Trump XTREME!!!!!!!!!

             So, Patagonia fleece season is officially over here in tropical Lawrence, Kansas and my inner Trump apologist is wrought with heat exhaustion, and desperate to get out. Just kidding. 0 part of me is capable of being a Trump apologist. But let’s see what I can do today.

Notice he's wearing a helmet. It's because he's extreme. (That will be important later)

             Hello all and welcome to another edition of this blog where I try to choose an example of Trump doing something well so I can perhaps delve into some analysis that digs deeper than, “Wow, can you believe he really just said that completely unfounded and offensive thing?”

Today we have a segment from the second presidential debate that covers Trump and Clinton’s stance on allowing Muslims into the country.

Disclaimer: If it wasn’t clear enough, I have absolutely no support for the things Trump says or implies here, I simply think he came out on top in terms of ‘performative’ debating.

             The question asked: 

“There are 3.3 million Muslims in the United States, and I’m one of them. You’ve mentioned working with Muslim nations, but with Islamaphobia on the rise, how will you help people like me deal with the consequences of being labeled as a threat to the country after the election is over.”

             “Well you’re right about Islamaphobia, and that’s a shame.” Alright, he’s off to a good start. Trump then turns on his heel and immediately places blame on Muslims themselves for their position in America. The message is essentially this: if Muslims want to be a part of this country, they need to do a better job reporting signs of terrorism from extremists.

And without hesitation, he throws around some pretty dangerous generalizations:

“They’re murderers, and some very bad people”

The most critical thing Trump does here is make you forget that the Muslims he’s talking about banning from the U.S. are living, breathing people.

But yet… it seems to be a clever strategy. In placing blame upon the victims, Trump gains leverage over them, making them seem like they owe him something.

            While this might not work wonders with the Muslim vote, it is his main voter base that matters. This is an instance where I believe it is important to analyze the effectiveness of someone’s communication by the reaction of their audience rather than the quality or truthfulness of their message.

TRUMP XTREME

             The rebranding is also clever. When asked if he was still in support of a ban, he responded “it’s called extreme vetting”.  An interesting approach, since much of his campaign he prided himself on the platform of keeping Muslims out of America., though I suppose this was an attempt to come off softer to avoid alienating the more moderate of his red voters.

            The biggest strength of Trump’s performance here overall is his stark contrast to Hillary’s stilted, dry, and slow delivery. She seems tired and overworked, and is always on the defense to Trump’s remarks. Being aggressive, bickering with the moderator over question time and repeating important soundbites made Trump appear more charismatic, and most importantly memorable.

While I would personally critique that he ought not go back and forth with Hillary over the Iraq war or comment on question time so incessantly, I think none of these small things mattered when it came to the final result.

Although it hurts my heart and is saddening to say, Trump won…this segment of the debate.

Trump Train

First, please listen to this song.

Hey all. Now I know I haven’t established enough of a consistent audience to assume those reading are familiar with my opinion on the candidate I have chosen to write about. To put it simply: it is not a favorable one. However, I think it’s time to take a step back. I don’t like the guy, but I think on this assignment I’m gonna give him a fair shot. I could have chosen a speech where he made offensive remarks, or gave a poor oral performance, but instead I will review what critics deemed Trump’s best speech. 

The speech:

Trump opens with his usual buoyancy. He exudes confidence and probably a harsh odor.

Play fair

He’s posted at the podium ready to give a prepared and polished speech. After greeting the crowd, he immediately points out his female audience located close to the stage. Women cheer, and the mood and charisma of the rally is promising.

Early on enough in the speech for it to make a difference, Trump’s teleprompter is on the fritz. The carefully planned speech he had prepared so hard for could all collapse with one slip of the tongue comment. But what’s this? There is none? Trump gets through an hour long un-scripted speech without saying anything astoundingly controversial or offensive?

Rein it in.

Yes, it appears Trump delivered a speech without teleprompters that didn’t anger his PR team. He did a lot of things well in this speech, as well as use the tech malfunction to his advantage to build on the narrative that he’s not like other politicians. This proved especially convenient, given that many times in this speech, Trump hits on the point that he’s not privy to big donors and lobby groups, “My only interest is the American people”, again distancing himself from establishment candidates, namely Hillary Clinton. This is another thing that plays well for Trump in this speech. This subtler Trump comes off as softer and more mature. 

He states:

“I will never put personal profit before national security. I will never leave our border open to appease donors and special interests. I will never support a trade deal that kills American jobs. I will never put the special interests before the national interest. I will never put a donor before a voter, or a lobbyist before a citizen.”

All of this is in direct opposition to Clinton, but he never says the name.

             When he finally does bring up her name, he makes a strategic choice to frame Hillary’s political correctness and scandals as a problem with the establishment, associating it with lies and secrecy, while he, Trump, who may be offensive and misguided at times, is only being “honest”. Though I disagree with this on all ethical and logical grounds, I think it was a smart move to put his own criticisms on the back burner to Hillary’s.

