Rittenhouse (centre) at a rally in support of the Second Amendment (Bill Pugliano/Getty Images)
For a very long time now, commentary about Donald Trumpâs good fortune has been much preoccupied with his unrivalled capacity for political survival. Though the attempts to jail or otherwise marginalise him seem to have fallen by the wayside lately, it wasn’t really that long ago that political debate more or less revolved around the strange invincibility of “Teflon Don”. No scandals, no court case, no internal coup could seem to break his stride, and many a pundit found cause to curse the supposed brainwashed “cult” that had formed around him: for what other reason would there ever be for so many people to support the man? The idea that people in 2016 or even 2020 simply listened to what the man had to say, took stock of his political programme, and actually liked what they saw and heard usually didn’t cross anyone’s mind.
It’s thus quite ironic that actual proof of a “Trump cult”, at least in a manner of speaking, is slowly beginning to surface now, at a point where it simply doesn’t matter anymore. Today, the US has so many problems â with more seemingly on the way â that discussing minor unsavoury details about Trump simply doesn’t elicit much of a response. But even so, a very minor and soon-forgotten civil war among many of his online supporters might be worth dwelling on, for the simple reason that it reveals that Trump might not be all that he used to be. When all is said and done, tales of his political invincibility might end up being just tales.
The online spat in question began last week, when Kyle Rittenhouse â the young man who killed several men during the series of riots following the police shooting of Jacob Blake â posted a selfie together with the retired libertarian politician Ron Paul. Rittenhouse explained that Trump wasn’t strong enough on the Second Amendment, which isn’t particularly outlandish as far as political viewpoints go in 2024 America. He then added that he was writing in Ron Paul for the presidential election, thereby implying that he wouldn’t be voting for Trump.
What followed was a veritable explosion of hatred and rage, a picture-perfect example of a “rabid Leftist” cancellation, except it was coming from the Right. People took to denouncing Rittenhouse as a lowly backstabber, a Judas in the flesh, guilty of betraying Trump. They didn’t stop there: they mocked his appearance, his weight, intimated that it would have been better if Rittenhouse had actually been shot that night in Kenosha, and that nobody should ever listen to him. Rittenhouse, who was probably quite shocked at such sheer vehemence, swiftly published a letter of apology, in which he dutifully denounced everything he’d just said and promised to be a good boy and vote for Trump.
The idea that a voter owes loyalty to a politician (and should thus simply shut up if the politician is weak on the issues the voter cares about) is a strange one to have in an electoral democracy. But the mildness of Rittenhouse’s criticism â that Trump had been weak on the Second Amendment â together with the fierceness of the anger directed at him speaks to something fairly significant: it reveals a growing sense of weakness and panic on the American Right.
The energy of 2016 is mostly gone at this point; many people I know who were quite into Trump eight years ago have now mostly checked out. And itâs not exactly a great mystery why: many of the guest speakers at the Republican National Conference were divisive, to put it mildly, and in general there’s just a sense that Trump is older and slower at age 78 than he was at age 70. More problematically, Trump’s penchant for surrounding himself with people who undermine what he’s doing â or at least undermine what many voters think Trump should be doing â does not seem to have improved over the years.
Criticisms of the kind that Kyle Rittenhouse voiced â before being forced to ritually denounce them in an online Maoist struggle session â sting today because they hit at something real. Behind every lurid tale about how Trump is going to deport a hundred million illegals over lunch break while also lowering the price of hamburgers, there lurks a growing sense of aimlessness, desperation, and fear: fear that things in America are rapidly breaking apart, that more pointless forever wars loom on the horizon, that nobody â not even Trump â will actually captain the ship. Faced with this insecurity, we can see the emergence of a growing “Trump cult”, one that exists not as a casual slur but a genuine social phenomenon.
