20
Liberal Opinion Week
March 23, 2016
Ruth Marcus
Donald Trump’s Thuggery It’s always a good day in middle school when the seventh-graders make it out of the cafeteria without a lunchtime food fight. So we should, I suppose, pause to appreciate the restraint and substance of the latest GOP presidential debate. The candidates, most notably mashed-potatoflinger-in-chief Donald Trump, managed to make it through the evening without resort to belittling invective (“little Marco,” “lying Ted”) or juvenile puffery (“He referred to my hands, if they are small, something else must be small. I guarantee you there is no problem. I guarantee.”) Sigh of relief, and credit to CNN moderator Jake Tapper and his colleagues for substantive questions that did not prod the candidates to taunt one another. “So far I cannot believe how civil it’s been up here,” Trump observed at one point in the evening, as if he has not been the chief engine of 2016 campaign incivility. But it’s also important to note: This is grading on the most generous curve. The lowest point of the evening -- as disappointing as it was predictable -- came when Tapper asked Trump about violent attacks on protesters at his rallies. Just the day before the debate, at an event in North Carolina, a Trump supporter identified as John McGraw punched a demonstrator in the face. “We don’t know who he is, but we know he’s not acting like an American,” said McGraw, who has since been charged with assault, in footage posted by Inside Edition. “The next time we see him, we might have to kill him.” Kill him. Stop and think about that scary mindset. Because Trump doesn’t. The moment was played nonstop on cable news, but he didn’t take the time to look at what had happened at one of his own events, much less accept any responsibility for it. “Do you believe that you’ve done anything to create a tone where this kind of violence would be encouraged?” Tapper asked. Trump responded with the weakest of condemnations. He spent more time empathizing with the understandable anger of his supporters than criticizing their unacceptable conduct. “People come with tremendous passion and love for the country, and when they see protest, … you know, you’re mentioning one case, which I haven’t seen, I heard about it, which I don’t like,” he said. “But when they see what’s going on in this country, they have anger that’s unbelievable. They have anger. They love this country. They don’t like seeing bad trade deals, they don’t like seeing higher taxes, they don’t like seeing a loss of their jobs where our jobs have just been devastated. ... There is some anger. There’s also great love for the country. It’s a beautiful thing in many respects. But I certainly do not condone that at all, Jake.” Tapper persisted. “Some of your critics point to quotes you’ve made at these debates -- at these
rallies -- including February 23rd, ‘I’d like to punch him in the face,’ referring to a protester. February 27th, ‘in the good ol’ days, they’d have ripped him out of that seat so fast.’ February 1st, ‘knock the crap out of him, would, you? Seriously, OK, just knock the hell. I promise you I will pay for the legal fees, I promise, I promise.’”
egging on violence. Indeed, he incites his crowds against the “absolute scum,” “sleazebag,” “lying, disgusting” reporters at his rallies. On Friday, accepting the endorsement of Ben Carson, a man he once described as “pathological” and likened to a “child molester,” Trump reaffirmed his inclination to meet violence with violence, citing the example of a protestor who was “swinging” at the audience. “And the audience hit back,” Trump said, approvingly. “And that’s what we need a little bit more of.” Actually, we don’t. Left unprovoked, Trump can manage to keep things civil. That should not mask, and it does not excuse, his underlying thuggery. Ruth Marcus’ email address is ruthmarcus@ washpost.com.
Trump, characteristically, regretted nothing. “We have some protesters who are bad dudes, they have done bad things,” he said. “They are swinging, they are really dangerous and they get in there and they start hitting people. And we had a couple big, strong, powerful guys doing damage to people, not only the loudness, the loudness I don’t mind. But doing serious damage. And if they’ve got to be taken out, to be honest, I mean, we have to run something.” Trump never accepts responsibility. He never (c) 2016, Washington Post Writers Group recognizes the role his own rhetoric might play in 3-13-16
Fred Hiatt
The Real Donald Trump
If he consolidates his front-runner standing in Tuesday’s primaries, you can expect more and more Republicans to begin trying to persuade you, and themselves, that there is nothing to fear from the real Donald Trump. Trump is showing that he can appear reasonable, conciliatory, even tolerant when he wants. Redfaced and strutting, he fantasizes aloud about punching a protester in the face. Later, he can calmly deplore (while still sympathizing with) his supporters’ violence. Some Republicans have been fine with either version from the start. Reince Priebus, chairman of the Republican National Committee, is emblematic of the amoral functionary for whom Trump’s bigotry and demagoguery are irrelevant. “Winning is the antidote to a lot of things,” Priebus has observed. But others have had misgivings. Given the anti-Muslim bigotry that helped fuel his own presidential candidacy, it’s no surprise that Ben Carson could find his way to endorsing his former rival. But even Carson had to reassure himself by purporting to have discovered the “two Donald Trumps.” “There’s the Donald Trump that you see on television and who gets out in front of big audiences, and there’s the Donald Trump behind the scenes,” Carson explained. “They’re not the same person. One’s very much an entertainer, and one is actually a thinking individual.” Of course, there is only one Donald Trump, and if he continues to win you will hear several theories to explain why that singular personality is essentially benign. Some politicians will cite Trump’s all-tooevident ignorance as a blessing: He is an empty vessel who will take guidance, or unwittingly be molded, by more experienced hands.
Others will take comfort in Trump’s identity as a dealmaker who is simply staking out opening positions that he knows must eventually be moderated. Maybe the wall won’t be quite so high. Maybe we’ll split the check with Mexico. Maybe we’ll deport only 5 million people, not 11 million. Still others will assure us, and themselves, that he can’t possibly mean the things he says. They know someone who knows someone who’s been to his parties; he’s a nice guy; he’s not really a hater. In truth, bigotry and demagoguery got Trump this far, and he cannot abandon his roots. He vaulted into politics by playing cynically on voter suspicions that America’s first black president must be foreign-born. He catapulted to the top of the Republican field by calling Mexicans rapists. Whenever his campaign needs a jolt, Trump finds an ugly way to deliver it - mocking women, threatening critics, endorsing torture. A man who gains power by showing contempt for democracy and civil discourse is not going to develop a finer sensibility as he gains more power. The reverse is far more likely. Even last week, as we were celebrating the supposedly new and improved civility of the campaign, Trump was again slandering an entire religion. “I think Islam hates us,” he told CNN’s Anderson Cooper. In the debate that night, he was asked whether he meant all 1.6 billion Muslims. “I mean a lot of them. I mean a lot of them,” Trump said, and then added in his usual conspiratorial way: “There’s something going on that maybe you don’t know about, maybe a lot of other people don’t know about, but there’s
Hiatt continued on page 21