By Nick Catoggio
Thursday, August 01, 2024
I trust Donald Trump’s political instincts more than I
trust my own.
How could I not? In 2015, I thought the American right
cared about “constitutional conservatism” and shrinking the size of government.
Trump thought it cared about boorish performances of dominance and owning the
libs by hook or by crook. I assumed most Republicans were classically liberal;
he assumed most were crassly authoritarian or indifferent to civic tradition.
He was right, I was wrong. Mea culpa.
He wasn’t as right about how popular his brand of
politics would prove to be with the wider electorate, but fairness requires us
to admit he was more right than wrong about that too. He won the presidency
once, came surprisingly close to winning it again, and overperformed his
polling in both races. Amid all the hype
about Kamalamentum this week, he still leads in national surveys and
the RealClearPolitics’
polling averages.
The American mind is Trumpier than many of us would have
believed 10 years ago. I’ll never look at the country the same way.
And so when Trump resorts to a political gambit that
seems to me gross and counterproductive, the humility I’ve learned from
underestimating him and overestimating the American people leads me to paranoia
about what he’s seeing that I must be missing.
“Is she Indian or is she black?” he wondered of Kamala
Harris during
an interview on Wednesday at the National Association of Black Journalists
convention. “I respect either one but she obviously doesn’t because she was
Indian all the way and then all of a sudden she made a turn and she went—she
became a black person.”
Not only is that not true, it’s the opposite of true.
Harris was “black enough” in her youth to have attended
Howard University, America’s most prominent historically black college.
While there, she joined the oldest black sorority in the United States. If
there’s evidence of her denying or downplaying her black ancestry in the past,
I’m unaware of it. So are Republicans, presumably: The various cracks
they made last week about her being a “DEI hire” weren’t aimed at the
Indian side of her parentage, I suspect.
Trump’s comment at the NABJ convention turned out not to
be an ad lib, but rather part of an apparently considered strategy to question
how authentically black America’s first black vice president actually is. All
day long on Wednesday, he and his Renfields in
right-wing media highlighted moments from Harris’ past in which her Indian
heritage on her mother’s side was emphasized,
sometimes by
Harris herself. “Unlike you, Kamala, I know who my roots are. I know where
I come from,” sneered
Trump lawyer turned populist “personality” Alina Habba, warming up the crowd at
his rally in Pennsylvania.
There was even a birtherism cameo courtesy of Trump
fanatic Laura
Loomer, who posted a copy of Harris’ birth certificate on social media and
noted triumphantly that nowhere does it say she’s black or African—merely
“Jamaican.” Trump himself pronounced Loomer “a fantastic
person, a great woman” at an event a few days ago.
The effort to muddle Harris’ racial background is still
going as I write this on Thursday morning. “Thank you Kamala for the nice
picture you sent from many years ago! Your warmth, friendship, and love of your
Indian Heritage are very much appreciated,” Trump wrote in a post
on Truth Social, appending an old photo of Harris in traditional Indian
dress with some of her Indian relatives.
Why is he doing this? What is he seeing that I’m
missing?
Eating the pieces.
Maybe nothing.
Donald Trump’s political ploys are not always driven by
animal cunning, needless to say. In 2018, when he pardoned populist chud Dinesh
D’Souza, BuzzFeed
reached out to a former Trump administration official in hopes of
understanding the strategic logic behind the move. There probably wasn’t any,
the official told them. Trump typically doesn’t play “the sort of
three-dimensional chess people ascribe to decisions like this,” he claimed.
“More often than not he’s just eating the pieces.”
That’s the most popular theory online
to explain his turn toward race-baiting Harris. He’s eating the pieces. Under
stress as the race tightens, he’s resorting to the undisciplined wild-man
flailing of his first campaign in 2016.
Like any rodent, an authoritarian demagogue will revert
to instinct when cornered. And Trump feels cornered right now: His glide path
to reelection was disrupted by the Democratic switcheroo, Harris is proving to
be more politically agile than many of us expected, and he’s at dire risk of
having Pennsylvania slip away if she selects Gov. Josh Shapiro as her running
mate. Overcome with panic and frustration, he’s doing what comes naturally to a
right-wing nationalist leader: He’s indulging his prejudices.
When he posted that photo of Harris in a sari, I
bet his pupils were fully dilated.
But it isn’t hard to impute some Machiavellian strategic
logic to him in this matter, if you’re so inclined. Whether Americans are
willing to place a nonwhite woman from San Francisco in charge of the U.S.
military is very much an open question, so it was inevitable that Trump would
begin to look for ways to accentuate the “nonwhite” part. Starting a moronic
argument over Harris’ ancestry serves his interests by refocusing voters on the
fact that, wherever they might land on the “black or Indian?” question, they’re
thinking about the fact that Harris isn’t white.
