I actually agree with you: you simply cannot win elections by demonizing your fellow citizens.
You have to pretend that people who claim to care about free speech are simply defending the constitution, when they don't object to a president who:
* calls the free press "the enemy of the people"
* uses his immense power to savage anyone who dares disagree with him
* loves every giant corporation with two exceptions: those linked to CNN and The Washington Post, which he victimizes by official action.
You have to pretend that secret and not-so-secret Trump voters are raising principled objections to censorship when the only times they *actually* defend free speech is when it comes from one or another type of bigot.
Democracy requires some pretense. It requires being willing to credit better motives than you really believe are present. It requires hoping that if you give people credit for decency and honor, some -- enough -- of them will live up to that. It requires remembering that you're not perfect either, and bringing some humility to the continual search for Lincoln's "Better Angels."
It just does. It always has. We're gonna have to suck it up. Right now, the alternative is four more years of Trump.
28
What is it Bret? One week the Dems are running on unachievable and way too far to the Left policies, and now its that they are running on the immorality of the most immoral president to date?
You never-Trumpers are so bumfuzzled about losing your party, to of all people Trump, so wet out there in the cold, and lost in the woods you're still doing the same old writing, telling Dems how to win elections...worse, how to win over the unwinnable.
The whispering Trump voters, are either locked in for him already, or not. They are quiet about it for their own reasons, and its hard to believe it has much to do with being shamed over it.
And to draw the ridiculous comparisons to real cancel culture, is well ridiculous.
I think in the last 3+ years I've been surprised, like head snapping surprised, about 2 times, to learn that those 2 people, whom I never would have guessed voted for Trump, did so. Mainly because Ive never met a Trump voter I couldn't figure out did so after a few conversations. 1.they either say things in direction support. 2. absent that, they behave and speak in ways I know were not likely to align to the HRC POV, or the Dem POV. But they just don't use the T-word.
Its the others who have surprised me more, the ones who talk like Trump supporters (racially tinged) but didn't vote for him. Because most are local to the NYC area and know him for what he is...deplorable.
You banished Repub never-Trumpers just need to vote Dem, period! Get over it already!
22
No Bret. Having a bad opinion doesn’t necessarily mean you’re a bad person.
That said, believing Mexicans are rapists and the likes, or that you can shoot someone on Fifth Avenue etc. I don’t know Bret.
What does that make you and those who are die-hard fans of that type of talk?
Oh wait!!! My bad!!! We’re not supposed to talk about those things.
Please accept my apology.
10
We do not need to listen or negotiate with white supremacists. We need to win the war they started.
20
The censorious left?
Mitch McConnell?
Rush Limbaugh?
Sean Hannity?
Laura Ingraham?
Lou Dobbs?
Matt Gaetz?
Devin Nunes?
Jim Jordan?
Mike Pence?
Hugh Hewitt?
And on and on....
Bret....please?
47
To vote for an obviously corrupt, self-aggrandizing, ignorant, incurious, vindictive man out of a disdain for the left's social excesses, which are unlikely to be significantly affected by the president—unlike heathcare, war, the environment and the rule of law—indicates a frivolous and petty mind. So you've changed your views. So what. You were an informed grown man four years ago. You did a monumentally stupid thing. Why should anyone respect your opinion or advice?
32
Many of the comments to this article buttress Stephens' points. Most assert that every Trump voter is a morally handicapped deplorable and that there are absolutely no tangible tangible gains to families in the past 4 year to justify an economic vote for reelection. I am a lifelong Democrat who after many years in California moved to a red state. Many of my neighbors, colleagues at work, and a few friends voted for Trump the last time around. Some of them may not do it again but most will. They are genuinely nice people, good neighbors, and most are involved in volunteering activities to help others (the poor, the sick, the disabled, SPCA, PTA, etc). They are not racists, neo-nazis, obsessed with guns, or unpreoccuppied about the welfare of others. Yes, I deeply disagree with their presidential choice. But stereotyping them as the scum of the earth, as most of my Californian friends do is not only wrong and inaccurate but extremely unproductive to bring about a political change towards a more decent and inclusive America.
49
What a rare pleasure to see the word “comprise” used correctly: to mean “include, universally.” So often it appears incorrectly (the most common misuse being “is comprised of,” when the writer means to say “is composed of”). Thank you, sir.
6
The left?
The left in America was silenced long ago. Just last week Rush Limbaugh was given a medal of freedom for his contributions to free speech.
The only free speech the left has is the right to discuss in relative obscurity. The Creel Committee 1917-1919 did a wonderful job just ask Herr Goebbels.
If the real left had free speech we would be discussing whether it serves any useful purpose to keep a nation together where there is no way forward.
Trump has done nothing except bring reality into sharper focus. I am a Canadian who welcomes American isolation not because I hate America but because I love Canada and even with that said I don't believe America deserves all the gaslighting.
Free speech means exploring why Donald Trump is President. The Brits at least now know that it was the English working class that gave up on the Labour Party because they understand that they have no future and neither do their children and as flies to wanton boys are we to the gods.
My skin crawls when I watch America suck up to its worst enemies and its worst enemy is seen as patriotic.
20
I disagree. We should not respect people who believe that African Americans are inferior and that women are inferior. We should not respect those who don't support the LGBTQ+ community,
128
Thank you, Mr. Stephens.
There was one person who used the term "deplorables", and she has been off the scene for over 3 years. Yet as a Democrat, I feel as though, even to this day, I feel the stain of that ugly word. I despised that term in 2016, and I despise it now. BUT why are Republicans getting away with continually calling Democrats names and labeling us in horrible terms? I see it from the President, House Congressmen, and every day on Fox News.
I am a moderate liberal who lives in the SFO area but do not consider myself a "coastal elite". I am not "sleazy" or "human scum", and I do not consider Democratic leaders to be "Do Nothing Democrats"--especially when the Republican Senate leader has 270 bipartisan bills sitting on his desk, that he refuses to bring before the Senate.
Republicans, I won't call you names, and I will stand up for you if and when my friends and Congressmen resort to name calling. Your President and Fox News call us names every single day. . Will you stand up for Democrats?
31
Recently two separate incidents of Trump supporters being attacked was never reported. If this had been an attack on Democratic supporters, it would have been all over the news. There is much hypocrisy in the media. I am a Trump supporter who will on occasion express my views. I have had for so long had to remain silent but am fed up. Why shouldn’t I be able to tell others my preference. I am not ashamed but quite frankly proud. My days of being silent are over.
16
People are bigots, we all are to a degree just as Jimmy Carter said regarding lust in our hearts.
But some of us have the sense, maturity and respect for fairness to not fly either too high or too low in order to escape the island that imprisoned us.
Potus had a history of failure after failure;bankruptcy after bankruptcy; lawsuit after lawsuit for non payment and non delivery of goods and services.
So America bought what he portrayed in a tv show, written by writers equal to any other fictional show, That means it’s not real America, that the entire plot is artificial, fake, made up !
But just like tv wrestling it draws enough viewers and fans.
What’s real is the fate U.S.F.L. met when they sold a franchise to Trump who was rejected by the NFL.
USFL succeeded where WFL failed, by occupying a space not in direct competition with NFL but with a spring schedule.
So what did trump do ? Wanting to play with the BIG BOYS, he convinced enough owners to switch to a fall schedule & go head to head with NFL.