But what, you might ask, about Kamala Harris? Surely, there’s something fairly similar going on among Democrats? The answer to that question is both yes and no. Harris appears less as the leader of a cult of personality than a very odd kind of American Gorbachev. Because Biden’s re-election campaign was an almost farcical exercise in cult-like behaviour â with grown adults repeating the obvious lie that the man was “sharp as a tack” up to the point when he was forcibly removed â Harrisâs ascendancy truly does represent a form of glasnost and perestroika for Democratic voters. No longer do they have to pretend that the obviously incapable 81-year-old is the best presidential candidate in the history of the country; now they only have to contend with a politician who is merely unpopular and incompetent. After being forced to subsist on tree bark and coal shavings for more than a year, the Democratic coalition now seems quite happy at being treated to bread and water.
On the American Right, by contrast, itâs important to note that the growing “Trump cult” is not a product of Donald Trump himself. It’s not a top-down scheme to trick people or string them along. Rather, it is a bottom-up phenomenon, and very likely a short-term one at that.
After the Second World War, the tribal Melanesian islanders created cargo cults and built improvised runways in the hope that the American planes would be convinced to return. For many of Trump’s voters today, the choice now is to either give up hope of significant improvement, or to try to meme the good old days of 2016 back into existence, while treating anyone who risks piercing the bubble with increasing hostility.
But for every person screaming at Kyle Rittenhouse and telling him to repent, you will find two or three people whose hopes for improvement through the political system have diminished substantially over the past eight years. Trump or no Trump, the MAGA Right is starting to lose its grip. Despairing at the black storm clouds on the horizon, they are desperately trying to keep the flame of faith alive, even if the tools to do so take them uncomfortably close to the Left they purport to hate. Fans of Harris, on the other hand, have already learned to live with disappointment and hopelessness. On both sides, then, in very different ways, Reaganâs promise of “Morning in America” has never felt so distant.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeMeh. Trump opposes open borders and net zero. Thatâs good enough for me.
Could we please have some sensible, rational articles about these issues.
âmany people I know who were quite into Trump eight years ago have now mostly checked out.â
What does this mean? How many is âmanyâ? And who exactly are the people you know? And what does âmostlyâ mean?
Shades of Margaret Thatcher! Interviewer – “Why do people stop us in the street almost, and tell us that Margaret Thatcher isn’t just inflexible, she’s not just single minded, on occasion she’s plain pig-headed and won’t be told by anyone?” Thatcher – “Would you tell me who has stopped you in the street and said that….tell me who and where and when”.
I could just say the opposite. Some of my acquaintances, who didnât vote for Trump in 2016, are now voting for him, because the choice is between the most left wing candidates,Harris/Walz, in U.S history and the Trump/Vance ticket, who promise to resolve the border crisis, the economy, the woke gender nonsense and also will stop the nonsensical NetZero policiesâŠ.
Isn’t she simply left of the far right? In most western countries she would not be considered mush left of centre.
Exactly correct. Sheâs a centre-left âlawmanâ at heart, one who was considered too severe by many here in California. She tried on a progressive costume for 2020 but it never fit.
Does a “centre-left lawman” typically solicit bail money for people involved in looting and rioting, as Harris did during the ‘mostly peaceful’ protests of 2020?
No. She took a bad turn during all that mess; an ill-fitting costume.
Does a tough on crime tough guy call obstructionist rioters patriots and collect donations for his own multitude of legal troubles?
I donât get it. Trump was the president during the 2020 riots, and Harris was a senator. Why is she is she being blamed for the riots? Trump is the one who promised to pardon the January 6 rioters. He says nothing about the 140 police officers who went to the hospital. One officer lost his eye and many had head and spine injuries.
Thatâs not all. No, sheâs a far left progressive. Among other leftist ideas such as raising donations to bail out criminals, sheâs for banning gas cars by 2030, said yes to 70% taxation, yes to banning red meat, yes to children transitioning without parental consent, yes to open borders, yes to abortion up to birth. That is until she said no, because politically it didnât look good. Sheâs a genuine phony.