A final thought on the successful aspects of this speech again goes back to subtlety. We’re all pretty aware of the choice words Trump has had about Mexicans. A main point of his speech was his stance on immigration, as one would expect, it’s one of his trademarks. But this time, his anti-immigration rhetoric is different than usual. He does not speak about Mexicans as aggressors, but rather appeals to the victims of “immigrant crime” (is “immigrant crime” on US civilians a thing?). This was clever of Trump's team because it steered clear of alienating voters that may be anti-immigration, but also have less rigid a stance.

I love this picture.

Now,

my biggest no-no about this speech is Trump’s blame game.

“They will take words of mine out of context and spend a week obsessing over every single syllable, and then pretend to discover some hidden meaning in what I said.”

Here he is bad-mouthing the media again. He goes on about this for a while, and in summation, takes zero responsibility for the words that come out of his mouth. The single biggest problem I see in Trump’s campaign strategy is his unrelenting denial of being wrong. Trump has a very difficult time acknowledging his mistakes without making excuses. See: Locker room talk. I believe many Americans would have more sympathy for Trump’s wrongdoings if he were to own up to them honestly, but he does not.

In his North Carolina rally, Trump was successful in proving to voters that he’s truly unlike any candidate before him. He goes off-book and delivers an understated, yet powerful speech that is now being called the best Trump speech to date. I’m proud of this boy. He has shown that he is capable of being a professional in a political environment, and that is a glimmer of hope. I would like to see more of THIS version of Trump in office.

Trump-fil-A

(If you read my last post I wanted you to know that I imagine Trumpagonia being chanted to this exact tune.)

Here I am sipping Chick-fil-A lemonade in direct contradiction with my Patagonia synchilla, and beliefs on social policy. I’m pondering two things. First, why did they cancel The Apprentice? I mean, I know Trump blames Schwarzenegger, but I think that’s pretty unfair. Second, I’m thinking about the Trump presidential campaign-- everything that went wrong, and worse: everything that went right.

Finally, a brand that a Trump supporter can get on board with.

Trump is consistently a cool guy having a chill day. He’s twitter famous, a CEO, and a reality TV star, in other words, a total diva. He’s the candidate that’s going to put up a fight, grill his opponents, and he’s wearing a polyester MAGA hat while doing it. He appeals strongly to a poorly educated and predominately white demographic, a potent group that has demonstrated their power forthrightly in this election. Unfortunately, with such bellicosity and gusto comes a loose tongue and poor impulse control. He says things that get him into trouble, and puts himself in precarious positions. He lacks political experience and tends to come off as amateurish and unprofessional.

            On the Clinton campaign front, one woman’s trash is another man’s treasure. The email scandal, her connections with Wall Street, and her tendency to musical chair her stances on issues, all presented themselves as opportunities that the Trump campaign took advantage of. The campaign was, however, confronted with several complications as well. Trump’s Access Hollywood tape, self-contradictory statements, and a fat pile of lawsuits all posed threats for the campaign, but with their usual effervescence and class, the Trump campaign staff was able to overcome. But not really. I would argue that the campaign staff did little to mitigate these concerns. Trump either excused his comments as unrepresentative of his beliefs, or shrugged accusations off, commenting with his typical bravado that he could, “stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and [he] wouldn’t lose voters," and he was probably right.

            Also, I’ve ran out of Chic-fil-A fries, and that reminds me, did you know Trump publicly stated he wants Chic-fil-A to be open on Sundays? Thought it was funny.

The Trump campaign was riding on successfully delivering a very specific narrative to an extremely choice group of people. The object of the campaign was to paint the current establishment as incompetent. The previous administration was accused of putting the country at risk at the border, abroad, and at home, wasting American’s tax dollars and hard work. The issues at the forefront of the campaign were immigration policy, healthcare, and the tax code. Surely given the results of the election he covered the issues important to his voter base, but in order to win the popular vote, and the guy definitely wanted to, he needed more substance on these issues. There was a lot of talk about what and why, but not enough how. Many politicians and citizens questioned Trump’s ability to draft and execute the legislation he was pushing for, due to the infeasibility of many of his ideas. (Check the sick links that demonstrate why each of his major policy platforms I listed will fail).

4r Da Squaw

Now it’s time to introduce some members of Team Trump™.

First, he’s big, he’s grizzly, he’s Executive Chairman Steve Bannon. He has experience in political journalism being a founder of the far-right publication Breitbart News. The publication has been referred to as an “alt-right hub” where extremist conservatives congregate. Here’s an example of one of their headlines: 

“Birth Control Makes Women Unattractive and Crazy.” Same.

            Bannon’s role in Trump’s campaign began before it was official. He started by plugging Trump propaganda on Breitbart, and hosted multiple radio interviews with Trump, positing him in a favorable manner. The apparent brownnosing worked, and Bannon was signed on as chief executive. Since then, it has been relatively smooth sailing, and Bannon will likely be assuming the position Trump appointed to him on the National Security Council.

