Not a day of Donald Trump’s presidency has gone by without him blasting his “Make America Great” schtick on Twitter and viciously lashing out at the free press and his political rivals.
But in the routine flurry of tweets shared by Trump last week, one was particularly heinous. The leader of the free world retweeted a video of a Trump supporter shouting “white power” at protesters in Florida, setting off a scramble inside the White House, as The Washington Post wrote.
“Thank you to the great people of The Villages. The Radical Left Do Nothing Democrats will Fall in the Fall. Corrupt Joe is shot. See you soon!!,” Trump wrote in the tweet.
Hoping to minimise the backlash, senior staffers rushed to track down the president, who was unreachable for a number of hours. Three hours later, after some back-and-forth, Trump was persuaded to delete the incendiary tweet.
But there was no apology from the president. Instead, his officials fell back on the standard Trumpian tactic: deny, deny, deny.
Reporters were fed the excuse that Trump hadn’t heard the protester yelling “white power” and that he’d quickly moved to purge the video from his Twitter feed.
It took less than 24 hours for Trump to ease back into racist rhetoric, sharing another explosive tweet of a white couple in Missouri pointing guns at Black Lives Matter protesters — who were mostly people of colour. The demonstrators had marched to the St Louis mayor’s home to demand her resignation after she read out the names and addresses of residents who wrote letters requesting she defund the police.
Trump’s staffers have palmed off his remarks as ignorance too many times for us to believe he’s made another mistake. Especially when we’re talking about the same man who called COVID-19 “kung flu” and demanded to see the birth certificate of the country’s first African-American president.
In fact, Australian National University public policy professor Dr John Hewson believes Trump knows exactly what he’s doing.
“He runs a strategy based on division, he divides on every issue, whether it’s race or gender,” Hewson told Crikey. “He’s feeding the racist stereotypes all the time. It’s all very conscious.”
According to Hewson, while Trump often makes outright racist remarks such as, you know, Mexicans are “rapists” or “I think Islam hates us”, he also uses subtler messaging to appeal to his base.
By doing so, Trump invites his hardline supporters to read between the lines and allows his staff to dream up excuses on his behalf.
“He uses a ‘nod and a wink’ but what he really means is ‘we’re going to take a hard line against people’,” Hewson said.
As a textbook narcissist, Trump dislikes having to take questions from “nasty” reporters at press conferences, Hewson says. And that’s why he uses Twitter so emphatically: to control the narrative and intimidate and lambaste his critics.
Rather than relying on factual, quality journalism, Trump shares content from networks and journalists that paint a favourable view of his presidency. Fox News and Turning Points USA are his favourites, but recently he’s been cosying up to One America News Network, a right-wing news channel that’s prone to pedalling conservative conspiracy theories. The president also routinely shares articles from Breitbart, a controversial far-right news network.
It’s a dangerous tactic for a world leader to employ — particularly a world leader with 83.5 million followers.
But University of NSW international relations lecturer William Clapton isn’t convinced Trump employs a single political strategy on Twitter.
“We seem to get a mix of policy announcements, random thought bubbles, outlandish conspiracy theories that he seems to have an affinity for, and blatant attacks on people he doesn’t like; whether that’s Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden or the traditional news media,” Clapton told Crikey.
According to Clapton, Trump is the pinnacle of a populist president in that he’s able to appeal to the grievances of middle-class white America.
“He’s known for nasty, inappropriate language but it feeds into his popularity and allows him to present himself as one of the people, despite being elite himself,” Clapton said.
“He’s absolutely not an everyday person. But he’s able to present himself as one by throwing niceties out the window.”
While Twitter has traditionally allowed the president free rein to tweet out baseless claims and launch vitriolic attacks on his opponents, the company is finally beginning to take a stand.
Last month, Twitter hid one of Trump’s tweets, warning it “incited violence” after he wrote “when the looting starts, the shooting starts” during the Black Lives Matter protests. The company also fact-checked an unsubstantiated tweet by the president about mail-in ballots.
Trump responded in the only way he knows how: by going on the attack. He issued an executive order against social media companies, warning on Twitter that Republicans “will strongly regulate” the companies or “close them down” if they “silence conservatives voices”.
The fast-approaching US election might explain why we’ve seen a ramping up of hateful, polarising speech on the president’s feed during a time of turmoil, rather than messages of unity.
“His re-election is all that matters. He will do or say whatever he has to say to help him get re-elected. That’s his strategy,” Hewson said.
“Elevating his re-election over the country is a disaster. It’s been a big cost to pay, and we’re nowhere near the worst of it.”
Trump is not the leader of the free world, and he never has been. Why do journalists persist with such rubbish? Where is your source or reference? Its an insult to western democracies to continue this lie. If you must have a ‘leader of the free world’ at least refer to a person who is a real leader, not just someone who has a leadership position; I’d suggest Angela Merkel or Jacinda Adhern.