Of course State Media is busy memory holing all her statements, try Goebbeling, sorry Googling them.
Wow. Iâve lived in Northern California during her whole legal and political career. Someone who heavily prosecutes marijuana possession and wants to jail the parents of truants is not far left (nor things I agree with). Sheâs well back toward the center nowâwhere she fits and belongs by temperament.
Try exercising a bit more scepticism toward the first page of Google results; that should reduce bubble-think and confirmation bias.
Curious you made a cheeky reference to the S S Minister of Propaganda. Perhaps you should worry even more about those referring to their opponents as âverminâ and âunhumansâ.
Hmmm, well as a Californian perhaps you have a better handle on the real Kamala, but to many of us in flyover country, her primary characteristic is a finger in the air to determine the wind direction… at heart she seems to be simply a chameleon.
I donât dismiss that criticism. And Perhaps Iâm more âbubbledâ than I estimate, though Iâm not progressive overall and donât think Iâm much of a group thinker. Iâd like to see Harris take some firmer, moderate but energetic stands and show sheâs willing to fight for them.
Iâd return to you that both Trump and Vance seem perfectly willing to put their fingers to the wind and select their positions accordingly, as Vance seems to have done to win over first Donaldâs sons, then the ever-suggestible DJT himself.
Yeah, I spent some time wondering why Trump picked Vance, given that his “America’s H*tl*r” comment was on the record. I ended up deciding that Trump had no issues with being compared to somebody that he would consider to be a “strong leader”.
No, sheâs a far left progressive. Among other leftist ideas such as raising donations to bail out criminals, sheâs for banning gas cars by 2030, said yes to 70% taxation, yes to banning red meat, yes to children transitioning without parental consent, yes to open borders, yes to abortion up to birth. That is until she said no, because politically it didnât look good. Sheâs a genuine phony.
Of course State Media is busy memory holing all her statements, try Goebbeling, sorry Googling them.
Well if they promise then it must happen!
I don’t know why Trump needs to “promise to resolve the border crisis”. Surely that was resolved after Trump built the wall that he promised to build when in power last time.
You can add my brother to that list. He disliked Trump, as he dislikes most rich arrogant people. But the assassination attempt and the handling of Ukraine by ‘Biden’ are enough for him to give the Donald his vote.
If the assassination occurred in October, Trump would gain. He has to actually debate Harris, and he has to give speeches. He will waste the time whining about 2020. He’s already attacking Gov Kemp of GA. He’s a stupid stupid man, and a terrible politician.
A rare point of strong agreement between us. Heâs quite the showman in his own weird way though: like PT Barnum crossed with Don Rickles.
X is full of ‘republicans’ pledging to vote for kamala… đ
Do yourself a big favour and stay away from X. You’re polluting your mind.
X is full of a lot of stuff. It’s a smorgasbord where you can pick and choose any opinion you want and find lots of people either pro or con on any issue.
If they’re on X, it is unlikely that they are secretly Democrats.
I’m not sure living in Uppsala gives the author a reliable feel for what is going on in the US.
Living in Uppsala is not much different from living in Chicago so maybe the author has some perspective. And he may be an American currently living in Uppsala.
“The Trump Cult has finally arrived…the MAGA Right is starting to lose its grip?”
*sigh*
I seem to recall that the ‘credentialed class’ of progressives declared incessantly and with finality that the “Trump Cult has finally arrived” and was “starting to lose its grip” back in 2016. At which time it was quickly deemed to be comparable to Hitler and the Weimar Republic in the 1930s. It was The Seventh Sign, the Mark of the Beast, the Apocalypse, the End of Time and of All Things – and yet the Constitutional Republic of the United States easily survived such hyperbolic silliness. In short, as progressives’ Days Of Our Lives fantasy soap opera went on and on with boring regularity, the world continued to turn.