The USFL sued NFL on anti trust.
The court awarded USFL $2.
USFL went bankrupt.
See the connection America ?!
8
“It is the sense of viciousness lying in wait, of violent hate just waiting to be unfurled, that leads people to keep their opinions to themselves, or to share them only with close friends.”
This.
At a Christmas party 2009, a couple I'd known for years, casual friends (and neighbors) that I thought the world of sat across from me discussing the election between themselves.
Loud enough to easily be heard, she said "the best thing that could happen to Obama would be a bullet".
They are in their late 70's to early 80's now, dedicated trump supporters. He is an elder in their baptist church.
Free speech doesn't have to be yelled or whispered to be vicious.
Would I ever consider politely and quietly attempting a conversation with these people?
No.
I no longer have an iota of respect for either of them.
39
This business about the Electoral College protecting the interests of small population states is lies. Senate apportionment and the Electoral College exist as they are because the original 13 colonies needed to make a devilish deal to enshrine liberty to enslave to grow cotton and tobacco in some of them.
12
Policies that encourage and financially reward people who claim to know what God thinks give credibility to delusions. They violate the Establishment Clause and freeze intellectual development of the public.
23
Except Katie Roiphe’s pretty much made a ton of money from writing about how picked-on by lefties she is, and I can’t help wondering just when it was that FOX&Friends, Liberty U, the Republican Party, Trump’s White House, the Heritage Foundation, and a long, long list of other right-wing orgs became hotbeds of free speech and diversity of opinion.
I don’t seem to see a lot of willingness to stop calling names and listen a little on the Right, either. When’s THAT on the agenda?
21
The Left have become precisely the tyrannical absolutists that they claim to abhor. They are neither liberal nor democratic.
My family...registered Democrats, all...will be demonstrating our rejection of their totalitarianism at the ballot box come November.
16
Treating Trump voters with respect? While it is not quite - yet - at this point, would Stephens have you treat the National Socialist German Workers' Party with "respect?" Would he say, "They're good people, just have a different point of view." We're losing our country, Bret. It's no time to be polite.
This nonsense about "whispering" is absurd too. While there are a few excesses, for the most part those who care about #MeToo, racism and other social ills are courageous and telling truth.
Those who complain about "canceling" and "callout" culture are hiding behind their own unmitigated biases and privilege. Roiphe is one of those people and has been doing it for decades.
The reason there are "whisper networks" and secret Trump supporters is that they really can't defend the smug positions they take and don't want to be exposed.
I recently read an interview with a Trump supporter who declared that he liked that Trump "tells it like it is." I wanted to be the interviewer and ask, "What example can you give of Trump telling it like it is? Just one. Do you know he has lied more than 15,000 times? Do you really believe that credible journalists at the New York Times and Washington Post are 'fake news' and that Trump and Sean Hannity are telling it like it is? Are you that stupid?"
There are many problems in America. Call out culture and Katie Roiphe's concerns are not among them.
28
Treating the opposition with respect? Not going to happen when the quintessence of the NYT/Progressive movement is the 1619 Project. I can only assure Mr. Stephens and others that I and my ancestors are and have never been racist...And yet, we are, a priori, the enemy because of the color of our skin.
The battle is joined, but the Panzers of the Left were the first to cross the Maginot Line.
11
"People who freely share the most intimate details of their sex lives with near-strangers think twice about sharing some of their political views with old friends."
People with old friends—being old themselves—don't share anything about their sex lives with anyone; also the only thing remarkable is that they still have a 'sex life.'
7
I think it's a mistake to conflate the climate of today with that of 2016. Back then (which seems like a very long time ago), if someone squinted their eyes, craned their neck and ignored certain voices in their head, they were able to make a case that Tr#mp would be a semi-traditional president with semi-traditional policies. That is no longer a possibility, even with tortured rationalizations. And while I recognize that in making this case, even the most righteous people can come off as insufferable. Even so, I will not make distinctions between those who "don't like Tr#mp but are voting for him anyway" and those who wear MAGA hats at rallies. If anything, I regret not being more vocally contemptuous of people in the early stages of 2016 when they were just toying with the idea of voting for Tr#mp. It could have and absolutely should have been nipped in the bud then.
16
It is not true that those who support Trump are misogynists, racists, bigots and xenophobes. What I tell my friends who support him is that one of two things is true:either I do not know them well or they do not know the DJT that I know. And I had a front row seat having worked in NYC some years ago! What I can say, with some degree of certitude, is that every misogynist, every racist, every bigot and every xenophobe is thrilled beyond belief to have one of their own in the oval office. Vote!
24
Mr. Stephens must have spent the past three years in quite a quandary. On the one hand as an admirer of Sheldon Adelson (and in fact anyone willing to support Israeli right wing), he must be absolutely giddy about Trump giving Mr. Netanyahu anything he's asked for without (as Tom Friedman has repeatedly said in this publication) asking for anything in return. On the other hand, Mr. Stephens is obviously intelligent enough and well-read enough to easily realize what a fraud Trump is and his apparent support for Israel is not based on any principle or innate love of Israel or Jewish people. In fact quite the opposite, Trump gives "things" to Israel because those things don't belong to him in the first place and therefore do not cost him anything. For Trump giving "things" to Israel is merely transactional. Move the embassy - receive millions from Mr. Adelson. To Trump this is a very easy choice, almost laughably easy. This state of affairs, having what you have always wished for but receiving it from a man he knows to be corrupt and contemptible as Trump is, must have ruined what may have otherwise been a glorious three or so years.
13
Well... except for the racism and white supremacy.
To support Trump, you are either a bigot yourself, or you don't mind that he is. And if you don't, it's because you are white.
That's what's scary about Republicans' uniform support for Donald. The party surely can find another Republican -- with better party credentials -- who would further the same policies and name conservative judges.
But they are afraid to. Still 15% of Republicans in New Hampshire voted for somebody other than Trump. Nearly ten percent for Bill Weld.
This Trump thing is grotesque. It's hard to treat white nationalists with respect.
19
I will follow your advice, Bret, as soon as you can tell me the difference between being a racist and "just supporting one".
25
Sorry, I'm a terrible liar. I have no respect for people who let themselves be conned by a snake oil salesman. trump's vulgarity, mendacity and bigotry was on display for all to see when he rode down his gaudy escalator. If they're not smart enough or care enough to see the damage his tenure in the White House has wrought on our democracy, I can't imagine being able to show them.
19
In the beginning of his campaign, after he descended the escalator and began to spew his filth, I wondered aloud if I should vote for this tool simply to give other Rs the opportunity to beat him like a drum. As he gained popularity my desire to “make the R party an example” of such hateful foolishness with a vote for him became unconscionable. When Kelley Ann Conway had her first interview as his Campaign Chairman my heart sank and I knew then that he would win. She is the reason he is in the WH. She is more smarmy than him. I worked hard for HRC cuz I sensed the danger of her along with him. Sadly, my intuition about HER was right...those who enable him are worse than he is!!
10
Our parents thaught us how to behave and we picked up on their behavior, which we first emulated as kids, then accepted or rejected depending on our own experience and outside influence.
My 78 yo neighbor calls blacks colored. That is how it is. A black physician took care of her dying husband at the VA, but they are still colored for her.
Dems have to do their thing, not waste time on convincing people that suppoting an ignorant bigot will never, ever make America great again.
