The Many Theories Of Trump

What Caused Trump’s Rise? These People Think They Know.

David Frum has a theory about Trump’s rise.

Instead of tax cuts and Paul Ryan’s budgets, the base wanted big government largess and protectionism. The Republican Party is too conservative.

The angriest and most pessimistic people in America are the people we used to call Middle Americans. Middle-class and middle-aged; not rich and not poor; people who are irked when asked to press 1 for English, and who wonder how white male became an accusation rather than a description.

Of course he also mentions immigration, but Frum is himself a (Canadian) immigrant. The emphasis on whiteness and the English language implies that it’s more about racial and cultural alienation than immigration per se.

David Limbaugh has a theory about Trump's rise.

Republicans have failed to stop Obama's shift of the country leftwards. They haven’t been conservative enough.

People are mortified by the nation’s fiscal instability, its unbridled national debt, its spiraling entitlements and Washington’s refusal to address them. They are sick of the fraudulent spending “cuts.” They have had their fill of the lies, especially about Obamacare, whose costs dwarf Obama’s promised projections and are getting worse.

David Brooks has a theory about Trump’s rise.

It’s because of the decline of political compromise. The Republicans fight Obama too much.

Trump is the culmination of the trends we have been seeing for the last 30 years: the desire for outsiders; the bashing style of rhetoric that makes conversation impossible; the decline of coherent political parties; the declining importance of policy; the tendency to fight cultural battles and identity wars through political means.

Put another way, the Republican Party owns this for identifying too much with cultural conservatives.

Michael Brendan Dougherty has a theory about Trump’s rise.

Conservative elites disdain the working class. They haven’t been fighting the cultural wars enough.

Working-class whites are increasingly atomized and disconnected from their communities, larger networks of family, the political process, and the nation…

Donald Trump’s campaign has re-exposed them, their unique problems, and their perspective to the political class. It’s been a rude experience for many in the political class. The Trump campaign has also proven, so far at least, that this class of voter will turn out for a rally for someone who truly solicits their attention. When his carnival show leaves town, there’s still plenty of work to do to rebuild this class and their communities.

Jeb Lund has a theory about Trump’s rise.

People are angry.

As tacky and thuggish as it might be, Trump plays the hero to people that the wise warriors of the system have abandoned.

Matthew McWilliams has a theory about Trump’s rise.

People are attracted to authoritarianism.

Paige Lavender has a theory about Trump’s rise.

He empowers the uneducated, the ignorant.

Here’s the thing: there are actual people like that man in the ad. And it almost surely isn’t his fault that he’s “poorly educated.” He is coping with a political system that has underfunded schools, and with politicians who haven’t addressed his or his parent’s socio-economic concerns. He may not have a high school degree. But that doesn’t mean he can’t read. Nor does it give people license to belittle his opinions. And when he goes to vote (presuming he’s over 18), his ballot will count just as much as anyone else’s.

(Quick question: if the education system is to blame, why didn’t we have more Trumps before? 100 years ago a former college president was elected to succeed a future Supreme Court chief justice. I’m pretty sure education in America was at a much lower level 100 years ago than it is today.)

Leon H. Wolf has a theory about Trump’s rise

People are tired of being politically correct.

The reality is that people are excited to see, hey, here’s a guy who goes on TV, and if he wants to pop off at the mouth, he pops off at the mouth, and if this guy can rise to being President of the United States then maybe I don’t have to always shut my mouth and I can sometimes say what I feel and maybe I can call my annoying coworker ugly and not have to risk being sued, too.

Patrick Ruffini has a theory about Trump’s rise.

It’s because of his talent for media manipulation.

A surge in media coverage and interest for a candidate invariably leads to a surge in polling for that candidate…. Trump has played this game masterfully. As a master media manipulator for more than 30 years, he understands that traditional media is dying, and what remains of it must morph into entertainment in order to survive.

Adrian Gray has a theory about Trump’s rise.

He was given free coverage by the media, blocking out all other candidates.

Trump saved cable news and social media a whole season of having to manufacture controversy to woo viewers. Instead, he simply hand-delivered one ruckus after another, on almost a daily basis. In doing so, he absorbed a historically disproportionate amount of media attention, preventing other candidates from ever getting public consideration.

