Trump’s Routine Outrages
When being despicable is normal, is it still news?
Visitors to the major news sites that I frequent—The New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Associated Press, NPR, YahooNews, and Google News—could easily miss what one might think would be a big story: the presumptive Republican Party nominee for President making some rather outrageous comments in a profanity-laced tirade at a campaign rally. Of those, only NYT and YahooNews highlight the story high enough that I could see them without scrolling.
NYT (“Trump Says Some Migrants Are ‘Not People’ and Predicts a ‘Blood Bath’ if He Loses“):
Former President Donald J. Trump, at an event on Saturday ostensibly meant to boost his preferred candidate in Ohio’s Republican Senate primary race, gave a freewheeling speech in which he used dehumanizing language to describe immigrants, maintained a steady stream of insults and vulgarities and predicted that the United States would never have another election if he did not win in November.
With his general-election matchup against President Biden in clear view, Mr. Trump once more doubled down on the doomsday vision of the country that has animated his third presidential campaign and energized his base during the Republican primary.
The dark view resurfaced throughout his speech. While discussing the U.S. economy and its auto industry, Mr. Trump promised to place tariffs on cars manufactured abroad if he won in November. He added: “Now, if I don’t get elected, it’s going to be a blood bath for the whole — that’s going to be the least of it. It’s going to be a blood bath for the country.”
For nearly 90 minutes outside the Dayton International Airport in Vandalia, Ohio, Mr. Trump delivered a discursive speech, replete with attacks and caustic rhetoric. He noted several times that he was having difficulty reading the teleprompter.
The former president opened his speech by praising the people serving sentences in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the Capitol. Mr. Trump, who faces criminal charges tied to his efforts to overturn his election loss, called them “hostages” and “unbelievable patriots,” commended their spirit and vowed to help them if elected in November. He also repeated his false claims that the 2020 election was stolen, which have been discredited by a mountain of evidence.
If he did not win this year’s presidential election, Mr. Trump said, “I don’t think you’re going to have another election, or certainly not an election that’s meaningful.”
Mr. Trump also stoked fears about the influx of migrants coming into the United States at the southern border. As he did during his successful campaign in 2016, Mr. Trump used incendiary and dehumanizing language to cast many migrants as threats to American citizens.
He asserted, without evidence, that other countries were emptying their prisons of “young people” and sending them across the border. “I don’t know if you call them ‘people,’ in some cases,” he said. “They’re not people, in my opinion.” He later referred to them as “animals.”
[…]
Mr. Trump issued vulgar and derogatory remarks about a number of Democrats, including ones he often targets, like Mr. Biden and Fani Willis, the Atlanta prosecutor overseeing his criminal case in Georgia, as well as those widely viewed as prospective future presidential candidates, such as Gov. Gavin Newsom of California and Gov. J.B. Pritzker of Illinois.
Mr. Trump called Mr. Biden a “stupid president” several times and at one point referred to him as a “dumb son of a — ” before trailing off. He also compared Ms. Willis’s first name to a vulgarity, called Mr. Newsom “Gavin New-scum” and took jabs at Mr. Pritzker’s physical appearance.
Unlike some regular commenters, I don’t think the lack of prominence to these remarks—all of the sites covered them—is a nefarious plot to boost Trump to keep the race close. Rather, it’s a function of Trump acting outrageously with such regularity that it’s not newsworthy. It’s dog bites man rather than man bites dog.
I’ve long found myself doing the same thing for much the same reason. At some point, flogging the same story day after day gets monotonous. (For that matter, I’ve mostly stopped commenting on mass shootings, as I have nothing new to say about them and can already predict what the comments section will look like. And, while I covered the wars in Ukraine and Gaza on a daily basis at their outset, I now comment on them only sporadically.)
In the early days of Trump’s political ascendency, people constantly warned that his outrageous behavior was being “normalized.” To some degree, that has in fact happened. The press continues to cover it. They even describe it in ways that make clear they think it’s outrageous. But there’s also a certain “water is wet” quality to it.
I realize that Trump is not Hitler. But Hitler’s comments and actions were certainly normalized for a long time. The “not people” and predicting there will be a blood bath should be front page news for any daily newspaper. Trump fatigue is a pathetic excuse. I hope the Democrats have these remarks front and center when campaign ads start appearing.
If a gang is going around deliberately attacking people with dogs, “dog bites man” will likely be news until they are stopped, regardless of how many dog attacks happen.