Do you think his supporters understand the damage done to the American economy by trashing the trans Pacific trade aggrements? Do you really believe discarding a whole continent like Africa (where Chinese and the EU are competing in getting business like building infrastructure) is going to help us in the long term?
Trumpers don't care, because they don't know and don't care to know. As Asimov noted democracy for them is equalization of
ignorance with knowledge.
16
Eldridge Cleaver or Malcom said something scary in 1967. The Movement folks in Philadelphia were even more scary. They recognised slavery when they saw it. Free?
The deplorables were never enslaved. Lot easier to trick. Three hundred rail cars full of Sarin. Right there in North Dakota. Is that a gas mask or a virus mask?
When you scream fire in a crowded theater you just might get crushed too Brett. Look out for it. Everybody is screaming. Barrack Obama didn't scream, still scaring the dickens out of them.
1
I am a retired (California) Boston lawyer whose wife (37 years) is of color. Most of our friends are highly educated liberal “professionals”. I enjoy fishing and hunting and travel to do both. Most friends I fish (or hunt) with are blue collar conservative. Like liberals, they live everywhere-some places maybe more than others. my Trump supporter friends invite us to their homes, come to our home and invite us to go out to social events. they and their wives are friends with my wife-independent of me.I see no difference between my groups of friends when it comes to how they view people of color.
However, My liberal friends think that Trump supporters are ignorant racist Neanderthals, and my Trump supporter friends think that liberals are a bunch of condescending elitist snobs who are giving the country away.My liberal friends are aghast at how “stupid” the Trump supporters are because he has done nothing for them but make idle promises while lining the pockets of the rich. My Trump supporter friends bristle at the hypocrisy of the liberals who are making “millions” on the stock market and business under Trump but want him out only to be ruined later by the “socialist” who will burn the market down.
My experience has shown me that there is little in the way of compassion nor understanding, and a lot of fear and loathing. I don’t know the solution, but if one is not found, it will soon be neighbor against neighbor
8
and the oldest whisper network in the world updates another follow on outcome of Trump's Presidency...
White Supremacist Propaganda Distribution Hit All-Time High in 2019
White supremacist propaganda distribution more than doubled in 2019 over the previous year, making it the highest year on record for such activity in the United States, according to new data from ADL. A total of 2,713 cases of literature distribution – an average of seven per day – were reported nationwide.
https://www.adl.org/
3
Eight Times Picks, and all are men. Guys, practice what you preach. So far every Times Pick from a woman in the comments’ section is just as deep, just as well-written, and just as smart. Get a grip!
3
It's always interesting how in liberal press people are often exhorting each other to be empathetic and listen hard to what the other side is saying. I seldom hear that same exhortation coming from the right.
432
Some of us already treat Trump supporters with enough respect to carry out a political conversation with them. You just don't see these conversations because they're initiated by community members, canvassers, volunteers, etc. We see and feel and understand the pain that many Trump supporters experience, and it's not hard to see how somebody who isn't obsessed with politics could hear the president's remarks and nod along.
Ignoring his tactlessness, Trump has spoken to problems that affect working class Americans: abysmal trade deals that have led to the outsourcing of well-paying jobs, years of status quo politics during which the working class has been ignored nearly entirely, the dismantling of the coal industry without enough jobs in green alternatives. These people were written off long before Trump declared his candidacy in 2015.
Telling these voters that they aren't deplorable and that they should be taken seriously isn't enough. A candidate needs to speak to these problems as well. Solid trade deals should not be a strategy exclusive to Republicans. When we talk climate change, we need to discuss the possibility of job creation that can come out of combating it. Working class voters don't have the luxury of worrying about issues that are so far down the line when they are struggling to get by right now. Bring them into the conversation by speaking to their needs and you'll win them over.
7
Here's my approach: I do listen, then I carefully weigh the arguments in light of established facts and trying to leave out opinions regarding individual personalities. Only then do I proceed to dismiss and denounce. It happens that I often find it necessary, after careful analysis, to dismiss and denounce. I do this for my own satisfaction, knowing it won't change anything. Sigh.
4
The inability to listen to the opinions of others having been "...fully weaponized to political conversations..." is the historically documented and documentable creation of Conservative Republican ideologues by the names of Limbaugh, Gingrich and Ailes.
Trump's presidency would not exist without them and their decades long careers as well poisoners of our body politic.
19
We ain't seen nothin yet I'm afraid. If three years in the Oval office hasn't convinced us the extent Trump will go in developing an authoritarian presidency wait until Nov. 4th, when he fails to win, causing an uproar declaring the election illegal and fraught with cheating. Refusing to leave the WH and calling on the base, those who bypassed all the atrocious statements he's made since descended the elevator at Trump tower, to prepare themselves to confront those who voted against him. Would he encourage violence, he once did at a Trump rally indicating a punch and removal would solve the problem, and the crowd cheered. Is he capable of heightened violence? My vote is YES.
12
I find Trump voters to be incredibly uninformed. I spoke with one last night in a Bar. He railed against anyone that is a democrat as being crazy liberals. I informed him that I consider myself to be a centrist democrat, meaning that a few issues separate me and a member of the GOP. I explained the political continuum to this guy and informed him that the level of people that is far right or far left is much less than those in the middle. The media gives us the juxtaposition of far left vs. far right however most of us are in the middle, there are a few issues that we disagree on. When I challenged his understanding of trickle down economics and the Laffer curve he was incredibly ignorant. His comprehension ended at republicans are great with the economy. I explained to him the national debt consequences of two terms of Reaganomics and again he was unaware that the national debt quintupled in the two terms of Ronald Reagan. I went on to inform him that the only leader that paid down the debt in the last forty years is Bill
Clinton. This young guy could believe what he believes because he was born into a GOP family or because he trusts but doesn't verify. There is a vast valley of ignorance in the electorate and it is very alarming.
13
So what’s the takeaway, here? Calling out corruption, overt, ugly racism and sexism, and the politicization/destruction of our democratic institutions, shouldn’t be done because it might hurt someone’s feelings?
If I’m not mistaken, it was a prominent conservative who once said “Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue.”
My, how times have changed....
7
now about this "secret voter" canard.
we are all secret voters on election day and all our votes are secret and they all count.
2
Labels -- any labels – have power. If repeated often enough, the labels morph into the truth or a reasonable facsimile thereof.
If free speech is a goal in our representative democracy, then every man and woman should be free to criticize anyone he or she wishes to criticize.
One might respectfully suggest to Bret Stephens and to any other journalist that calling Donald Trump a vindictive, reckless man is perfectly acceptable. Just don’t whisper it – shout it from the rooftops.
6
"How to pull it off this time. By treating Trump voters with respect.....By listening, not denouncing; empathizing, not ridiculing; understanding, not dismissing."
There are millions of vulnerable Americans who have been inundated by false information from right wing media sources - essentially, brainwashed with conspiracy theories and outright lies. There is no listening on their part, no empathizing, no understanding. They repeat what Hannity (or some other fox shill) has told them over and over and over again. This is the crisis - people who have had their minds stolen. When you figure out how to undo the brainwashing then maybe there's a chance at dialogue.
Excellent doc on how serious this problem is.
https://www.thebrainwashingofmydad.com/streaming-services
10
I do not agree that the Democrats case should be the moral deterioration of the country during President Trump's term --as Bret Stephens suggests.