Are we really so stale in the creativity department that the Democrat party is going to recycle and repackage their same loud moans, groans, and nonsensical hyperbole when such assertions were already demonstrably proven false?
Did progressives ever perform an introspective analysis after Biden was elected to question whether their nonstop apocalyptic “what if” Trump Cult scenarios – with which they felt justified to destroy regular Americans’ lives and livelihoods – played out? Pro-Tip: They didn’t.
This reminds me of an old comic in which a group of handwringing warmonger generals who hope to receive another paycheck, flock together in a party room with balloons, streamers and confetti – and one of them nervously asks, “…but what if we throw a war and nobody comes?”
This article is a strangely inconsequential mess of trivial speculation and wishful thinking. I do hope Unherd didn’t pay for it.
I call ‘bullshit” on this vague generalized statement made by the author. I doubt even ever even associated with any Trump supporters.
What is it exactly to which this writer points? The word that occurred to me anyway is âhopelessnessâ. Modernity is running out of hope? Gasping its last breath? Itâs hard to imagine any thoughtful person wrinkling their nose at the idea.
Perhaps some “thoughtful” people just have a wider, or deeper, perspective than that which is offered by these mainly superficial articles. The way in which journos flip this week’s take on the political scene is no more vital to the human condition than flipping burgers in McD’s; possibly less so.
Hmmm. We have the so-called left demanding that the surface of earth never again suffer the imprint of even one more human foot, all while they claim to be the source of all hope for the human race. Sounds tragic to me.
Test
Good point! This is indeed a test for everybody!
This essay was just so many empty calories.
I assume that the purpose of the article is to show that in 2016 there was a feeling of hope and optimism (make america great again), whereas in 2024 there is a feeling of merely delaying the inevitable (make america survive again?).
And in such an environment, debates about which politician is more libertarian seem an awful lot like the debates of Byzantine theologians about the sex of the angels when the Turks where outside the gates of Constantinople.
I’m not sure that I entirely agree with your point, but I do like your simile!
The angels were pansexual.
Aren’t angels free to self-identify?
Have no idea what the author is talking about. Perhaps living in Sweden and being clueless of the US has something to do with it.
Does UnHerd owe this Swedish guy money? Is he an editorâs nephew? He clearly knows nothing about America. Why doesnât he write about Sweden? Maybe start with rape in Malmo?
I must admit I too find it odd that they give him a forum.
This author’s blatant bias makes me laugh rather than anything else. It’s a good attempt at propaganda, but there are other authors who do it better. I’ve commented on some of those authors. The thing about propagandistic writing is, you have to change it up from time to time, lest your audience catch on to the multiple logical fallacies in your words.
Why was this essay so utterly predictable? I can read this sort of stuff in the numerous Trump bashing media. Not sure it qualifies as an “Unherd” thought piece since it’s perspective is so commonplace as to be virtually ubiquitous.
Was interested in reading this until I opened the link from my email and saw the author. Skipped straight to the comments and was able to confirm what I already suspected from something written by Malcolm. “Thank you” for your service, my fellow commenters!
There is definitely a Trump cult. At outlets like National Review, they have always been Never Trumpers. He’s quite popular, but more and more anti-Trump comments are put up at Breitbart and other “true believer” sites. The cake is baked for this election, and the GOP will lose. Harris and Walz are definitely the leftiest of lefty candidates in all of US history. It’s going to be a dreadful 4 years.
Left of McGovern? Nah, the center has moved but the ticket is not that far left. I certainly agree the the far-right ticket of Trump and Vance is headed for defeat, though far from a certain one. How will the Trump first-middle-last loyalists react to that if it occurs?
How will they react? Probably much like they did last time. The advantage will be that it will be Biden, not Trump, in the White House till the inauguration.
“Many people I know who were quite into Trump in 2016…” LOL-that almost made me spit out my coffee! I sincerely doubt if Mr. Kyeyune has even met anyone not expressly Far-Left…
Itâs thus quite ironic that actual proof of a âTrump cultâ, at least in a manner of speaking, is slowly beginning to surface now, at a point where it simply doesnât matter anymore.
