which Trump used his platform to express the sentiment that America was in a state of disrepair evidently resonated with a considerable portion of the American population. But how did Trump’s nationalist rhetoric manage to propel him to the office of the White House?

Introduction This decade has been characterised by dramatic changes, from Arab spring, the spectacular Brexit effects, and unprecedented American presidential elections that shook the entire world, and increased stress disorder among Americans themselves (APA,2016). In USA particularly, as American voters exercised their rights to vote, in a one of the most democratic fashion in the world, the entire world was taken off guard to learn that Mr. Trump is the next President of the most powerful country on earth-USA! Hard to believe it, too good to be true, shocking, the most important day of a brighter future of Americans, or in a simplified term: A mixed emotions and feelings. However, due to his perceived strong ultranationalist position, unpredictability, enthusiasm among his core supporters and his tough political fights against all who opposed him, including his own party members ( GOP), together with his controversies and dirty campaign he ran against his 16 opponents in GOP primaries, and later even dirtier and muddy political fight when he was running against his democratic opponent, he become more concern of fantasy to many, in USA and in the world. Most of all, he emerged out of nowhere, without any political experience, nor military service, knocked out all of his GOP opponents who were more politically qualified, with higher education than him, such as Dr.Ben Carson ( a well respected paediatric surgeon), Dr. Rand Paul, and big names like Jeb Bush ( George W. Bush brother, and son of George H.Bush), and ultimately a big surprising knockout against one of the most politically experienced-Hilary Clinton. However, weeks before election, Trump had been accused by more than 10 women for sexual assault, and even worse, a Hollywood video released, where Trump was on hot mic bragging about how he assaulted women by starting by “touching the pussy”( Trump said), because he was a celebrity. However, regardless all odds, without any political experience, with flip and flops on may issues or without clarity at all, had lost all 3 presidential debates to Hilary Clinton, his wife Melania accused of illegal earning when she was a model ( she did not have a work permit. Allegations claim),and for the first time in history of USA presidential elections Trump refused to release his tax return ( “None of your business”-Once he told a journalist), he surprised American people and the world with a clean winning to become the 45th US President. Donald Trump has tapped into anger of many unhappy American people, who erratically celebrated his victory, praised by KKK group that marched in celebratory event to Trump’s election, and even more so, young children in middle and high school who chanted “ BUILD THE WALL” against Mexican origin classmate, while other students were chanting “WHITE POWER” holding Trump’s sign. However, his [Trump] election to president angered more on the other hand, who subsequently took on the street of many cities in USA right after his election. He has said more than hundreds of things (By Jenna Johnson, Washington Post, January 22-2016; Java Lange August 4th 2015/ The Week) that put many at an ease, swore more than angry bad or The Simpsons (cartoons show), confronted his own party and threatened to breakaway should they bother him, proposed unacceptable ideas such as waterboarding, stop and frisk, banning Muslims from entering USA “until we figure out what the HELL is going on”, ending gun free zones such as schools, threatened to punish women for their own productive choices and much more. Many of annalists possibly including myself said: This is it! Given the fact that minority such as Black Americans, latinos and Native americans and women don’t like these ideas, and no single president has even won election in this country without a sizeable percentage of the minority groups, Hilary Clinton is the next president of the United States of America. But “SURPRISE”!!!We were all “ WRONG”. How did he get away with it? How did he win and leave many people scratching their heads, despite all polls suggesting his opponent -Hilary- a winner with possibility of a “landslide victory”? This paper will highlight some plausible psychological observations and factors that catapulted Trump to the most powerful and relevant position in the world, oval office!