The strongest case is that the President is attacking our democracy by behaving like a King. His coziness with Russia's Putin is another reason for voting him out of office. These are issues that cut across party lines and that do not confront Trump voters about their racist views concerning immigrants.
8
We're finally in the tumult the founding founder were counting on to balance all these freedoms. You can say what you want but then welcome to the tumult. Until recently its been more of a sheeple style culture where a few opinion leaders can say what they want with 'authority'. We're finally straightening our spines and having it out, finally living up to our creed.
1
"[treat]Trump voters with respect. [ask] why so many of them wound up in his tent to begin with. "
Aside from whispering on social networks, broadcasting and headlines in mainstream media do much to spread the viciousness
For example, pretty much all reporters in 2016 & since, took Clinton's "deplorable" comment out of context. But I took the time to read the entire quote on line in the LA Times (see below). Isn't this exactly what Bret is calling for?
"To just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic ...unfortunately there are people like that.
He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people, now ... 11 million.
He tweets and retweets their offensive hateful mean-spirited rhetoric. ..
but …the other half of Trump’s supporters…. “people who feel that the government has let them down, the economy has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures, and they’re just desperate for change.”
They “don’t buy everything he says, but he seems to hold out some hope that their lives will be different. They won’t wake up and see their jobs disappear, lose a kid to heroin, feel like they’re in a dead-end. Those are people we have to understand and empathize with as well.”
10
Wrong!
I have no respect for Trump’s “base” who say they love him because “he says what we are thinking.” Those thoughts are better kept to themselves.
I have no respect for his Trumpvangelical base who want to make America into a theocracy.
I have no respect for those who admire his faux strongman authoritarian posturing as a cure all,
I have no respect for those blind to his ignorance, especially as climate change advances unchecked.
I have no respect for those who agree with his cruel and unproductive anti-immigrant policies
I have no respect for those who shrug at his defiance of the expected norms of governance and his Constitutional Presidential oath.
I have no respect for those who revel in his “maximum” pressure tactics.
I have no respect for those who revel in his divisive rhetoric and laugh at his lies even as he lies to them
I have no respect for the politicians and ordinary citizens who have joined him in playing our Democracy as a winner take all blood sport where the opposing party is considered a mortal, dishonest, corrupt enemy.
I have no respect for those who hold their noses but believe that they benefit from the economy he has created, as that economy is built upon a foundation of unfairness and shortsightedness. To them I would say...we don’t need Trump to keep our economy vibrant, fairer for everyone today and the future.
Civil to Trumpers, of course; incivility is Trump’s calling card. So to you in the MAGA cap...”have a nice day.”
11
Wow. Bret lost his veneer pretty quick.
Notice how it's always the Democratic party that needs to show the nation how to behave! trump and team are actively scissoring away at the constitution, and Bret is convinced that out of all the odious factors trump can throw into this election, it's some Democratic censorship that's going to bring America down.
The censorious left?? It's like a crime victim getting mad because the police aren't polite enough to the mob!
9
I agree with you Bret.
2
According to American revanchism. The US was great when most of the rest of the world was in ashes after WW II.
5
Stephens is right, but getting the left to treat Trump supporters...or "secret supporters"...with even a modicum of respect is a non-starter.
To quit referring to them as rubes and deplorables, and spitting on them on campuses? Ain't gonna happen. That's why so many of them have gone silent and are waiting.
The Trump-hating train pulled out of the station a long time ago, standing room only, and there's no stopping it...until those secret supporters derail it in November...again.
5
The key to defeating Trump is not to placate and make nice with his voters. This is politics afterall, and as John McCain often noted... politics is a dirty business.
No, the key to defeating Trump is to get him to defeat himself. And for that... all you have to do is know how to persistently get under his skin and drive him into a rage (which by the way, everyone should know by now... this is not a long drive). Once he gets triggered, he actually will do most of the work for you.. as we have all seen this week with his very public admission that he not only feels he has the right to interfere in Justice Department cases, but has in point of fact done so publicly this very week.
Just keep pushing him into being triggered, and he will self-implode.... because he simply cannot help himself. And his solid based... also largely "grievance driven" will happily follow him like the lemmings that they are. The Trump voter who is not part of his solid base.. many simply will not vote for a triggered maniac for president... and this time around.. Trump cannot simply run on his success as a celebrity.
4
Bret Stephens, I cannot respect a Trump supporter but I will always be civil and engage them. I do every day on social media. My brother-in-law is a Trump supporter, a life long Republican who votes against what he perceives are the “Democratic commies.” He’s a 60 year old Cuban male, who despises anything liberal as socialism or communism. When we had him and my sister over fro dinner, all of us avoided politics, but I wanted to ask him, “why do you support Trump?” I just want to understand, because it makes no sense to be how anyone with an ounce of integrity, morals and a faith in a loving God could support the vile man, Trump.
Yes, we must be civil and kind, and reach out to Trump supporters, even ask them some questions and get them to stop and think.
2
"If you seek authenticity in a politician, the antidote is not a man who has told 14,000 documented lies during his three years in office."
But the antidote is inserting an absurdly false statistic into your comment?
1
@acule
the number of lies told by Trump in office is well documented and the count increases on a daily basis.
it would be easier to count his truthful statements.
7
The comments do not augur well for liberals’ understanding of how repulsive they seem to moderate, persuadable independents. If the proposition is vote for Sanders or be considered a racist, there are many who will reject that framing and go the other way
7
No, the letter and the spirit of the First Amendment both say that the government can’t punish you for your speech, or for your political or religious views. The First Amendment doesn’t mean that private organizations need to give you a platform, or that other private individuals can’t call you names. In fact, just like the First Amendment protects your expression of bigoted views, it also protects other people’s right to call you a bigot. The only current major politician in the US that has called for the government to punish people for their speech is Trump. And the only party that widely supports laws punishing people for their speech and political views (whether it’s defunding colleges that don’t adhere to state ideology, denying visas to foreigners who are against the administration, or denying government jobs and contracts to people who support boycotting Israel) is the Republican Party. So any Democrat would be better on the First Amendment.
4
Trump voters have abandoned any claim to our respect. Up against the wall!
4
Stephens is right, but getting the left to treat Trump supporters...or "secret supporters"...with even a modicum of respect is a non-starter.
To quit referring to them as rubes and deplorables, and spitting on them on campuses? Ain't gonna happen. That's why so many of them have gone silent and are waiting.
The Trump-hating train pulled out of the station a long time ago, standing room only, and there's no stopping it...until those secret supporters derail it in November...again.
1
It seems to me that our most recent Medal of Freedom Winner to say nothing of our so called President have taken great pleasure in bashing Democrats, women, people of color. No wonder it is difficult to respect those that support that.
12
We used to call these people the silent majority.
2
Free speech does not mean freedom from criticism, nor does it mean that others have to give you a platform. You can have whatever opinion you'd like, and talk about it until your face turns blue. Of course, if someone thinks that your opinion makes you racist, sexist, or homophobic then they certainly have a right to state that opinion even if you don't like it, and if the business people who provide a platform believe that your opinions are going to cost them money they have a right to remove you from that platform. It has always been that way, and it didn't seem to bother too many conservatives when it mostly affected marginalized groups.
Online bullying, harassment, and threats are not OK when they cross a line. However, it seems to be that the very same people on the right who said online harassment and bullying were "free speech" during GamerGate because no one was being physically harmed are now all upset because the shoe is on the other foot. You reap what you sow; who are the snowflakes now?