This article presented no proof of a cult, actual or otherwise. There is an anti-Trump cult, however, and it is populated by most of the left and some who claim to be on the right and call themselves Never Trumpers. The amazing thing is that there has already been a Trump presidency and it was not much different from most previous administrations.
None of the things the fear merchants told us would happen did happen. And quite a few good things occurred, such as no new wars, a bunch of peace deals in the Middle East, record low minority unemployment, and so forth. An honest critic would also find room for improvement, also something that applies to every other administration.
He’s not the Messiah. He’s a very naughty boy.
There may well be a Trump cult out there, filled with slows who can’t do much better than your average crazy lefty but hurl insults at people like Rittenhouse. But to conflate this cult with the wider support base of Trump is a pretty major error of observation, I think.
To give a crude analogy, there are most certainly a number of child abusers within the Catholic priesthood, but to suggest they actually represent Catholic priests on a broader worldwide level merely tells me that the person making the suggestion just really hasn’t met any Catholic priests in real life. I speak as a lapsed Catholic and former altar server of many years – all the priests I knew were kinda awesome, in their own individually eccentric ways.
Anyway, yes, Trump. The ‘cult’ label appears to be a common slur used by many opponents of DT wishing to throw shade at the legitimacy or credibility of his campaign, or else try to talk down the amount of actual support and enthusiasm that exists out there for him. Which, from what I can tell, is substantial. In conclusion, I guess I should take this particular article with a pinch of salt.
I like this take and I agree with it. There are plenty of dipshit Trump supporters who have made his politics their identity because they don’t know how to make their own. But the same can be said for dipshit liberals who repeat every liberal beat ad nauseum and act smarter than everyone else.
There is a much broader support base for Trump, just regular folks. We don’t run around in MAGA hats and fly Trump flags out the back of our pickup trucks. Perhaps some of us find his character to be off-putting, but appreciate his political sense in this current environment.
I personally believe Trump wins in a landslide, and it will be another “surprise”, just like 2016. I think these types of authors (and the pollsters) are out of touch with how many Americans actually feel, which changes constantly as a result of the sociopolitical climate.
I’m not sure the “Catholic Priests” thing is a good analogy. While it is true that only a minority of Priests were actual offenders, a much larger number either assisted in covering up the activities of the offenders, or at the very least turned a blind eye to their activities.
And here I was thinking Unherd readers were too sophisticated to mutilate a good analogy by attempting a hamfisted re-litigation of the Catholic priest sex abuse scandal and cover-up. I’m wrong again.
Oh, you think the “Catholic priest sex abuse scandal” should be glossed over?
When a comment is too complicated for a man to understand (even if most men would understand it), he has to restate the comment in a form that makes sense to him even if it is wrong. You’re the man who didn’t understand the comment, Martin M, in case you also didn’t understand this comment. Let me know if you need help with anything else.
Nonsense.
JD Vance, age 39, was a popular (populist) choice for VP of what would be a single 4 year Trump term.
Thatâs a lot more meaningful, Malcolm, than an online tempest in a teakettle.
Unless you like teakettles up there in Sweden, that is.
Vague feelings in your water doesnât journalism make. Please Unherd, some facts to back up sniffing the air.
What is wrong with the comments section? Why do I have to do captcha every single time I try to post? Itâs asinine.
Harris/Walz speeches tells it all. They are returning to old time Dem politics of promising to save the middle class and give everyone a hand up. The election is Corporate Capitalism VS Progressive Socialism.
‘Malcom Kyeyune is a freelance writer living in Uppsala, Sweden.’
All is explained.
Living in Uppsala is not much different from living in Chicago so maybe the author has some perspective. And he may be an American currently living in Uppsala.
Why this animosity? Ever heard of working online?