Fast Capitalism, 2016

In the contemporary capitalist global economy, as many of the authors in this issue of Fast Capitalism assert, markets have been remade by neoliberal leaders and organizations to favor greater global finance, manufacturing, and trade over preserving the prosperity of entire national economies. Under the blows of the austerity that such policies bring, democratic political hopes and cultural traditions are suffering new crises and shocks. From the Brexit vote in Great Britain, a hard-line party crackdown in China, and low intensity warfare with Russia in Ukraine to a failed coup in Turkey, a severe presidential crisis in Brazil, and the ongoing fragmentation Syria in its brutal civil war, the struggles between ruling elites and restive mass publics are becoming more bitter and severe. In this respect, the United States plainly is no longer an exceptional country. Indeed, as the 2016 presidential primaries for the Democratic and Republican parties in the United States of America have unfolded both at home and around the world, the crass culture of "reality TV" with its heated celebrations of extraordinary individual wealth, cruel competitive gamesmanship, and vicious spectacles of personal debasement simply to gain a bigger audience and dominate daily discussion incredibly has colonized the presidential elections in the USA. The centerpiece of this development is the bizarrely successful bid by Donald J. Trump to win the Republican Party nomination, which he captured during July 2016 despite widespread dissatisfaction in the party with this outcome. Trump's unique rhetorical mix of individual put-downs, suspiciously sweeping negative generalizations, anti-establishment insults, and xenophobic calls to greatness quickly have, in turn, become his campaign's most distinctive feature. While his bombast has started to stall going into the general campaign in August 2016, if only because of Trump's resolve to run as a Washington outsider and champion of "America First" policies, his over-the-line approach to electioneering continues to excite many alienated voters. Many political pundits are arguing that Trump also is driving away most moderate voters, and he is flagging in almost all of the swing states. Nonetheless, it is still over two weeks before Labor Day, and many electoral campaigns find new focus and energy as Election Day draws near. Even so, one must return the decades before World War II to find equally extreme politicking in a major political party's campaign messaging and policy positioning. By praising Vladimir Putin's strong leadership, harping on President Obama's African heritage, ridiculing disabled reporters for their special needs, insulting female newscasters with sexist comments, doubting the geopolitical purposes of NATO, suggesting nuclear weapons would be used in the Middle East to defeat fundamentalist Islamic terrorists, hinting gun owners in defense of the Second Amendment "might do something" about Hilary Clinton to prevent her packing the Supreme Court with anti-gun justices, and claiming President Obama founded ISIS (the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria), Trump has pressed harder on his strangely twisted appeal to the darkest fears of the GOP party faithful by taking his gloomy vision into the national campaign. He unfortunately won too many primary elections by appearing seriously to regard myths as facts, facts

Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties

The 2016 US presidential contest, and Donald Trump's election, present challenges to political science. This special issue explores some of what political science got "right" and "wrong" in terms of anticipating, or failing to anticipate, Trump's success. It explores some of what the discipline may learn from the 2016 election by asking what Trump's candidacy illuminates about the success and limitations of literature on elections, public opinion, and parties. These papers touch on the uniqueness of Trump's candidacy, but it is important to start by placing the 2016 election in context. As Endres, Panagopoulos, and Weinschenk (2018) document, polling throughout the election suggested Hillary Clinton would win, and, indeed, Clinton won the popular vote with a 2% margin, earning nearly 3 million more votes than Trump. The Electoral College being what it is, if less than 40,000 votes flipped differently in three states 1 that Trump narrowly won, Clinton could have been President. Under that scenario, one that most observers expected, this issue would certainly be different: perhaps examining the continuity of Barack Obama legacy, Obama's enduring multi-racial coalition, the embrace of globalism, and, most certainly, the role of gender in the election of the first woman as US president. Trump would have played a role in that counterfactual issue, but not the starring role. The odd context of the 2016 US presidential election It is important to consider the election in the context of widespread dissatisfaction with the major candidates. Exit polls had 54% rating Clinton unfavorably, and 60% rating Trump unfavorably. A quarter of voters were motivated by dislike of the candidates; most of those voted Trump. Nearly a third of Trump voters found him not honest or trustworthy, and 23% of Trump voters found him unqualified. 2 This suggests widespread dissatisfaction, as