7
Whispering is as American as hotdogs. Anytime someone fails the purity test, the whispers begin. Our Senator Franken was convicted through shouts and whispers. The conservatives are after Sessions and Romney and anyone else who isn’t worshipping Trump hard enough. Ending whispering won’t help. “Swing” Trump voters this time around can’t be won over by any tactic. Like Republican Senators, Trump voters do not have to hide their shame. They can now say, ‘I hate his tweets, his personal attacks are awful, his total lack of morality is against my religious beliefs, his treatment of women... but those judges and the tax cuts and keeping those foreigners out .... he’s got my vote.
1
So, the number of closet trumpites grew because the left is so promiscuously "censorious" of trump. His enemies are more hostile to the 1st Amendment than he is. Really? Impossible.
trump's critics are promiscuous in their condemnation because there is so much to condemn--an endless supply of inane, vicious, outrage dished up at all hours of the day and night.
Critics don't want to curtail trump's free speech rights; they would like his tweets to fall within the realm of his duties as leader of the country. We don't need his opinions on every trivial thing and every battle waged against his uncountable enemies.
Where did the myth derive that the left is "censorious", that it talks down to trumpites? Why are trumpites and the GOP so aggrieved?
The left didn't suppress democratic votes, steal a Supreme Court seat, gerrymander democratic districts out of existence, never insulted a GOP president the way the GOP treated Obama.
trumpites think we should get over him, shut up, get used to the ignorance, chaos, isolation of our country, and the massive debt.
And we should treat trumpites with respect. Why? when neither trump nor his mob seem to know what respect is.
12
Twitter is the uber whispering network and Trump is the uber user of twitter.
2
"Restore honor and integrity to the White House"--Bret
Wouldn't that be nice? I have conservative friends who send me their 'secret network' stuff. I never respond but don't tell them to stop sending it either. It's always fascinating to see what the right field bleacher section is thinking.
They're chocked full of conspiracy theories like the Bidens' "criminal behavior in Ukraine." Mostly it's about demonizing Democrats as socialists, commies and worse, with special hate directed at Pelosi, Schumer and Adam Schiff.
Sorry, Bret, secret networks are here to stay and expanding. We still have something called the 1st Amendment.
5
I have been hearing my entire adult life how the left should be quiet and polite and respectful while I watch extreme, misleading, anti-democratic shouting from the right grow louder by the day. I am not defending the militant left, but once again I feel like the "conservative" NYT pundits are directing a common sense suggestion at the wrong side. Get after your own people, Bret. They've moved on from the cute lies like the ones that got us into war with Iraq. Donald Trump is at war with the USA. And his primary strategy is hate speech.
8
What would an objective analysis of the composition of Trump supporters yield? A healthy cross section are actually "deplorable" because they are either avowedly racist or willing enablers. Another group are evangelical Christians who have made Trump their "useful idiot". Still another group are Trump's declared favorites, the uneducated voters. They're the ones that scream, "hey, big government, hands off my medicare" and get bent about "drag queen story hour". Finally, the plutocrats and would be plutocrats who are all making a mint. Of all these, the only hope is the uneducated, but that's going to be tough because they got suckered and no one ever wants to admit that.
2
In other words....treat Trump voters with respect....
In return.. they will punch you out on the street for having the audacity to put a bumper sticker on their vehicle that supports someone other than Trump.
Nice sales pitch... waste of time.
3
I can understand those people in 2016 who thought we needed a change from "politics as usual" and thought Trump to be a highly unconventional candidate who just might deliver the transformation they thought was needed.
But over the past three years, Trump has clearly shown himself to be a petty, vindictive, vulgar, racist, mendacious, and immoral ignoramus.
Pardon me if I find it impossible to sympathize with those who still support him.
6
I am sympathetic to Trump voters because I see them as making a big mistake by supporting a guy who has no empathy for them or anyone else, and has a long record of working for his own benefit, regardless of collateral damage he creates. But I find it pretty much impossible to discuss anything with people who uncritically accept that everything Trump says is true, no matter if real world evidence shows many of his statements to be lies. A relative of mine loves that Trump points out "enemies" on whom they can blame everything that went wrong in their lives, while ignoring any evidence of Trump's ignorance and incompetence.
2
Brett Stephens presents a convincingly compelling argument through his excellent Opinion. The nature and the level of discourse in this multi platform digital age reveals avenues of electronic expression and sophisticated vehicles to relay those sentiments that expose individuals to praise and contempt. Civility and open mindedness are absolutely positively required attributes to exercise in this extraordinary sensitive atmosphere. I am reminded of the 1968 campaign of Robert Francis Kennedy and extreme ridicule and vicious verbal characterizations Bobby endured because of his magnetic attraction of racial and ethnic minorities to his cause. Compared to Eugene McCarthy's campaign, the hard cold realities were present. Later in 1968 the George Wallace campaign capitalized upon racial fearmongering and anti government disdain to enhance his position in the polls. Detractors of Wallace expressed outrage and contempt towards his supporters. In the end, Wallace succeeded in carrying five Deep Southern states [plus one electoral vote in North Carolina, though Richard Nixon won that state]. Nixon's Southern Strategy proved effective through the public relations approach of persuading Wallace supporters, not demonizing or insulting them, that Nixon would bring law and order and resist school racial integration. Wallace's dangerously hyperbolic rhetoric was viewed as frightening, and the erosion of support steadily increased. Bottom line: we can agree to disagree, without violence.
1
I agree with Bret’s theory. I see it in action every day between my progressive left vs right wing friends. Each group expresses total indignation over the beliefs of the other group. And, the discussion always ends in a stalemate. I fear we lose our capability to listen to the opinions of others when we come fully weaponized to political conversations.
7
@Kathy Berger
again with the false equivalency.
the inability to listen to the opinions of others having been "...fully weaponized to political conversations..." is the historically documented and documentable creation Conservative Republican ideologues by the names of Limbaugh, Gingrich and Ailes.
Trump's presidency would not exist without them and their decades long careers as well poisoners of our body politic.
1
@Kathy Berger: This awful system of unequal federal representation brings out the very worst in people. We must endure having our noses rubbed in slavery every day.
2
This article uses the terms secret rebellion and free speech.
Trump talks about this openly. His term for it is PC, political correctness.
As the whisper threat has expanded, as more people feel threatened, then more people resent what Trump seems to be talking about.
I say "seems to be" because Trump is just using loaded language from focus groups and the tested impact words of political hit operators along the lines of Rush Limbaugh. I don't suggest he's got his finger on the pulse of real issues, addressed as here in this article.
However, the reality addressed in this article is empowering for someone doing what Trump is doing. Reality on this point is moving toward the bad guy. And make no mistake, Trump is a bad guy in any matter on which he has values at all.
Democrats and Independents need to do some self correction here, fix their course before they hit the rocks.
It should not be that hard. Look at what happened to those Democrats who already took this too far.
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand took down Sen. Al Franken this way. How did that work out for her?
An extremely vocal user of this was Michael Avenatti, the attorney for Stormy Daniels. Where is he now? True, there are other reasons he went down, but would he have had that focus on his actions without this prominence? Which nail gets hammered, by those who can pick and choose cases?
Abusing this is happening, but it is proving to be a bad idea for the most prominent of those using it.
