By Jonah Goldberg
Wednesday,
March 20, 2024
At
a rally in Ohio on Saturday, Donald Trump said that if he is not elected in
November, there will be a “bloodbath.”
That
he said that much is true. Having actually read the text of his remarks,
however, I do not believe he was threatening: “Elect me president or the
streets will run red with blood.”
But
that is exactly how many, particularly in the media, interpreted his comment.
“In Ohio campaign rally, Trump says there will be a ‘bloodbath’ if he loses
November election,” read a CBS News headline. “Trump
says country faces ‘bloodbath’ if Biden wins in November,” announced Politico.
In
context, though, two things are pretty clear. First, Trump meant reelecting
President Joe Biden would be a catastrophe, or “bloodbath,” for the automotive
industry. (He’d vowed to put a 100 percent tariff on cars built by Chinese
companies in Mexico right before his “bloodbath” comment.) Second, his comments
were a typically incoherent mess.
Trump
defenders note correctly that the term “bloodbath” is often used
metaphorically. It’s commonplace in coverage of Wall Street (“Five Tech Stocks that Survived NASDAQ’s
Bloodbath This Year”), and Trump’s recent purge of Republican
National Committee staff was dubbed a bloodbath by many of the outlets now aghast at Trump’s use of the word.
What
Trump defenders elide is that the former president has forfeited any
presumption of good intentions. Trump winks at and even celebrates violence all the
time. He fawns over authoritarians and insists that presidents, like rogue cops, should have
complete immunity to commit crimes. When the Capitol was under siege by a mob
acting on his behalf, he declined to intervene
for hours. He even defended the mob’s chants of
“Hang Mike Pence!”
Heck,
Trump once again celebrated those “great patriots” of January 6 during the same
rally Saturday, declaring those convicted of assault and other crimes
“hostages.” If these convicted criminals are hostages, where are the ransom
demands?
In
short, Trump, who routinely distorts others’ statements and plays footsie with
violence, doesn’t deserve the benefit of the doubt when he
uses terms like “bloodbath.”
But
as Clint Eastwood’s character says in Unforgiven, “deserve’s got
nothing to do with it.”
Where
I disagree with both Trump’s defenders and many media critics in this brouhaha
is that I don’t think the press is being dishonest in interpreting Trump’s use
of the word. As evidenced by the absurd 2011 media frenzy over whether Sarah
Palin’s “crosshairs” on a congressional map incited a madman to shoot then-Rep.
Gabby Giffords, journalists are often desperate to find confirmation of their
sincerely held views.
And
elected Democrats are often eager to egg them on. “Headline writers:
Don’t outsmart yourself,” Democratic Sen. Brian Schatz tweeted Saturday night. “Just
do ‘Trump Promises Bloodbath if he Doesn’t Win Election.’ ” Many obliged.
I
think those who see Trump as a singular threat to democracy, norms, decency,
and so on have some good arguments and evidence to back up their convictions.
But if that’s what journalists believe, they have all the more reason not to
indulge themselves by making the media the story. It may seem counterintuitive,
but members of the Trump-hating press would help their own cause by being more
restrained in their coverage. (And while I could make an idealistic case for
more responsible reporting, I suspect appealing to the media’s more cynical
impulse to advance their personal beliefs has more power.)
Trump
actually benefits enormously from media overreaction to his irresponsible
rhetoric. The people who instantly believe reports that Trump was threatening
carnage have already decided to vote against him (or in some cases for him).
Those aren’t the people who can still be persuaded one way or the other—the
people who will decide the election.
Every
time the media exaggerates or misleads on a specific story, it provides an
opportunity for Trump and his praetorian guard to claim that the media
exaggerate or mislead on every story. This has been the go-to
strategy for Trumpworld from the Russian-collusion story onward. And it has
worked.
Most
persuadable voters dislike both Trump and Biden. If the goal is to persuade
these so-called double-haters to vote against
Trump or for Biden, the media should get out of Trump’s way. We live in a
moment when claiming to be a victim of the media is a badge of honor. And no
one in American politics is better at playing the martyr than Trump.
Many
in the press still seem to believe they can impose their view of Trump—and of
the world generally—by simply asserting it. And yet this approach has backfired
for decades now.
It’s
not as if Trump won’t do or say more things that legitimately warrant outrage.
So why not wait for those moments?
No comments:
Post a Comment