BY NBC NEWS
This is the obstacle that all politicians must overcome as the new election year gets underway. The topic of “what’s the most effective way” to face the former president for all of his sins, normal activities, undemocratic acts, hate speech, and reckless administration has never been up for argument. Instead, the focus has always been on how best to go about doing so.
If beating Trump in an election is the ultimate measure of success, then President Joe Biden’s 2020 campaign has led the way so far. Naturally, he had the benefit of facing Trump as an incumbent during a period of government collapse (COVID-19), which, to be honest, made it relatively simple for Biden to develop his voice and determine how to effectively challenge Trump. Even though Biden prevailed in the 2020 election, his unexpectedly close win begs the issue of whether Biden’s success was due more to the nation’s weariness with Trump as its leader at the moment than anything else.
I bring up this Biden query about 2020 because, based on what I’ve seen, I don’t think the Biden campaign will be all that successful in trying to apply the same strategy against Trump in 2024. Since Biden is the incumbent, it will be far more difficult for him to keep the campaign focused on Trump while managing to keep himself out of the spotlight. However, I don’t believe it’s incorrect for the Biden campaign to center this race around Trump. Watch how they carry out their strategy.
The election of 2024 will have a significant influence. The United States’ place in the world will drastically alter if Trump is elected. It’s possible that some voters desire it, but there will be serious repercussions. The differences between Biden and Trump over the next four years, regarding the conflict in Ukraine, plans for Middle East peace, and dealing with China, couldn’t be more pronounced. But it’s evident that this isn’t where the voters are at the moment, despite the fact that the stakes for America’s continued status as a beacon of democracy and freedom could not be greater.
Voters in our nation will continue to see the world through their own lenses, even if an election of this magnitude has such a profound impact on global affairs. There have been several American elections—the most recent ones being in 2000 and 2016—where voters were unaware of the outcome until much later. Even seemingly small campaigns have a significant impact on the course of the country.
I traveled to Germany with my family for the holidays, taking some personal time. Although it wasn’t my first visit, it was the first time I wasn’t there for business, so I had more time to consider the relatively recent history of the nation.
Germany has done a fantastic job of taking ownership of its past, as seen by the Jewish museum in the city and the Topography of Terror museum, which documents the 12-year systematic effort to dehumanize and exterminate the Jewish population from Europe. (One display describes the precise moment the Nazi government in Germany issued an order prohibiting Jews from going in public.)
Naturally, there are also the concentration camps, which have been kept for history so that Germany in particular and the rest of the world may “never forget.” These displays are all quite powerful, with the exception of the genuinely soulless.
It’s unsettling to consider how recent all of this history is when you take it all in. This was not the handiwork of a lunatic ruler or a feudal lord from the Middle Ages; rather, it occurred in one of the world’s most industrialized nations in the 20th century, after the beginning of the Industrial Revolution.
Many scholars and Nazi sufferers have questioned aloud: How did such a sophisticated country as Germany come to be the home of such a dictator as Adolf Hitler? Why didn’t he get stopped earlier? Why did he need to start a world war to be stopped? First of all, why did the German people welcome him? Why didn’t the German people rebel against Hitler and the Nazis themselves?
Without a doubt, the recent past has inspired a great number of political entities in America to take independent action in order to counter the perceived danger posed by Trump. History has taught us all to confront dictators head-on rather than cowering.
There have been plenty of efforts to challenge or “stop” Trump; there have simply been much more ineffective attempts than successful ones. However, there was a great purpose underlying each and every one of these initiatives. Even if one differs on the efficacy of the confrontation, one can understand the motivation behind the endeavor, given the impeachments, criminal charges, civil litigation, de-platforming on social media and mainstream media, and attempts to keep him off state ballots.
Let’s face it, though: There is no guarantee that any of these efforts to oust Trump will succeed. If anything, some of them—like the efforts to keep him off the Colorado and Maine primary ballots—may work against him and instead make him stronger.
Sunlight is the one universal principle I’ve come to believe in when it comes to addressing Trump. Anything that’s just a wasted chance is trying to take a bank shot against Trump.
Let us consider the decision made by social media firms and several mainstream media sites to remove Trump from their platforms starting on January 6, 2021. He cannot be allowed unrestricted access to the public if he intends to use it to incite rebellion, which was a laudable objective.
However, what was the practical outcome? To convey his irrational complaints and his grievance-driven politics to his fans without facing opposition or recognition from the mainstream of America, Trump just established his own social media ecosystem. In fact, I firmly believe that if mainstream media and social media corporations continued to actively endorse Trump in 2023, as they did in 2016, he would not have the support of elected Republicans that he presently has.
Because they would be wary of having to defend Trump’s many complaints, I believe that fewer elected Republicans would be inclined to support him for a second term. However, the fear of association decreases if such complaints are solely being addressed by the base.
The extent to which Trump was using Twitter to influence the political discourse was obviously wearing people out prior to January 6. The people were so weary of his incessant tweeting that they did not want to endure another four years of it. However, Trump remains off of mainstream social media (though he is free to use them if he so chooses), and the mainstream media has re-platformed him on occasion, but only on certain occasions. Additionally, when they do, they portray him as more serious and somber than he really is.
He is only protected from indignation by editing Trump or shielding the public from what he says and does. If anything, Trump and his promises are likely being underreported by the media. Interviews with Trump need to increase rather than decrease, and they ought to be aggressive yet varied in their questioning style. Not only should he be questioned about his activities on and around January 6, but also about his inaction during that same time frame.
Every time Trump stays in the limelight for too long, he outstays his welcome. And the people should know what they are getting into well in advance, rather than discovering it after the fact, if he does win again.
In my opinion, the Republicans vying to unseat Trump need to adopt a similar perspective. At most, the campaigns of Ron DeSantis and Nikki Haley “bank shot” their criticism of Trump. They are continually apprehensive about their reputation among Trump supporters, which makes them cautious in their pursuit of him.
They are obviously desperately clinging to this myth that Trump voters can be separated from Trump himself, as evidenced by DeSantis’ bizarre attempt to attack Trump for COVID lockdowns (which he claims is him being tough against Trump) and Haley’s fear of using the word “slavery” in response to a question about the origin of the Civil War.
Chris Christie deserves credit for maintaining a platform that squarely addresses President Trump, even if I have doubts about his reasons for seeking the presidency. He’s not attempting to take responsibility for what he did to him in an attempt to maintain his chances of eventually winning over Trump supporters. He’s just giving it to you straight.
Is he doing this now because he realizes how terrible it was to assist Trump in becoming more mainstream, or is he just trying to establish himself as the go-to Republican for corporate boards for the remainder of this decade? While figuring out the motivation behind political moves is never easy, Christie is directly criticizing Trump and raising doubts about his suitability for the position. It’s likely that the primary race would be different if more Republicans were taking similar action.
As much as anybody outside the GOP tries, Republican Party members will ultimately have to face Trump head-on or risk losing their jobs in the process. Since being associated with Trump will eventually become a source of shame in the annals of history rather than a golden ticket to winning a GOP primary,. Hopefully, the American people won’t need to see new museums or displays to know that we’ve learned our lesson.