The press can’t ignore the outrageous comments, but if they simply cover it, then it does normalize them. Now that trump is the R candidate, the press does need cover the comments and do so in the context that these are far outside the normal bounds of discourse.
We talk about democracy (in the case of the US and most Western countries, a constitutional representative democracy) so often it’s easy to overlook that this form of government is not well understood by the general population and further, if it were, it would not be widely accepted. I suspect a wide majority of people are fine with democracy only insofar as it yields the “right” results. Some are explicit about this, such as White Nationalists and Dominionists. They recognize that popular democracy in a nation where their theology is in the minority and therefore seek to deny the vote to those who don’t believe as they do, and bypass the vote when it may yield an ungodly result.
Just as I don’t think a committed Christian Scientist should be appointed the Surgeon General, I think Dominionism is a disqualification for any office charged with protecting our democracy. It is frightening that we have at least three Dominionists on the Supreme Court (Alito, Thomas, Coney-Barrett) and quite probably a fourth (Kavanaugh) although this supposedly brilliant jurist’s writings are such a mass of rambling self contractions it’s impossible to tell from them, and unlike the other three he has never expressed support for Dominionism publicly.
@Stormy Dragon: this. Report the rest of the story by asking every politician what they think of it. Get them on the record, and never let them get away with “I haven’t seen it/don’t follow that sort of thing” BS. Of course they do, and everyone knows it. When they pull that crap the follow up question can be “you don’t think knowing what your/the other party stands for is important to your job?” Don’t let them get their talking points out until they’ve answered the question
James,
I am going to disagree. This is more than normalizing rhetoric. Trump is threatening another January 6 if he doesn’t win. By not prominently covering this, the mainstream media is normalizing insurrection.
@Moosebreath:
As I said yesterday, Trump is certainly laying the groundwork for another Jan. 6 if/when he loses this coming November.
@MarkedMan:
You and me both. And Dominionism has also been normalized by the press, mostly by ignoring it. They seem to operate on an old school belief that religion is a private matter, subject to public scrutiny only when Republicans pretend to fear JFK would follow the dictates of the Pope. You remember? Way back when conservatives thought that would be a bad thing. But it seems moderately obvious that religious belief should become a matter for public scrutiny when it drives policy preferences.
Republican déjà vu…
Note that Trump says “bloodbath”. Not “economic bloodbath” as his toadies are claiming.
If a bloodbath is the least of it what else does he envision? The press needs to find out.
I believe that Trump is advocating for the murder of his political enemies if he loses the election.
@MarkedMan:
@gVOR10:
Of course if the Dominionists were to follow the lead of Francis, we’d be better off. But they selectively choose what reinforces their personal convictions.
I predict the Sad Boys will pull out their patented whining and mewing with a lot of incel energy when Trump loses.
Unfinished basements the country over will feel the sting of a 1-liter Jolt Cola being thrown half-heartedly at the cinder-block walls.
Why Trump scares the lanyard class. He picks up on what his crowds feel and articulates it. In the “bloodbath” comment, he was talking specifically about the auto workers
If you really want people to support you, make them feel seen, don’t do the Democrat wagging finger. Ironically, Trump has been the pressure release valve.
I know you love some Mises
@JKB:
“…it’s gonna be a bloodbath for the country…”
No, Trump wasn’t talking about the auto workers. He said “the country.”
@SenyorDave:
Hitler wasn’t Hitler until he was.
@JKB:
You know me so well. My heart swoons. And that’s not the end of my physical responses.
@JKB: Have you received instructions on how to deflect the (some of these) migrants are not people quote yet?
Please include a Mises quote with your response.
It’s always interesting to see people who, without prompting, often proclaim how much they resent/dislike/hate certain professions or classes of people then turn around and cite “experts” from said professions/classes as evidence.
I realize that it’s a “here’s the exception that proves the rule” idea, but still–there have to be people and sources from outside the hated professions that are saying certain things equally as well.
@JKB: I’m not clear on something (and your link didn’t really help any 🙁 ); why do you and Trump want to slaughter auto workers? I get Lars Larsen back at the Big-3 bailout time–he specifically was hoping for the elimination of “all those high-paying blue-collar jobs.”
What’s your beef? I can understand why Trump would want to eliminate high-paying blue collar jobs–though less now than 20 years ago when he still built things.
How does this square with the breathless coverage of Biden’s age since 2019? The fact Biden and Trump are old is not new news anymore.
Trump being found civilly liable for a sexual assault, a new development, didn’t generate very much commentary in comparison.