In addition to the above articles, here are a few more theories I’ve seen.

The Immigration Theory

The way this theory goes, Trump is a result of the Republican Establishment ignoring the base’s concerns about illegal immigration. Trump’s early rise was fueled by his promise to build a seven hundred foot wall out of ice and make the wildlings pay for it. This is how populists get a base: find a wedge issue and appeal to the single issue voters swayed by it. It’s definitely a part of the story, but not the whole thing, and here’s why:

Mitt Romney, the 2012 Republican candidate, was the most anti illegal immigration nominee in at least in a generation. It’s widely acknowledged that Romney’s clumsy phrasing about “self deportation” hurt him. In reaction some Republicans collaborated with Democrats on the hated gang of eight bill, which passed in Harry Reid’s Senate and died in John Boehner’s House.

Poll after poll shows that immigration is not a top priority for Republican voters, and that substantial percentages are completely fine with amnesty (which even Rubio isn’t proposing). Put it simply: there is zero evidence that the Republican Establishment is far from the base on immigration.

Additional Theories:

• Personal musing of mine- it’s possible that the feeling of cultural alienation if it exists, is in reaction to the coverage the Black Lives Matter movement received. The same way many conservatives blame George W. Bush for Obama’s rise, there’s no way to avoid looking at the man who presided over the country these past few years. Obama was elected on a platform of racial healing and has delivered anything but. Hey, it’s as good a theory as any of these others.
• It’s been commented that the large field — which included Jeb Bush tying up resources — helped Trump. It made him frontrunner early on with only 20%, and resulted in the other candidates attacking each other and not him.
• I saw an elected official argue on Twitter that Trump’s rise is in part because Republicans have not fought abortion enough. The problem with this? The GOP today is more cohesively anti abortion than it ever was, and Donald Trump was openly “very pro choice” until very recently.
• There’s a respected national security expert who contends that Trump’s rise is because Republicans haven’t properly atoned for the Iraq War. But George W. Bush’s approval among Republican voters is somewhere around 80%.
• The below piece includes valuable information about Trump’s nativist support. It’s not a theory of his rise, but I think it’s a component.

“He’s bigger than the conservative movement, he’s bigger than the GOP establishment, and he’s proven that you don’t have to play their game,” (Alt-Right leader) Spencer said. “And I think that’s inspiring and liberating for a lot of alt righters.”

A spokesperson for the Trump campaign didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Can all of these theories be true?

I think a lot of this is people just looking to plug in their pet issue wherever they can. And Trump’s rise is very hard to understand, so the theorists get busy making up theories. But that’s not to say they are wrong.

Two people once came to a Rabbi to solve a dispute. The first guy presents his side of the story. The Rabbi tells him “you’re right”. Then he hears out the other guy, and tells him also“you’re right”. The Rabbi’s wife is listening from the other room and asks how they both can be right. “You’re right too”, say the Rabbi.

There is no one reason for Trump’s rise, but all these theories likely have a bit of truth to them.

All these components have been around before. Ross Perot tapped into populist anger to get 19% of the vote in his independent run in 1992. Patrick Buchanan won a several Republican contests as a nativist in 1996. Ron Paul had his online cult well before Trump did. Celebrity populism deserves it’s own piece, but we’ve seen this game before, and it’s not a uniquely american thing. A celebrity has instant name recognition, and is familiar with dealing with the media.

I’m not sure why the right wing media embraced Trump, maybe it’s the ratings, maybe it’s immigration, maybe it was the opportunity to take on the “mainstream” media. But they did embrace him and that gave him credibility with the not-very-ideological base of Republican voters.

Populism is about anger, a primordial cry of pain. It’s not logical. People can be simultaneously mad at The Establishment for being too powerful while mocking its impotence. Mad at the Republicans for not fighting Obama and for trying to repeal Obamacare. Mad at being called ignorant and proud of their ignorance. Any attempt to make sense out of it is looking at it the wrong way. It doesn’t make sense.

We are just unlucky enough to witness the perfect mix of events that brought it this far.