She’s not one of us. She’s the
“weird” one. That’s Nationalism 101. It’s not a coincidence that Trump got
his start in Republican politics noisily demanding proof that the first black
president was actually born in America.
There’s also a certain sinister logic in impugning Harris
as a phony, an eternal theme in Trump’s demagoguery even apart from questions
of race. Two days after Joe Biden withdrew, with Democrats rapidly uniting
behind the vice president, I predicted
that “for the next three and a half months, the Republican message about her
will be simply this: Everything about her is illegitimate. Everything.”
The essence of Trump’s narcissism, and of the right’s
cultish devotion to him, is the belief that he’s some sort of invincible hero
who can’t lose in a fair fight even though he’s never touched 47 percent in a
national election. Everyone who impedes his path to power is accused of
cheating or deceit of some sort, from the fakery of “Republicans in name only”
who criticize him to the massive fraud supposedly committed by Democrats in
rigging the 2020 election.
His two favorite words to describe his setbacks are
“hoax” and “scam,” underlining his belief that he’s unstoppable unless his
opponent stoops to chicanery. Go figure that he would eventually try to
shoehorn Kamala Harris’ ancestry into that critique by questioning the
sincerity of her own blackness. Everything about her is illegitimate—“fake! fake! fake!”
to quote the man himself—including her racial identity.
There’s a third strategic virtue to attacking Harris in
an ugly way: It steers the media spotlight away from her and back to Trump
himself.
One might interpret that as another case of him acting on
instinct under pressure, saying whatever he needs to feed his bottomless
appetite for publicity. But there’s a method to the madness, as Jonathan Last
explains:
Trump’s view of politics is that
nothing can be accomplished without dominating cultural attention. It does not
matter if people love you or hate you—you want them fixated on you. From there,
you can figure out the angles. (And let the Electoral College do its work.)
…
For the 11-day span from Joe Biden
stepping aside to yesterday, Donald Trump was invisible. Kamala Harris
dominated the country’s attention and sparked the emergence of a genuine
cultural movement.
Trump needed to get back on the
screen in order to compete with her in the attention economy.
I thought that the race becoming a referendum on Joe
Biden’s untested vice president instead of a referendum on Trump would hurt
Democrats. That hasn’t been the case so far. Harris has performed well enough,
and has been received with sufficient excitement, to have erased Biden’s
deficit in some polls in less than two weeks’ time.
Maybe Trump feared that she was suddenly on her own glide
path to victory and that he needed to do something dramatic to disrupt it,
which he did. Harris has now temporarily been thrown off-message, forced to
decide whether to get sucked into a counterproductive argument about her racial
background or to ignore it and let Trump press his case on that subject
unopposed.
Still, I don’t think any of these points get to the real
strategic logic that’s motivating him.
Race-baiting with a twist.
Only in America could a right-wing demagogue adored by
white reactionaries end up arguing that his opponent isn’t proud enough to
be black.
The twist in Trump’s race-baiting of Kamala Harris is
that it isn’t chiefly intended for his base, I think, the “one of us” factor
notwithstanding. It’s intended for black voters, or nonwhite voters generally.
He wants them to see themselves as victims of a hoax perpetrated by the vice
president.
One of the great subplots of the campaign is how well
Trump was polling with nonwhites by traditional Republican standards when Joe
Biden was his opponent. Less than a month ago, a New
York Times poll found him effectively tied with the president among
Hispanics and pulling more than 20 percent of the black vote, all of which had
left swing states like Arizona, Nevada, and Georgia firmly in his column.
Racial realignment has many causes, from high inflation
to the GOP’s reorientation toward the working class to the left’s alienating
enthrallment with cultural progressivism. As of a few weeks ago, it had remade
the electoral map.
Harris’ sudden ascension is an X-factor. No one knows yet
how much more a black Democratic nominee might appeal to black and Hispanic
voters who’ve been flirting with the GOP, but Trump is doubtless worried about
it—and he
should be. The latest
poll of battleground states has Harris suddenly leading by two points in
Arizona and Nevada and tied with him in Georgia.
She stands a better chance than Biden of recapturing some
of the gains Trump has made with nonwhite voters over the last two years. But
at the same time, she’s nowhere near reassembling the racial coalition that
handed Barack Obama two easy victories. As Ruy Teixeira pointed
out in a post on Thursday, Obama won nonwhite voters by 64 points in 2012.
Harris is winning them by just 34. The gap is even wider among working-class
nonwhites, with Harris enjoying a 29-point advantage as compared to Obama’s
67-point victory the year he was reelected.