Who are those 3 knobs in the picture under the headline, and what does it signify?
Mr. Kyeyune seems to have missed the point that this contest is about the future of our nation. It’s not an on-line game of memes and influencers vying for the “Most Popular” award.
Many people, myself included, will do something they never thought they would do. Vote for Trump. It’ll be my first time in 45 years voting for a Republican. Because Kamala!
Harris, who just six weeks ago was a political nobody, has been anointed as candidate without winning a single vote. The Democrats, after shutting-down Sanders’ candidacy twice (’16 and ’20) tried every silly dis-info trick in the book to shut-down Trump. More recently they’ve dragged him through court a half dozen times, mostly on silly charges. Everyone around the world could see what they were up to.
And they’re not finished yet. Harris has never shown the capabilities to run the country (just imagine how Xi or Putin will walk all over her; Netanyahu, too) or even to get fairly elected. They obviously have many more tricks up their sleeves. It’s very important that we put a completely stop to this crap! I would vote for Wiley E. Coyote if I had to. I don’t think I’m alone.
Public opinion is like a pendulum. With luck by the time November comes around Harris will have lost her imagined shine. And the Dems will be left trying to impeach Trump for golfing on a week day.
Harris, who just six weeks ago was a political nobody, has been anointed as candidate without winning a single vote. So what? Gerald Ford got to be President without winning a single vote for that office, or the office of Vice President. At least Harris will have to face the people in the election itself.
Trump 2024, Vance 2028, 2032.
If not, prepare for Kamala â24, â28, â32 and â36 and beyond.
“The Trump Cult has finally arrived?”
*sigh*
I seem to recall that the ‘credentialed class’ of progressives declared incessantly and with finality that the “Trump Cult has finally arrived” back in 2016. At which time it was quickly deemed to be comparable to Hitler and the Weimar Republic in the 1930s. It was The Seventh Sign, the Mark of the Beast, the Apocalypse, the End of Time and of All Things – and yet the Constitutional Republic of the United States easily survived such hyperbolic silliness. In short, as progressives’ Days Of Our Lives fantasy soap opera went on and on with boring regularity, the world continued to turn.
Are we really so stale in the creativity department that the Democrat party is going to recycle and repackage their same loud moans, groans, and nonsensical hyperbole when such assertions were already demonstrably proven false?
Did progressives ever perform an introspective analysis after Biden was elected to question whether their incessant apocalyptic “what if” Trump Cult scenarios – with which they felt justified to destroy regular Americans’ lives and livelihoods – played out? Pro-Tip: They didn’t.
This reminds me of an old comic in which a group of handwringing warmonger generals who hope to receive another paycheck, flock together in a party room with balloons, streamers and confetti – and one of them nervously asks, “…but what if we throw a war and nobody comes?”
Malcom, the life in Uppsala, Sweden is slightly different from the life in Birmingham, Alabama and if you think that internet discussions are what people really think, I cannot help you.
No idea if this is accurate but it is fairly standard Malcom Kyeyune fare. Nothing new here.
What is especially disturbing about the political left is that they seem to have no sense of the tragedy of the human condition. Instead, they tend to see the problems of the world as due to other people not being as wise or as noble as themselves.
Thomas Sowell
The only thing the progressive Left has been good at also happens to be the worst thing they’ve done. The splintering of our society into isolated moral silos. If you support Trump (or any other animal, vegetable, mineral not specifically approved by progressive ideology) I don’t need to waste my time listening to your thoughts, opinions and ideas because you are by definition a bad person.
Tribal warfare on our streets and fractious gridlock in our halls of power? What other possible outcome could there have been?
So what is it about the guy? He’s such a boor and buffoon on a regular basis. Almost zero finesse. Well. at the end of the day Trump is a legitimate green light for the ‘enemies of the people’ to go ahead and do what we should have done the minute the first neo-socialist pop tart darkened our door: listen politely (it doesn’t cost anything to listen), then stand up, clear our throats and shout F*ck Off! No moral judgments, just a rejection of tired ideas that have never worked – never will.