Yes indeed + 100 from me!
Agree but, with Frau Merkel, soon to retire so it’s all on Jacinda Ardern’s shoulders.
Wouldn’t we have to have a free world in the first place? We have a bunch of countries with democratic forms, but that doesn’t make them “free”.
I wonder why the ‘free’ countries tend to be very, very expensive?
Usually at the cost of the rest of the world, stripping their resources, polluting the air, sea & water.
Faustian bargain?
Agree. But if you’re a RWNJ like a lot of Americans their view of freedom is totally different, ie. freedom to sleep rough under a bridge, freedom to die through lack of health care, freedom to be shot dead, and freedom to be enslaved by insultingly low wages while relying on tips and gratuities, and yet an enormous proportion of the population is fed by junk food companies via patronising welfare like the WIC program.
At least Germany and NZ have an electoral system (MMP) that better delivers a parliament representative of the communities’ diversity of views and that almost denies the ability of any one political party taking control of the executive branch of government. …They have to negotiate, compromise and form a consensus. …no wonder they produce real leaders, instead bullies & ‘strong men’.
Great choices, Merkel, the ex-East German Communist, who helped flood Europe with muslims or the hijab-wearing Ardern. Why not just lie down and pay your Dhimmi tax?
I don’t know why leftists crave a muslim future.
Job, you talk rubbish.
A person like Merkel who has lived in and has personal experience of a totalitarian police state does not make her a communist, but a person more likely to value democracy and liberty.
The fact that Ardern has worn a hijab, does not make her a muslim, it means she wore a hijab; so what? Why is it that you think you can criticise a woman for what she wears? That she wore a hijab as a token of her respect and empathy makes her a more outstanding leader.
You concern about loss of liberty and freedom of religious belief would be better directed at the actual law making of our politicans like ScuMo, who is intending to introduce laws to enable religious institutions to be nasty to people they don’t like under the guise of ‘religious freedom’; or laws which now allow trial in secret & detention without charge etc under Dutton and Porter. Afterall, it’s the laws they make and implement that are important, not that a leader grew up in a failed communist state nor what clothes she wears.
There are none so blind as those who refuse to see. Merkel has proven her leanings by helping to flood Europe with people who, as you would put it, do not ‘value democracy and liberty’. Deny that if you can.
As for Ardern, if you think she is an ‘outstanding leader’ for showing respect and empathy for a ‘religion’ that hates the West, you must be out of your mind.
You worry about the PM, whose silly nickname you childishly mis-spell, introducing laws to be ‘nasty’ to people they don’t like under the guise of ‘religious freedom’. Give me a break. Do you think that muslims believe in religious freedom? Are you aware of the penalties for muslims who try to leave that medieval, hate filled religion? Have you seen what happens to ‘apostates’? Then there are the murders of homo-sexuals by muslims. Throw in suicide-bombers and beheadings and you complete the picture. Anyone who sees their behaviour as not being something to worry about is part of the problem.
Have you paid your Dhimmi Tax?
Job, you still speak rubbish.
I did NOT suggest the refugees allowed into Germany by Merkel and her coalition partners do not value democracy nor liberty. I said that Merkel’s experience in communist East Germany could mean she values democracy and liberty more, than say, for example, a person who takes such things for granted.
If you are suggesting that the refugees don’t support democracy or liberty, its not up to me to find evidence of such an outragious claim; that is your responsibility.
I assume your assertion is based on the false premise that the Muslims amongst the refugees all follow extreme radical cults of Islam, such as that practiced in some of the places they were seeking refuge from. Aside from the ridiculousness of that premise, it is just plain wrong to assert all Muslims follow extreme radical cults of Islam. This would be the same as asserting that all Christians seek to protect paedophiles from civil laws, not just the Catholic Church.
It is clear you have no experience or real life interaction with Muslims and as such have no right to make claims attributing some extreme views to all of ‘them’.
I’m an atheist. Yet, as an atheist I have had many cordial, friendly and productive meetings and negotiations with Muslims from many countries. It is my experience that Muslims are just like ‘us’, wanting to raise their families and improve the world. I don’t believe their religion, just as I don’t believe Christianity, Judaism etc. I’ve also met some horrid, unprincipled Muslims, just as I’ve met horrid, evil, unprincipled Christians.
And yes, I do believe Jacinda’s show off empathy was well placed and more likely inducive to ongoing cordial relations. The alternative implied by you would just create more conflict and mistrust. ..hardly a worthwhile objective.
Your comments about ‘Muslims’ doing horrendous acts might be true in fact, just as it is true in fact that each year thousands of people are killed in the USA & the Philippines, including by government officials in extrajudicial killings, by ‘Christians’. Does this condemn all Christians? According to your flawed logic it would.