Course correction.
2
There is not much we can do about private speech. Political correctness has been over the top. Personally,I think it will get old and discarded at some point.
I try not to demonize Trump supporters. I see most of them as the end result of 30 years of right-wing propaganda. The fact that Rush Limbaugh gets a Medal during the SOTU is proof of that.
8
Why does Trump (DJT) have a whisper network? Many DJT supporters or defenders probably feel like a silenced minority that has become sensitive to people who hate Trump and anything Trump and are so close minded that they get sick of hearing people who don't think the way they do.
DJT derangement syndrome (TDS) is real and hear to stay for another 4 years, that is if Trump is reelected. TDS happens when left wants to hear only their own free speech and goes bonkers when they hear the other side of the story. Little do they realize that the defense of the results of DJT presidency is not necessarily an expression of love of DJT but just a realization the state of the Union (SOU) of the USA has been the best in the past 36 months. After failing miserably to converse with 99% of the NY Times and many of my friends and family on a planet we share, I had enough. I just documented in a kindle book my independent observations of the state of the Union. The title of the book is DJT presidency: Best SOU of USA. What I hope is that those who never liked the outcome of the 2016 election can recall for themselves how USA has been in the past 3 years compared to what it was for themselves and the rest of the world with an open mind. I don't think it has been best for everyone and certainly not for me but I am happy for the 7 million Americans who found jobs and other millions who benefited from the stock market highs which include retirees exposed to the stock market and endowments.
5
Your comments make a good point as to why people may vote for Trump because of the feeling in the wallet when they go to the polling booth. Naturally, one should rightly criticize the fueling of the economy by deficit spending and that job growth was greater under Obama. I’m happy about my 401k approach retirement. I will never vote for Trump but the stock market reaction to Sanders or Warren’s policies need to be taken into account because , in the unlikely even either is elected, the resulting market reaction will sink the Democrats again like the health care overreach did under Clinton and Obama. Without those mistakes, the Republican Party would not be where it is today.
The important thing for the Democrats to fo is put the economy first and it will give the next Democratic President more trust and leverage to address other concerns.
2
@Girish Kotwal I would feel a lot better about Trump if he would acknowledge the truth that jobs were increasing for several years after 2008, when Obama saved the country from a major depression. Trump was fortunate to become president when that trend was already in place. The Trump-GOP tax cut and the trillions of dollars of debt resulting from it raise questions about the GOP and Trump as stewards of the economy.
3
I certainly give up conversing with people who keep telling me I have to believe things that aren’t true after a while, yes. Not big on repeatedly being told that I believe stuff I don’t believe and can’t think rationally because I’m some kind of neurotic, either.
3
Conservative judges, tough measures against illegal immigrants, severely restricting legal immigration, reducing regulations, renegotiating trade deals - everything Trump's supporters like could have been implemented by a different Republican president and there were multiple Republican candidates in 2016 offering a menu of precisely those items.
If you like those policies you don't have to support Trump. If you do support him, you're choosing to support his immoral, vicious and dishonest character. With him, you don't get the one, policies, without the other, character.
That's why it's right to condemn Trump supporters as morally defective - as deplorable and properly condemned. That's what is different about politics now compared to any other era in our history
7
@Max Davies
So the author's whole "treat them with respect instead of dismissing them; listening, not denouncing ..." apparently didn't sink in?
9
@JRC The objection is to the attempts to normalize Trump's character and erratic behavior. One must say something about a president who has encouraged violence at his rallies and in a campaign speech on TV, who regularly demonizes segments of the population he dislikes, and has over 16,000 documented lies on the record of the past 3 years. As Trump regularly defies the Constitution by claiming no one can oversee his behavior, citizens have a duty to defend the Constitution against Trump's attacks on it.
3
Two separate themes mashed together here. Hopefully we can all agree that cancel culture and suppressing free speech should be avoided at all costs. Acknowledging a small subset of voters, however, who are driven, not by ideology or principle, but by a need to simply rebel against anti-free speech actors, or because it is ‘forbidden’, regardless of the ramifications of those actions, seems like a waste of all of our time.
I would argue that there is a larger segment of voters reluctant to share their opinions who struggle with their transactional-based rationalizations for supporting a character, whom they would concede to be so deeply flawed.
1
The Democrats also need to state, over and over, how the economy hasn’t changed any under Trump. The stock market growth rate lags behind where it was at the same point in Obama’s first term, and the economy still grows at 2%. The unemployment rate is only down 1% under Trump. The only change under Trump is doubling the annual deficit.
Because the Democrats are awful at politics they have allowed Trump to hijack the economic narrative. The response should be a shrug, a “no big deal” campaign that also points out how Trump was all talk (5% growth, manufacturing jobs that never materialized, etc.). Under Obama the narrative was the “sluggish” economy while now, with no material change, it’s “the best economy ever.”
Whoever advises the Democrats is just awful.
9
@Pj5106
Trump has a corrupt but effective advantage in his political messaging, as he is willing to make up all kinds of statments that have no facts or evidence associated with them. The GOP support him in this approach
3
Since this is a discussion about free speech, it should also be about the free press. Speech is speech. Sometimes suppressed by either side: right or left. Suppression we can point to and raise alarm, but more pernicious is omission of speech to effect a political outcome. This is where trust is lost. Withholding information that is not in-line with the political leanings of whatever editor or editorial staff of our most esteemed media organizations hold. This destroys trust.
One example I list here is the liberal press in Germany. Sometime ago they forgot to mention how a Cologne Sylvester Abend (New Year's Eve) celebration turned really bad for numerous women at the hands of recently arrived immigrants. This non-news escaped their attention, until they could no longer avoid it.
This is free speech by omission. Sure breaks down the trust though.
4
There has been much debate since Citizens United on the relationship of money to speech. It seems to me that an equally important topic, but one that is more nuanced, would be, "Is social media really the same as speech?", and should the same rules apply to both? For many, the assumption seems to be that one is a form of the other. I used to agree, but I've begun to wonder if they are really so closely related.
When the first amendment was written, speech (and the press) did not have the reach we see with social media now. Once a lie could be debunked long before it spread too far. In fact, lies could often function as good starters public conversations about important topics. These days, a lie can circle the globe in a matter of hours or minutes, often leaving behind first impressions that the truth can have a very difficult time uprooting. I don't think that's a situation the Founding Fathers foresaw.
I do not have a solution to offer for this. I do think it needs more serious discussion as an issue of life in the 21st century... especially with one of the most egregious abusers of social media sitting on the Oval Office.
2
It will be tough to match the pay scale of Mike Bloomberg's whisper network.
2
It is a fair comment about the cancel culture, but not a fair comment about why people vote. First of all, votes are supposed to be secret. Second of all, in the example of Trump, a lot more people voted against Hilary than voted "for" Trump. He was the protest vote.
Most of my voting friends, some Democrat, some Republican, when asked why they thought Trump would be a better President than Hilary, they said it was about not trusting Hilary.
They now express regret at voting for Trump. Because they now believe that he is less trustworthy than Hilary.
None of us argued about why. It was not a conversation of"how could you". It was more a conversation about why.
But I do understand why people are fearful of Trump supporters. It is all of the bullying that Trump encourages. And interesting when I have listened to die-hard Trump voters, they all seem to have one trait in common. They are bullies themselves.