Trump has a real opportunity among nonwhite voters if he
can hold down Harris’ margins as she scrambles to win them over. So he’s
offering African Americans a reason to turn against her: She’s privately
ashamed of being black, he implied in his comments on Wednesday, and chose to
downplay that part of her ancestry until it became professionally useful for
her to celebrate it. She’s always preferred to be thought of as Indian.
She’s scamming them, in other words, by pretending to
identify with them now when she supposedly never did so before. It’s another
hoax.
Republicans have had good luck in the past making
laughingstocks of Democratic senators over their dubious assertions of racial
identity, as Elizabeth
“Pow Wow Chow” Warren could tell us. The difference is that Warren’s claim
to Native American ancestry truly
was “stolen valor” whereas Harris’ claim to black ancestry is not. And
unlike with Warren, evidence of Harris’ pride in her black heritage didn’t
emerge opportunistically later in life. As I noted earlier, it stretches back
to her youth.
Insofar as media reports stressed the Indian
side of her ancestry when she was elected to the Senate in 2017, there’s an
obvious, mundane explanation. The media loves “firsts” and Harris was the first
Indian American to join the chamber. She wasn’t the first black American to do
so, or even the first black woman. The press focused on the more novel aspect
of her identity, as it’s wont to do.
Attacking Harris for supposedly lacking black pride isn’t
even the first time lately that Trump has tried pandering to a traditional
liberal constituency by accusing prominent Democrats of having betrayed their
racial or religious identity. In his zeal to exploit the anxiety some
pro-Israel Jewish Democrats feel about the left’s influence on Gaza policy, he
accused Chuck Schumer of having “become
a Palestinian.” During a recent
radio interview, when the host called Harris’ husband a “crappy Jew” due to
his left-wing politics, Trump agreed.
Because Trump is amoral, he lacks the inherent distaste
for identity politics that many traditional conservatives have. His approach to
the subject is the same as his approach to everything else: Whether it’s good
or bad depends entirely on whether it serves his personal interests. If he can
plant a seed of doubt in the minds of black voters that Kamala Harris is less
proud of her blackness than they are of theirs, driving a wedge between her and
them, he’s happy to do it.
And a movement of lowbrow
populists that believes his criminal rap sheet and history of fathering
children with multiple women will endear him to African Americans is willing to
back him to the hilt.
Will it work?
Baiting Harris on her ancestry seems to me more likely to
cause black voters to feel defensive on her behalf than to persuade them to
treat her as some sort of race traitor. And focusing swing voters on her lousy
progressive legislative and prosecutorial record seems to me more fruitful
than focusing them on whether “Jamaican” is a synonym for “black.”
My instinct, one shared by many
Republicans inside the Capitol, is that a campaign preoccupied with the
question of precisely how “colored”
Kamala Harris is is repulsive and won’t fare well. It suffers from the same
strategic defect as choosing J.D. Vance for vice president, stroking the
right-wing id at the expense of alienating the
voters who’ll actually decide the election.
But what is my paltry instinct worth relative to Donald
Trump’s?
At this late hour in America’s decline, only a fool would
confidently predict that a hallucination about Kamala Harris suppressing all
evidence of her blackness until 2016 or whatever won’t electrify the electorate
and convince them to prefer a coup-plotter with three indictments still pending
against him. This country has more than enough damaged, unserious people to
reelect him.
If nothing else, it’ll be fascinating to watch his army
of trolls online and in right-wing media lend their support by feigning alarm
and confusion about a concept as straightforward as being biracial. “You mean
to say that Kamala Harris is somehow black and Indian—and can identify
with either side depending on the cultural context? Whoever heard of such a
thing?”
Except for the Republican nominee for vice president,
that is, whose own children are Indian American on their mother’s side. Perhaps
the ultimate loyalty test for J.D. Vance will come when Trump orders him to
start wondering aloud whether there’s something inherently suspicious about
being biracial. J.D. being J.D., there’s a nonzero chance that he’ll do it.
As for the populist minions who stand behind him and
Trump, they’ve become quite good at willing
alternate realities into being through sheer messaging exertion. Convincing
Americans that a biracial person like Harris can’t possibly be proud of both
parents’ ancestry if she once wore a sari in a photo will be a heavy
lift even for them, but I don’t doubt that they’re willing to make the effort.
And if it doesn’t work, they’ve always got her birth
certificate to scrutinize. “They all say, ‘I think he’s changed. I think he’s
changed since two weeks ago. Something affected him,’” Trump told
a rally crowd recently, referring to the attempt to assassinate him. “No, I
haven’t changed,” he quickly added. “Maybe I’ve gotten worse.” By the time this
campaign is over, we’ll know how much worse he’s capable of getting.
No comments:
Post a Comment