I do object to paying federal taxes to learn that Cormann and MacKenzie have unlawfully spent those tax funds and not faced any consequences. And I also object to paying more taxes than I need to because religious organisations, like the Paedophile Protection Network Catholic Church, don’t pay taxes.
Twice now you accuse me of ‘speaking rubbish’ while I never said a word. This is a written forum. Accusations of ‘rubbish’ are a symptom of not having a reasonable argument against it.
I never stated that you suggested that the illegal aliens allowed into Germany by Merkel did not value democracy nor liberty. Read my post again and you will see part of my statement is in parentheses. I just told the truth that the vast majority of muslims don’t hold these values. The evidence is there in the many acts of terrorism, beheadings, kidnapping of African girls, 1,000 kidnapped Yazidi women and children, ‘honour-killing’, genital mutilation of young girls, subjugation of women, murder of homo-sexuals, murder of ‘apostates’, flying aircraft into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon, USS Cole, Entebbe,
If those nice, non-radical muslims (do they even exist?) that you claim to know ‘escape’ to the West to get away from the death cults in their homelands, why do they continue to agitate for islamic practices to be established in the countries they move to? They demand sharia law. They set up ‘no-go zones’ in European cities. They demand that Australian swimming pools have women-only sessions. They live off Centrelink. They protest the flying of the Australian flag as ‘racist’ without telling us what race is being offended.
Abroad, Iran has recently executed a prisoner for the crime of drinking alcohol despite repeated warnings against it. Do you want that to happen here? In Pakistan a minor Hindu girl was kidnapped and forcibly converted to Islam, which happens a lot there. Do you want that to happen here? In England, muslim gangs are raping young girls. Do you want that to happen here?
You equate paedophilia with the Catholic Church while conveniently forgetting that islam was founded by a paedophile, Mohammed, who had a nine year old ‘wife’.
I have had interactions with muslims and spent some time in muslim countries so I do have the right to comment. What is your ‘experience’?
You should be glad you can be an atheist here as, in muslim countries, you would be in a heap of trouble just for saying so.
Angela Merkel was a member of the Free German Youth, which was the official communist youth movement sponsored by the ruling Marxist–Leninist Socialist Unity Party of Germany. In August 2015, she announced that Germany would process asylum applications from Syrian refugees if they had come to Germany through other EU countries. That year, nearly 1.1 million illegal aliens entered Germany.
Jacinta Ardern wore a hijab for a second time when she visited Zayed College for Girls in Mangere. The first time was bad enough in virtue-signalling, but the second time was worse as she just did it for no reason other than some notion of scoring political points. In 2008 she was elected president of the International Union of Socialist Youth. Maybe another Commie? I have some NZ friends who are not impressed with her. Watch out at the next election. She will be gone.
It appears that this islamophile behaviour is endorsed by left-wing politicians as a means of bringing down the West after failing to do so by other means. This is an offshoot of the last century when the vast majority of terror organisations were left-wing, muslim, or a mix of both.
You admit that horrendous acts by muslims might be true but try to justify it by mentioning killings in the USA and the Phillipines. There are a lot of murders in the Southern Phillipines, mostly by Islamic State sponsored muslim guerillas. Is that what you referred to? In the USA there are many murders and shootings, but, while whites are not innocent, the most common murder is black on black.
While no made no comment for or against the Dhimmi tax, you had a go at Cormann and MacKenzie. Bridget MacKenzie did no more or less than many politicians of all types. It was just the rabid anti-gun lobby that blew it out of proportion.
I have an ample supply of tinfoil available if you ever run out of hats, job.
Hello rolly, can’t handle the truth so resort to childish jibe? Typical lefty.
While Trump, Johnson, Dutton, Hanson et al. are symptoms, there is also another deeper purpose for dog whistling and it is not always or simply about race or ‘immigrants’, to deflect, but is also used by (radical) right libertarian political communications to denigrate democracy.
According to US dog whistling expert, legal scholar Prof. Ian Haney-Lopez, the following should be familiar:
‘…..politicians and plutocrats deploy veiled racial appeals to persuade white voters to support policies that favor the extremely rich yet threaten their own interests. Dog whistle appeals generate middle-class enthusiasm for political candidates who promise to crack down on crime, curb undocumented immigration, and protect the heartland against Islamic infiltration, but ultimately vote to slash taxes for the rich, give corporations regulatory control over industry and financial markets, and aggressively curtail social services. White voters, convinced by powerful interests that minorities are their true enemies, fail to see the connection between the political agendas they support and the surging wealth inequality that takes an increasing toll on their lives. The tactic continues at full force, with the Republican Party using racial provocations to drum up enthusiasm for weakening unions and public pensions, defunding public schools, and opposing health care reform.’
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/17847530-dog-whistle-politics
If you think it’s racist to ‘protect the heartland against Islamic infiltration’, can you tell me what race islam belongs to?