…
The message of this article is appropriately hopeless.
I’m no joiner. I’d been seeing USA making a wrong turn since Iraq invasion. As a matter of fact Trump, on the Howard Stern show, remarked on there’s a reason a place like Iraq has a leader like Saddam. He nailed it in 2003. This impressed, did not hypnotize.
Trump, a nearly life-long Dem also saw the wrong turn and the significant percent of the citizens who were not being served by either party. So he stepped into the void saying the right things. And then actually tried to execute the words as policy. But, the entire system stood against him and 49% of the electorate.
So, I see no cult, just a lot of Americans trying to move ahead while keeping safe the virtues that got us here.
There is room for ALL PEOPLE who want to see the Declaration of Independence and Constitution continue to be our guiding principles.
The choices offered by DEMs and RINOS long ago moved to a different place.
I’m not sure that Mr. Kyeyune is being entirely fair to Mr. Gorbachev.
Well, quite a few of us had moved on to supporting the political work of Ron DeSantis after 2020 so weren’t overjoyed to see Trump get the nomination.
Despite this terrible choice of VP, kowtowing to anti-Semitism in the left-wing youth, I’d expect Harris to come through now and the Dems to secure her the requisite votes one way or another.
I am no friend of Trump, but I would support him every day of the week and twice on Sundays in preference to DeSantis. Trump, for good or ill, has personality and charisma. DeSantis has zero of both.
Yes. Trump was cruising to victory against a guy with dementia but now that he’s up against the dumbest VP in the history of the Republic, the election is back to being a toss-up.
Dumbest VP in the history of the Republic? You obviously don’t remember Dan Quayle!
Dan Quayle was an inarticulate but competent legislator. Kamala Harris has a below average IQ.
I can already see the outraged Pro Trump comments below! To me he’s obviously been always a week politician with minority support – yes some people have loved him but more people loath him. The Republicans have never won a popular majority in any of the elections where Trump has been the leader. Surely if he’s that good, he should win a landslide? “But it’s a fraud or conspiracy” yadda yadda
Trump had two major advantages in the 2024 presidential race: Joe Biden’s obvious senile incapacity, and much more recently the assassination attempt. The coronation of Kamala Harris has removed the first. Even though she was even less popular that the Joe Biden, a very limited politician with major faults, she seems now to be winning the campaign against Trump, while he just keeps playing the same old playbook. His banging about the 2020 election just became boring and tedious – focusing on the past and not the future. After the assassination attempt he changed tone, but then very rapidly blew it with his childish and stupid attacks on Joe Biden who was already was drawing from the race.
And even on the “culture war” issues, Trump just doesn’t seem to be able to capitalise on the majority anti woke feelings of the American population – they just aren’t his priorities. As we know he endlessly falls out with people supposedly on his own side – hardly a recipe for strategic and coherent government. Did he build the wall? What can we actually say positively about his administration, which was noted for its chaos. In the one area that he didn’t interfere too much and show his signature inconsistency, foreign policy, the Trump administration had successes.
âTo me heâs obviously been always a week politician with minority support â
You appear to be stating a fact, but really itâs just your opinion. What do you mean by âminorityâ? Do you mean less that 50%? Is 49% a minority ?
And then you go on to state that âmore people loathe himâ. What does âmoreâ mean?
I wonder if this “Trump Cult” will survive Trump himself?
This seems right on to me.
The use of âseveralâ in âthe young man who killed several menâ is misleading – Rittenhouse killed two men. âSeveralâ is generally used to indicate three or more. This inflationary use of language near the beginning of the essay set off alarm bells that the writer was setting out to inflame passions, not provide useful insights. Also, whereâs the editor? Why didnât they catch this?
I do agree with the author, however, that America is faced with a depressing choice come November.