        Up next, she’s fearless, she’s supreme, she’s Campaign Manager Kellyanne Conway and she’s here to lay out the alternative facts. A republican woman of high education and successful career and family life, Kellyanne Conway is a perfect on-paper choice for campaign management. With experience as a strategist and pollster, Conway appears to be a good fit for the job. Conway met Trump in 2006 when she was living in one of his buildings and is said to have known him well. So well, in fact, she found it necessary to publicly refer to herself as “the Trump whisperer”. Good for her. The relationship between Trump and Conway seems stronger than ever, as she was appointed Counselor to President Trump.

          In an effort to sum this up, I just want to remind everyone that this is not good. Alt-right is a movement characterized by "white identity" and "alternative facts" is alternative phrasing for outright lies. This is troublesome to say the least. I resent the fact that my opener was about Chick-fil-A because the implications of the appointments Trump is making to his staff speak to the seriousness of the peril we face.

Trumpagonia

I am stationed only feet away from a sophomore fraternity bro, adorned in all brand names; Patagonia, Adidas, and Nike, filling up a metallic water bottle ornamented in his frat’s greek symbols and a MAGA sticker. I wonder if he knows that every brand he’s wearing right now has publicly denounced Trump. And then I wonder if he even cares.

·      Patagonia founder: 'Trump is the perfect person to take us to the apocalypse'

·      Adidas "…took a stance against Trump…releasing a company-wide email to all employees in which they denounced his actions."

·       Nike President and CEO: "Nike believes in a world where everyone celebrates the power of diversity…Those values are being threatened by recent executive order in the U.S. banning refugees…”

The interesting thing about Donald Trump is that he transcends conventional politics. Lacking political experience, party loyalty, and having little more to show than a background in business is only the beginning of Trumps 'unusual' candidacy. Party kingpins have criticized him, international leaders have condemned him, and celebrities rebuke him. Nonetheless, he soared in the primaries, he won the republican nomination, and he won the presidency.  Despite all of the criticisms and condemnations, the electorate, the Republican Party and the Electoral College still elected Donald Trump. I guess frat bros really don’t care if their MAGA sticker contradicts their fratagonia sweater.

An August 2016 Pew Research study states “Just 27% of registered voters say Trump would be a great or good president; 15% say he would be average, while 12% say he would be poor and 43% say he would be terrible.” And according to RealClearPolitics as of Jan. 29^th, 2017, Trump’s approval rating is at 44%.

For comparison, “Barack Obama’s first disapproval rating was only 12 percent. Even George W. Bush, who was elected after a protracted and controversial recount, opened with only 25 percent disapproval. Bill Clinton won just 43 percent of the vote in 1992, but only 20 percent disapproved of his job performance at the outset of his presidency in 1993.” (politico)

This poses a lofty threat for our President. As seen by Press Secretary Spicer’s freak out over crowd sizes at the inauguration (here), and Trump’s denial of approval rating data here,

...it is clear the Trump administration is very concerned with public opinion.

        While the administration seems to care a lot about being viewed in a positive light, they choose to DENY, DENY, DENY, negative attitudes instead of changing their approach. This proves problematic for those public dissenters, as this Vox article points out; approval ratings are one of the only avenues by which the public can restrain a president’s actions.
         Of course, the perception of Trump goes far beyond quantitative means, and is perhaps more striking when demonstrated anecdotally. Trump is widely condemned for comments he has made about women, ethnic minorities, the disabled, and other marginalized groups. Members of the public as well as government circles have given him titles such as “racist, sexist, and xenophobic”. While all of these criticisms should be staggering for anyone in public office, it does not seem like the administration has made pushes to deny accusations of bigotry, but rather, change the narrative to one that labels accusers as delicate and easily-offended.

Though I hardly see a future where this is the case, if Trump and his staff decided they want to improve the administration's image, they must start listening to their constituents. No more flipping the narrative, or minimizing claims of bigotry. When the numbers tell you that under half the public supports or approves of you within the day you assume office, as Winston Churchill once said, "However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results." 

I really like to avoid using absolutist phrases such as “never”, “always”, “none”, or “all”, but this election, and this campaign have left me with little other vocabulary to describe the events of the last several months. So many things about the 2016 presidential were unprecedented in our history, Donald Trump himself being one of those things.   

Never before has a president of the United States starred in a reality television show.

Before Trump, it was always customary for U.S. presidents to play by the conventional rules of political correctness.

All previous presidents have had some amount of political experience before entering Executive Office.

None of the previous U.S. presidents in the past 40 years have had as low approval ratings as Trump upon entering office, and that’s considering that these are comparatively less contentious times.

He is unlike anything we’ve ever seen before, and I guess that’s what people like about him.