Presidents, Promises and Problems: how Donald Trump remains popular in 2023
Donald Trump in 2023 (Photo: Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 2.0 DEED, via Wikimedia Commons )
David A. Graham, writing for the Atlantic, said “Not long ago, the idea that a former president—or major-party presidential nominee—would face serious legal jeopardy was nearly unthinkable.” US Presidents are not accustomed to tumult in their post-office lives. Obama increased his wealth by 3000% after leaving office; Bill Clinton earned $104 million between 2001 and 2013, for giving speeches alone. Even Nixon, who left office in shame, rehabilitated his image, published best-selling memoirs and became a trusted advisor to US presidents. Politically, there seems to be a bipartisan respect for former presidents; George Bush Jr, in many ways a proto-Trump, has recently been a cherished interviewee for CNN and MSNBC due to his current political position as a “balanced and politically rational” Republican. As always, Donald J Trump is the one to buck the trend of a tranquil post-presidency. In a highly publicised affair, “the big Don” has faced a total of 91 felony counts, alongside a civil suit in New York which could bar his businesses from his home state. And yet, one look at the polls places Trump slightly in front of Biden. So how is this man still such a powerful force in American politics?
The key to understanding Trump’s popularity lies in two things. Firstly, the image he conveys, and secondly, the preceding and succeeding Democrat presidencies. Considering the Ying-Yang Red-Blue symbiosis that governs US politics, the rise of one political side is inherently linked to its direct competitor’s demise. The 2016 election was no exception, yet it was nonetheless an election marked by unique circumstances. Despite 8 years of Obama, the Democratic party faced a serious internal upwelling. Bernie Sanders, previously on the fringes, was rallying vast amounts of young people and disaffected Democrats to a re-ignited US political tradition: progressivism. There are many explanations for this. Firstly, Obama’s presidency, despite being a landmark moment for US race relations, was ultimately very much a continuation of the dominant corporatist direction of the US. The budget of ICE and DHS - Bush-era agencies - steadily increased under Obama. He abandoned his single-payer healthcare promise, opting for Obama care, a rebrand of Mitt Romney’s healthcare plan. During the 2008 financial crisis, the US government bailed out huge corporations, whilst millions of Americans lost their homes. In foreign policy, the US engaged in vast bombing campaigns, as well as the destabilisation of several countries. Obama did have positive policies, but his agenda clearly swung right. And whilst this is an article about Trump, understanding Obama’s presidency is key to comprehending Trump’s election win. Obama disillusioned vast parts of the American working class, who had hoped for progressive legislation and reinforcement of a long-neglected welfare state.
Come 2016, Trump bests Clinton, throwing the political system into chaos. Yet Trump’s victory was not, as Hillary supporters argued, a result of “deplorables” and reactionary tendencies in the American public. American fascism is, yes, worryingly on the rise; yet a glance at policies popular with the American public reveals that despite social divisions, there is consensus on economic policy. A majority of voters, across party lines, supports a public healthcare option, and a smaller majority supports Medicare for All. Vis à vis defence spending, voters want further regulations. Yet, neither Trump nor Clinton proposed such policies. It was a choice between a political insider that had served in key posts in the Obama presidency, and a political wildcard whose only previous political experience was switching between three different parties in the early 2000s. US voters, long disillusioned with the direction of the country, opted for the “Fuck you to the establishment”, as was vulgarly put by filmmaker Michael Moore. That is Trump’s charm. He was a desperate reach to disrupt the political establishment by a population that has always been incredibly politically restricted.
In image, Trump was the quintessential, flip-flopping, promise-breaking populist. On the one hand he stated he loved Hispanics and on the other he made abhorrent comments about that same group. On the one hand he campaigned for the working American, and on the other hand severely rolled back worker rights. In policy, he was more establishment than ever. He presided over the largest upward transfer of wealth in American history, the CARES act, and increased privatisations. He continued Obama’s dirty security record, continuing deportations, and presiding over totalitarian protest suppression. He increased US military actions, pardoned war criminals, and ramped up US sanctions on Venezuela. But, by 2020, Trump’s loyal voter base could not prevent a Democrat victory at the presidential election.
But, like Obama, Joe Biden has been a disappointing president. Despite claims of a “transformative presidency”, Joe Biden broke key promises whilst in power. On the theatrical battlefield, Republicans have found it easy to chastise Biden as a useless old fool. Biden has done positive things, but not to the required extent. But even if Biden was twenty years younger, it is doubtful that he would have fulfilled the progressive energy of the summer of 2020 that propelled him to power. Biden had always been a right-wing democrat, giving eulogies for pro-segregation politicians, supporting the Iraq War, and spearheading the reprehensible 1994 Crime Bill. Politicians evolve, but the bizarrity of Biden’s current media presentation is clear to see, since he was quite regressive for much of his career.
The Trump-Biden dichotomy is not unique. It is the most raw example of the centre-radical right dichotomy posited by David Graeber. Material policy is secondary. Elections are wars of images, between two very similar candidates. Voters are faced with two options, the uninspiring centrist, and the loony right winger. Sound familiar? And that is why Trump’s charm as the “fuck you to the establishment” resonates; there is a certain attractiveness to his chaos, which contrasts to the suffocating boredom of the career democrat, à la Pete Buttigieg or Debbie Wasserman Shultz. Politics is exciting when volatile, especially in the boring late-stage capitalist banality of the US political scene; any semblance of shake-up is lapped up by the disillusioned and disaffected.
But whilst chaos and upheaval underpin demagogy, they can also underpin positive change. There is relative voter consensus on progressive policies. Voters will flock to politicians who channel this, overcoming the establishment media-political machines and promulgating policies aligning with voter views and welfare. Roosevelt did so in the 1930s, winning successive terms. In the chaos of the post-COVID world, Americans need a 21st century Roosevelt that takes on the financial establishment, the military-industrial complex and the healthcare industry. This is what Trump, a 21st century Huey Long, fears the most.