A Racist President
The President of the United States is a racist. His supporters can rationalize that anyway they want. They can say that “the Squad” earned the “go back where you came from” comment, and that Trump was defending the Border Protection Service when he went after Maryland Congressman Elijah Cummings. But he used racist words and racist thoughts; however they try to justify it: he is a racist.
Mary Angelou said, “…when someone tells you who they are, believe them the first time.” Donald Trump has told us over and over again, and it’s far past time to believe him.
This may or may not be from a “racist” heart; who knows what the President truly thinks? But it is a racist strategy, a well thought out political plan to win the 2020 election. Racism isn’t new in politics; in my lifetime George Wallace ran as a third party candidate on a racist ticket, and George HW Bush used the “Willie Horton” ad campaign to put fear of the “black murderer” in the hearts of “white” people. But not since even before Wallace has the racism been so overt, and so focused.
Doubling Down on Race
The Trump campaign recognizes that whatever they do, 84% or more of black Americans are going to vote for his opponent. Their thinking: so what if they anger the other 16%, there really aren’t enough votes to matter.
And the Trump campaign surely realizes that they are going to alienate some portion of the Hispanic vote. They hope that their Venezuela policy and pro-life stand will hold some of them, but the response to Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico and the Trump actions on the Southern Border have probably determined that vote already. A little overt racism won’t change many more minds.
I had the opportunity to watch a movie this weekend called “The Great Hack.” It was a documentary on how Cambridge Analytica (CA) used psycho-analytics to target the “persuadable” voters. Once they knew who those voters were, they gathered as much electronic data on them as they could; preferences, jobs, joys, fears, favorites and deletions. CA then used that information to tailor specific messages to those “persuadables,” using their own personal data to try to push them to vote one way or another.
Persuadables
The Trump 2016 campaign “threaded the needle” of the electoral college, eking out narrow victories in three key states, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. We don’t know what the now documented impact of Russian attacks on the voting processes were, but we do know that the campaign and CA focused on changing the “persuadable” minds to Trump. They were successful, particularly with white working men, and white women.
That’s where the “racist” strategy is focused now. The Trump campaign knows they will get their 40% base, even if Trump “…shot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue.” What they are counting on, is that they can persuade more white men and women to vote, in fact, they hope to increase the white vote totals in those states through their racism generated fear.
The Trump campaign believes it can increase the size of the electorate, by bringing out white voters who have been sitting on the sidelines. The “persuadables” are those who aren’t voting now, using the same “psycho-analytic” social media techniques to drive home the message. Increasing the turnout of white working men is the goal: 63% of them voted for Trump in 2016 (Guardian.) It worked then, it might well work again.
The Backlash
Of course, using this radical strategy will have a backlash. Not only is it likely to drive up the turnout in minority communities, but also among the more moderate “white suburban” groups, particularly women. Post-election research for 2016 shows that 53% of white women voted for Trump, versus 43% for Clinton (Guardian.) In 2018, 59% of white women voted Democratic (CNN.) While Trump wasn’t on the ticket, his impact on that election was significant. Trump was driving the “caravan of migrants” argument all the way up to election day. That argument drove white women voters away from the Republican candidates.
Where will these “white suburban” women go in 2020? It’s difficult to see overt racism pushing them towards Trump.
Showing Up
There are other groups that Democrats could use to increase the turnout for them. Younger votes traditionally don’t vote; a candidate that energizes that block could expand the voting pool, and change the election calculations. But without depending on that, working with the “old” voting model, Democrats need to show up to vote.
The racist strategy will make the 2020 election about turnout. Can the Democratic candidate do what Hillary Clinton failed to do: increase voter turnout enough to overcome the marginal advantage Trump has in the electoral college. Two numbers to remember: Clinton won the popular vote by nearly three million; Trump won Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania by a mere 77744 votes out of over thirteen million votes. The Democratic candidate needs to get the vote out in those states like never before.
If that happens, then the racism “strategy” will fail.
