The error that some clear-headed commentators make in failing to acknowledge the bigotry in Trump’s behavior is the same error some liberals make in trying to analyze the motivations of ISIS. They analyze it through their own eyes, which aren’t clouded in hate, but in doing so, they fail to see how someone with such biases could hold different views.
“The political cost of a tweet that many will view as anti-Semitic far outweighs any gain to be had via a nod to anti-Semites,” Paul Mirengoff wrote at Powerline after the Star of David “corrupt” tweet. “As a matter of strategy, how would it benefit him to do something like that?” Hot Air’s Allahpundit wrote.
Although bigotry isn’t logical as a basis for making decisions, it has existed throughout history. Moreover, bigotry (real or feigned) has indeed been a useful tool for big government politicians to appeal to voters throughout history. Cruz had the same hardline proposal on deporting 11 million that Trump once claimed, but he didn’t get traction in part because of his race (Trump supporters have cooler feelings towards minority groups) and in part because his language wasn’t as divisive.
Trump wouldn’t have brought so many new alt-right voters into the fold without his appeals to identity politics and bigotry. The bigotry, if Reince can’t see it so clearly and if others want to excuse it, is seen perfectly well by those who may be the intended audience, real racists like David Duke, Andrew Anglin of The Daily Stormer, and their Twitter followers. They both heard him loud and clear when they saw the Jewish star.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member