2017

Radical Philosophy Review, 2017

The election of Donald Trump as President of the United States left many progressives and liberals shocked and bewildered. During his election campaign, Trump promoted violence and appealed to racism, nativism, xenophobia, Islamophobia, ableism, and misogyny. And, as Douglas Kellner puts it, he brags, bullies, rants, displays extreme narcissism, and is a "bullshit artist" (49). So why did so many Americans vote for this "authoritarian demagogue" (57)? The books by Kellner and John B. Judis were completed after Trump's Republican nomination but prior to his election as president, while Arlie Russell Hochschild's book was completed during the Republican primaries. Still, they help to explain the rise and "success" of Trump. The works by Kellner and Judis also raise and help to address the question of how we should politically interpret Trump: Is he a rightwing populist or closer to a fascist? Relatedly, is he a threat to liberal or constitutional democracy? Kellner argues that a crucial enabling factor of Trump's rise is that his presidential campaign became a "media spectacle." He writes: "By 'media spectacle' I am referring to media constructs that present events which disrupt ordinary and habitual flows of information, and which become popular stories which capture the attention of the media and the public, and circulate through broadcasting networks, the Internet, social networking, smart phones, and other new media and communication technologies" (3). Early examples of media spectacles are the O.J. Simpson murder trial and the Clinton sex scandals, both enabled by the rise of cable news networks. Trump's election campaign as media spectacle blends celebrity, entertainment, and controversial and inflammatory politics. The groundwork for his campaign as media spectacle was laid with his business mode of operation, as described in several of his books, involving a ruthless capitalist mindset of winning at all costs and the art of branding the Trump name, and

Educational Philosophy and Theory

Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 2018

In 1939, Kenneth Burke, reviewing the first translated, unexpurgated edition of Mein Kampf for The Southern Review, complained in the introduction that earlier reviews were long on condemnation and short on analysis. His approach would be different. Hitler had "put his cards face up on the table…. Let us then for God's sake examine them," he wrote (1). Burke examined Mein Kampf, exposing Hitler's rhetoric of exclusion and scapegoating, of calling for unity behind an authoritative demagogic voice. It is in this Burkean spirit that Ryan Skinnell brought together the contributing authors to this collection-to analyze what in Trump's rhetoric has enabled him to succeed as candidate and as president. It is not surprising, then, that Burke figures prominently in this collection. Anna Young invokes Burke at the outset of her essay: she points out that Donald Trump is an habitual scape-goater. Trump has singled out Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, immigrants, Muslims, kneeling football players, and so on and held them responsible for bringing us to an apocalyptic moment from which only he can save us. But the main focus of her essay is on how Trump has united his followers. We live, she claims, in an especially stylized moment, and no politician is more committed to style than Trump. Exhibit one is the red baseball cap emblazoned with MAGA (Make America Great Again). The Trump campaign charges $30 for a cap that is, except for the lettering, indistinguishable from those sold in gas stations for a few bucks. The markup is the price of a branded political currency. Jennifer Wingard argues that Trump's politics of exclusion is consistent with a Grand Old Party program that, while distancing itself from Trump's cruder articulations, legislates consistently with them. Does this politics exclude Jews? Is Trump's rhetoric anti-Semitic? That turns out to be a complicated question for Ira Allen, who begins with a paradox. By some measures, Trump is the most Jewish president we have had: his daughter, son-in-law, and grandchildren are Jewish, and he has been more unqualified in his allegiance to Israel than any president since Truman. Yet his presidency brought an alarming rise in anti-Semitism as measured by violence taken against Jews. Allen draws on Burke's concept of consubstantiality to explain how Trump, even if he is not himself anti-Semitic, fosters anti-Semitism. At rallies Trump's red MAGA hats mingle with anti-Semitic slogans. The two ideas

Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft, 2019

Is US president Donald Trump a threat to democracy? Alerting against his manifold transgressions of democratic norms, many comparative political scientists have thought so. Their practical worries, however, have been inconsistent with prevalent theories of democratic stability. As careful examination shows, his main democratic norm violations have been discursive, and they have revealed him to be, not an ideological enemy of democracy, but a self-centered actor without deep democratic commitments. None of this should ring democratic alarm bells. But it does. As I suggest, Donald Trump has been conducting a kind of sociological “breaching experiment” on the political science community which has exposed a remarkable divergence between our main theories of democratic stability (which focus on structures, political behavior, and self-interest) and our tacit convictions (about the causal relevance of actors, political language, and normative commitments).