By Noah Rothman
Monday,
January 22, 2024
They say
politics is the art of persuasion, but that assumes the existence of an
audience open to being persuaded. With Republicans and Democrats alike
preparing to embark on a presidential-election cycle fronted by two of the most
well-defined and generally disliked candidates either party is capable of
producing, the universe of genuinely persuadable swing voters is a small one.
At what may be the earliest outset of the general-election campaign in living
memory, both major political coalitions appear to recognize that. They and
their allies are not tailoring their messages to either attract swing voters to
their side or repel them from their opponents. They are focused on suppressing
visible displays of dissent within their own ranks. In the process, both parties’
coalitions are telegraphing their intention to campaign for the White House by
bitterly berating their own side as much as, if not more than, the opposition.
With
Donald Trump’s re-nomination to the presidency appearing increasingly
inevitable, some Republicans have begun to sound alarm bells — all too
late, of course, and on the condition of anonymity — over signs that a sizable
portion of the GOP electorate is unenthused by the prospect. Citing polling
data and the unimpressive turnout for Iowa’s caucuses, lawmakers with an
investment in the GOP’s success warned that potential GOP votes may not be
convertible into actual GOP votes. The resources being diverted toward Trump’s
legal-defense fund compound this condition. Over a billion dollars in
unanswered Democratic ad spending will be devoted as much to building Joe Biden
up as it is to depressing potential Republican voters. How do pro-Trump forces
intend to address these suboptimal conditions? So far, the plan seems to be
limited to scolding Trump skeptics within the Republican firmament until their
morale improves.
The
primaries haven’t even concluded — not formally, at least — and already,
Trump’s proponents are menacing the former president’s critics with the threat
that, unless they buck up in some outwardly verifiable ways, they will bear
responsibility for Joe Biden’s reelection. “Whether you like Trump or not,
Americans face a binary choice,” read Senator Mike Lee’s version of this wholly uncompelling ultimatum.
North Dakota governor Doug Burgum also appealed to the “binary choice”
formulation, adding that Trump’s candidacy represents the best opportunity for
the West to avoid “World War III.” And you wouldn’t want to be responsible for
a third world war, would you? Indeed, potential Republican voters who remain on
the fence have been warned that they will be responsible for the critical-race-theory
studies in the classroom, DEI initiatives in the boardroom, chaos at the
border, and general “economic destruction.”
Perhaps
these committed Trump backers believe the prospect of their disapproval will
prove a sufficient inducement to get Republican stragglers to hop off the
fence. But the faulty logic of a “binary choice” election will not, if only
because the premise is self-evidently false. Voters will have a variety of
choices available to them in November, and not just in the form of third-party
protest candidates. Voters always have the option of leaving the top of the
ticket blank or just not participating in electoral politics at all. Indeed,
that tends to be what unenthusiastic voters do.
If
gettable GOP voters are unenthusiastic, it is because GOP primary voters made
them that way. Republican voters made an informed decision to ignore the
warning signs indicating that Trump’s presence on the ballot would repulse soft
Republicans and nonaligned voters. They invited the consequences associated
with Trump’s renomination, and a campaign of emotional blackmail will not make
their party’s enthusiasm problems disappear.
This
is not a Republican problem alone. Among rank-and-file Democrats, there is a
similar lack of organic or genuine exuberance for Biden’s reelection campaign.
So, Biden’s supporters — or, rather, the GOP’s opponents — have adopted the
shakedown tactics that mimic those deployed by pro-Trump forces.
“Some
respond by saying that Trump may be a curse, but they’re sick and tired of
voting for the lesser of two evils,” wrote Bill Clinton’s former labor
secretary, Robert Reich. “Wrong. Biden is not evil. Trump is truly evil.”
With Trump’s renomination coming into focus, Biden holdouts are being pummeled
with the accusation that their reluctance is a narcissistic exercise. The
integrity of the Constitution, America’s egalitarian ideals, and our very
national experiment in self-rule will be on the ballot in November. There are no two
sides to that argument. “You know, they are happy with or comfortable with the
notion of autocracy, of dictatorship, as opposed to democracy,” Barack Obama’s
attorney general, Eric Holder, said of Trump’s die-hards. “American democracy
could end with the election of Donald Trump.”
It
seems like everyone is gearing up for yet another “Flight 93 election.” Once again, we find ourselves perched
at the end of a precipice, and all that stands between us and oblivion is your
willingness to compromise your values — compromises to which those who make
those demands of you would never themselves submit.
Is
anyone still receptive to this trite exercise in blame-shifting? Has this sort
of eschatological hectoring ever changed a single mind? But then, maybe
persuasion isn’t the point. Perhaps the primary value of these ultimatums is
that they paper over the manifest defects apparent in the candidates they are
meant to serve. Indeed, they all but concede to critics of both Trump and Biden
that the viability of their respective candidacies is, at the very least,
suboptimal. But what can you do?
Catastrophizing
the election is a handy way to shame dissenting voices into silence, and that
is the tactic’s most attractive feature. It absolves those who imposed this
contemptible presidential matchup on voters of responsibility for their
preferences. Indeed, it renders their critics the irresponsible actors
in this drama. An election centered on two competing exercises in emotional
blackmail isn’t a persuasive enterprise. And it’s not supposed to be. It is an
internal conversation, the upshot of which is that no one really had any agency
in this process. Trump’s renomination and Biden’s reelection campaign were
ordained by fate. We are merely hostages to events. What is left to us but to
play out our predestined roles?
Nonsense.
Both likely presidential candidates got where they are because of the choices
their supporters made. And contrary to the table-pounding from the partisan
peanut gallery, all choices have consequences.
No comments:
Post a Comment