If we stuck to issues and policies, instead of personalities, maybe we would be much better off.
6
@Jean: "Crooked Hillary" is the most infantile projection of America's most enabled jerk.
3
When he ran in 2016, Trump was, as one of today's commenters puts it "devoid of integrity and moral principles". He has not changed. My hope is that a great many of his 2016 supporters have noticed this fact and will vote to be rid of him.
7
Since Reagan, if you believed the environment had sufficient value to protect it you were insulted as a "tree-hugger." If you believed that trickledown was ridiculous, you were a "socialist." if you believed in human rights and equal opportunity(ie black people have the same rights as whites), you were a "bleeding heart." If you believed that war ought not to be the 1st response to everything, you were "a wimp." If you believed that the US ought to treat others in the world with dignity(ie not abuse them financially or physically), you were unpatriotic.
None of these were endearing terms and all where meant to shut you up quickly and with a touch of humiliation...just like cancel culture.
yes...cancel culture has been around for a long time. Right or wrong(and it certainly doesn't comport with the "love thy neighbor" wisdom of Christ), it seems that now that the shoe is on the other foot, its unacceptable.
19
"Secret voters" did not usher Trump into office.
It was the Democratic Party's base staying home from the polls in the face of Hillary's "We Can Lose This One Too, Yes We Can!!" campaign and the DNC's dirty tricks.
The GOP's right wing extremists are clearly overestimating their support and Stephens is working diligently to correct that.
3
Adam... did not want the apple for the apple's sake, he wanted it only because it was forbidden. The mistake was in not forbidding the serpent; then he would have eaten the serpent.
Mark Twain, Pudd'nhead Wilson
1
I think I agree, if I understood correctly about the "land of the free" (?). Anyway, I think Whisper networks and the GOP Senate have something in common: Both exist to maintain people's personal political power. I know that's supposed to be this really great thing but, look, people. It's not. Term limits would have significantly removed the blindspots of that GOP kangaroo jury that recently incentivized every single senator (but Romney) to refuse to vote to remove. Willingness to speak out OPENLY about brutish, illegal behavior would do the same for Harassment Whisperers. Reason being, it's really not worth protecting something that is spiritually worthless in the first place—a career built on winning at all costs, an obsession, whatever. But there's good news. There is something that is worth protecting. If you can't remember what it is, try remembering laying in bed at night as a little kid, waiting to go to sleep, thinking deep thoughts, wondering about what eternity is, how this universe has no beginning and no end. Remember that endless, spaceless place? (It blew your mind just before your dreams took over.) It' where things make a different kind of sense and personal politics don't compute. Get it yet? Your soul and your conscience want to live together with you there now, today, while you walk this earth. Forget the day job if you that's what's holding you back. Take the trip. There's a whole other world waiting for you if you're willing. Pay with your heart. Wake up.
1
Conservatives' Triumvirate of well poisoning—Limbaugh, Gingrich and Ailes—eradicated the niceties of whisper campaigns.
Conservatives' assault on comity in political discourse began in 1988 when ABC Radio provided Rush Limbaugh with national syndication.
A eight years later the longtime Conservative Republican campaign consultant Roger Ailes became the well poisoner in chief when Murdoch gave him the keys to FOX News.
4
When a person (especially a heterosexual man) decides to write a column entitled "Is sex, biologically speaking, binary?" one has to wonder about the impetus of the article. As a matter of science, sure, it's an inquiry to help us understand the mechanics of nature. As a social inquiry, what's your point? The alt right loves to say things like "I'm not homophobic, but isn't it interesting that biology might say otherwise about sex?" Why is it interesting, and what are your motives for bringing up the subject? You have to take responsibility for your words and you have to be honest about your motivations. As an intelligent, responsible person you must look into your motivations, "I just find it interesting" is a dodge, plain and simple.
2
Sure, it's important to understand and respect the concerns of Trump supporters, and there certainly has been an unending stream of books, articles and broadcasts doing just that. That said, how much time do Trump supporters spend worrying about the concerns of the rest of us? The answer...not much.
8
Pretty nifty two-for-the-price-of-one column. It attempts to denigrate the Me Too movement, implying that large numbers of people "secretly" find the actions against predatory men excessive, and then goes on to imply that hordes of supposedly progressive voters actually "secretly" support Trump.
Gee, I didn't realize progressives were so shy and afraid to speak up about their true feelings.
Nice try, but I think I'll just believe my own eyes.
7
Feels like a double standard here. Trump supporters can spew all sorts of angry, vile, denigrating rhetoric toward the “other side”, yet expect to be treated with kid gloves by those they constantly insult. Of course, their leader is the worst offender. His indecency has no bounds. Sorry, I’m over feeling any sense of understanding or trying to have patience for people who choose to be ill-informed and who support a nasty sociopath as their leader.
13
You're correct in saying free speech is free until it isn't. But shouldn't there be a point where that's legitimately the case? We can go as deep and as granular as you want, lobbing tit-for-tat whataboutisms, scoring ego-driven debate points. But what about the margins that don't exist anymore?
At what point does moral clarity and "acting on good faith" come into play. As usual, children are never considered here. Is society really free to pervert their life experience and attitudes as we push the ever-expanding boundaries with what all this really means? Sorry, but I don't get it, and I'm as "liberal" as they come.
If the last 4 decades (with an emphasis on the last 3 yrs) of the crumbling difference between wrong and right isn't an indictment of this debate, then we've free-speeched our way to the point of no return.
When our own POTUS is free to threaten and eradicate lives, law, and cherished norms, we're already dead.
3
@kstew
Trump only believes in free speech if said speech fits his narrative and feeds his personal ego.
This is why he attacks the press so often and so maliciously with his "fake news" meme. He uses denigration as a primary censoring tactic.
The main point of Mr. Stephens article is not about Trump. It is about freedom of speech and the way in which the American so-called “left” has mutated from its defender into its foe. I daily hear about outrageous incidents on campuses in which Jewish students who defend Zionism are hounded and insulted; professors who challenge their students to think independently become targets of vicious campaigns; and legitimate scientific theories are denounced as not politically correct because they imply that different human populations have different genetic endowments. This is not surprising actually: the illiberal American “left” has just gone back to its roots, imitating the censorship of the USSR. But I still find it astounding that my students in the Middle East were more broad-minded, intellectually resilient and open to questioning their own beliefs than their pampered American counterparts.
7
@Mor The "daily reports" you are hearing about the attack on free speech at colleges are mostly right wing invented nonsense. Stray anecdotes do not define a trend. The American left is certainly not "imitating the censorship of the USSR," whatever you assert to be true.
3
Heck yes, there are plenty of closet Trump supporters. For those I know who are, they believe in not discussing money, religion or politics. They donate to campaigns locally, and to both parties.
These folks have some money, and in this cultural climate, they are portrayed as moustache-twirling villains. They voted for him for fiscal and policy reasons. If they applaud a lower corporate tax rate, in effect approving Trump’s actions, they are labeled greedy one-percenters - never mind the benefits bestowed on the businesses. They feel their employees are better off without unions. They are made to feel guilty for working hard and wanting to keep the money they earned by legal means. They pay more taxes than most of us, at least at a higher rate. These people are fiscally conservative and socially moderate/progressive. Put up Bloomberg and they will vote for him.