I don’t necessarily believe there’s a plot per se. I just think the priorities of many prominent editors and pundits are out of whack, due partially to socioeconomic privilege.
@Just nutha ignint cracker:
They’re officially endorsing Biden?
Keep talking Joe. Keep talking.
Biden, yesterday, at a donor dinner: One Candidate is ‘Too Old’ and ‘Mentally Unfit’ — The Other is Me
Keep talking.
The Guardian included another quote which shows how off trump Really is: “You know what’s interesting? Joe Biden won against Barack Hussein Obama. Has anyone ever heard of him? Every swing state, Biden beat Obama but in every other state, he got killed,” Trump said.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/mar/17/trump-verbal-gaffes-ohio-rally-bloodbath
@Mr. Prosser:
Were it Biden riffing on how Trump beat McCain, this would generate dozens of Substack, New York Slimes, and Washington Compost thinkpieces about how 77 year old Trump is in decline and should be replaced.
@JKB:
Where to start?
Do you know the origin of the term “lanyard class”? This is the second time I have noticed you use it. It’s a little jarring seeing its usage by right-libertarian, self-appointed guardians of ‘classical liberalism’.
Yes, it was coined as and is being used as a derogatory term for the administrative state. However, it was not because the lanyard class interfered with laissez faire capitalism. Quite the opposite, as it was coined by a radical Marxist.
The lanyard class were the people living in walled-off, safe places payed for by the poverty of the wretched masses they are claiming to rescue from the slums. This subset of the bourgeoisie dedicate their lives to what they see as a noble cause, but is, in practice, a tool of social control that reinforces the power relations embedded within the market forces that are shaped and harnessed by the capitalist class to enrich themselves.
The Far Right–from authoritarians to self-styled libertarians (get it?)–has a long history of misappropriating terms, divorcing them from context, and inverting their original meaning.
—
The Mises quote describes the state of mind and actions of MAGA far more accurately than it does any other contemporary group.
Your Jung quote paired with the video you linked is pretty much Marx’s conception of alienation.
Ironic, huh? The people who feel so isolated from their own humanity that they don’t feel they have the power to direct their own lives, the people who couldn’t accurately identify a single aspect of Marx’s thought, the people who so desperately need to feel seen that they idolize a man whose actions have shown that he actually despises them, would find a more accurate description of their feelings if they read a little Marx.
Shit, the alienated MAGA folk who are struggling to survive and reacting to their loneliness have far more in common with the targets of their hate–POC, migrants fleeing ‘shithole countries’, LGBTQ–than the dude they have deified. Trump would use each one of them as a footstool if given the chance. And each one would gladly prostrate themself just to feel useful, seen, and loved.
But instead of recognizing Trump for who he is, they let him choose their targets. Then they act from the belief that their “only choice is either to perish” or direct the state against their perceived enemies.
Mises was partially correct. But the part he was right about was entirely accidental.
@Mr. Prosser:
I think Trump may hope that by constantly repeating Obama’s name, even in a wildly incorrect context, he might inflame the prejudices of his audience.
Trump is calling for Liz Cheney to be prosecuted and imprisoned for the “illegal destruction of evidence” in the Jan. 6 case.
@Kurtz: On the other hand, self-awareness isn’t one of J’s strongest features.
@CSK: Trump may not be wrong about that. Say what you will, his predatory sense is still pretty strong and he’s good at pushing people’s buttons. It’s part of why he can spout pure raving nonsense and still, even now and crazy as he is, still suck all the air out of a room.
@Just nutha ignint cracker:
I’m pretty sure it’s intentional on his part. Although when he talks about Obama beating Biden, some members of his audience must scratch their heads in puzzlement.
@JKB:
Not sure why Mises is all the rage here but hey … Don’t we all love Mises?
Yes, once that ‘first flush of anger had passed,’ the fascists moderated their position.
Seems like Mises was a bit naive, no?
@CSK: Consider his audience; maybe not. Although there are probably one or two head scratchers out there. Though these ARE the people who came up with “literally but not seriously and seriously but not literally.”
@al Ameda:
I did not know about that Mises quote.
Trump’s outrageous comments are further evidence that he is morally and mentally unfit for the office. If that were the underlying theme of the media’s coverage – fitness for the job – then his daily wandering into the dark recesses of his mind loses the “water is wet” aspect and underscores the urgency of keeping the bar high enough so that a pathological liar and narcissist cannot become president.