That being said, self-righteous ridicule is a lousy way to persuade anyone who’s not persuaded to begin with. When was the last time someone changed your heart or mind by ridiculing what you believed in, taking what you say out of context and making fun of your appearance and perceived education? Every time a liberal makes a righteously angry and smugly superior comment, there’s another conservative confirmed in his belief that “they think they’re better than us.”
9
@FFS "Fiscal reasons?" You must be joking. The trump/ryan/McConnell tax cut for the better off has saddled this nation with unimaginable debt, but suddenly your team doesn't want to discuss that? They "feel their employees are better off without unions?" Hogwash, they don't want unions becasue they want the benefits of vulture capitalism to accrue to themselves and their ilk. hanging on to all their money, however hard you claim they worked for it (like the guy cleaning toilets isn't working hard)-- it will not mean a thing if we descend further into fascism. At least the democrats will be able to say you trump supporters-- closeted or out--were warned.
2
There's nothing new about private vice and public virtue, or folks whispering in the background, criticizing those with the guts to actually stand for something. These folks are cemented to the GOP. They won't be won over by moral arguments based on equity or kindness. There has always been the private vice and public virtue you describe, and community condemnation. And there have always been bullies claiming the right to ridicule for their own profit, blame the victim for not being a good sport, claim free speech. This is as old as mankind.
1
Stephens is pushing nonsense. Trump, and Trumpists, can't be reasoned away, or courteously turned aside. They espouse abhorrent values. Those values are not newly made. They have been percolating through nearly one-half of American culture since Reconstruction. And whenever and wherever they have appeared, they have always been backed by aggression.
What kept them at bay for all those long years was ridicule and social sanction. During that interval, the strength of that culture somewhat declined, weakening gradually as strong adherents died out. Now Trump has brought that malign culture back to life, and, once again, it is getting ready to fight.
That is not something which can be finessed away. It has to be confronted and defeated. As before, ridicule and social sanctions should be the weapons of choice. They work slowly, but experience has shown they work. The mechanism is not so much to convert the Trumpists, who are mostly beyond any hope of conversion. It is to confront their social aggression with sufficient social force to hold them in check, and to demonstrate their futility to bystanders. It is to deny them recruits, and wait for them to subside. In short, the method is to return to what the nation had been doing since the Civil War.
Actual fighting is the alternative, something we must pray to avoid.
5
Several points about the article and the comments:
- Stephen's points on the left's "Jacobin call-out culture" are right on target. This culture has to end, period. It is ridiculous. And I am as liberal as they come.
- But to say that those excesses are closely related to pro-Trump positions is perhaps a stretch. The Democratic presidential candidates don't really go there, and they're characteristic of mainly a slice of the left. On the other hand, the right has its own cultural excesses, on display on Fox News every day.
- Trump is so toxic and dangerous on so many levels that to vote for him because of a cultural grudge is irresponsible. Sorry. If you want to fight a meaningful cultural war, do it within the left. Voting for Trump means that your cultural/social resentments are more important to you than the Constitution, the laws, the environment, the planet's sustainability, morality, and even the long-term economy. I agree that we should not insult or disrespect our opponents, but this is not a normal situation, and the dangers facing the country and the world because of this man are real enough.
8
I find this column both excessively utopian and insufficiently concerned with morality.
There have always been whisper networks. People like to gossip. (Some anthropologists have likened it to the social grooming that knits together other primate groups.) In addition, knowledge is power. Passing along that knowledge puts you in a more powerful position than the people you are informing. To extirpate whisper networks would require an overhaul of human nature.
But Stephens's claim that this is a free speech issue ignores both facts and morality. I hate the purity tests used by too many on the left. There are frightful things happening in academia, and the cancel culture is dangerous and wrong. (I myself was recently ejected from a group I love for failing a purity test. It was wrong and stupid and hurtful.)
But free speech is not a license to pervert the truth, fan the flames of racism, or shred the Constitution. When I hear Trump supporters speak, I don't hear them defending free speech. I hear them declaring war on people they don't like and spouting ridiculous, and dangerous, falsehoods. The id unchained.
Maybe the reluctance of so many to publicly admit they support Trump is not the result of censoriousness from the left, but of shame from within because, on some level, they recognize that they are betraying the principles that were the best of America.
12
Part of the "treat Trump voters with respect" problem is that the Trump camp itself insists on positioning the most rabid, irrational fans directly behind him at rallies, so when the networks put out their nightly head shaking clips we are treated to watching these people chant "Lock her up!" and wildly applaud Trump's most outrageous lies. I don't think they're deliberately trying to poke me in the eye, I think they're trying to rally their own base, but eye-poked is what I feel.
A month ago I had a perfectly civil conversation with a guy I've known for years who would easily qualify to stand behind Trump at one of those rallies. We disagreed on everything we talked about, but it didn't end with us rolling around on the ground, it ended with us playing a round of golf together.
I'm not sure how that translates into the absolutist idea of treating him with respect, which I do as human being, but not as an intellectually sound human being which he is not; of not considering him a bigot because he thinks Mexico is for Mexicans, oblivious to my half-Mexican grandchildren; of listening to what he has to say, but refusing to stay silent in condemning his racist opinions; of empathizing with his irrational fear of young black men; of understanding his words, but dismissing his efforts to convert me to Trump.
1
Trump is someone who successfully speaks to people’s fears — fear of the other, fear of losing your job and economic security, fear of losing your way of life.... Fear has always been a motivating factor, albeit not the only one, that has elevated many pseudo-leaders and then their followers to turn a blind eye to the attacks on exactly those things that they themselves are fearful about. Turning their fear of others into the others fear of them, protecting what is mine (property, job, wealth) by ensuring others do not have the opportunity to “take it away” or “get some” too, ensuring my way of life by not permitting others to enjoy or have their way of life. This is the messaging that resonates to those who hear these Trumpian whispers — forget the three ring circus that Trump creates daily to feed his own demons — he, and he alone, will quell my fears. We have an issue, a serious issue in our country, when a great percentage of the population hears that siren song that the rest of us do not hear or have fears at a level that the rest of us do not comprehend. There is a reason when we come across a friend or family member who admits to supporting Trump and shake our heads and say “I don’t get it...” because in our brain we truly don’t..... and can’t.
5
Free speech includes the right to criticize, even vehemently, and condemn the opinion and acts of others. Free speech also allows talking against free speech.
Free speech is only threatened by people in power who want to restrict it by legislative or executive action. What you describe is human cowardice, calculation or duplicity but has nothing to do with the right to speak freely.
1
It may be unpopular of me to admit but I have become entirely intolerant of Trump supporters, including conscious distancing myself from former acquaintances (I'm happy to say none of my close friends voted Trump) who are Trump supporters. It's a disqualifying trait and there's no way I could even bring myself to exchange ideas - - or even words - - with these individuals. You are a deplorable if you agree with Trump's devastating policies towards human rights and environment or not bulk at his corruption or even the language he uses. If my attitude adds to the polarization of our country, so be it... It won't be the first time in history when people take a stand either on the right or the left side of it and it (history) will eventually but unequivocally sort it all out. I just hope that just like the McCarthy era, these bad times will end after short spasms of attempts at legitimacy.
4
This is Brett's best column in a long time. It seems he may have opened his eyes and looked around a bit. Perhaps even he is now repulsed by his colleagues endless sanctimonious and hypocritical preaching. This "For every voter who pulled the lever for Trump out of sympathy for his views, how many others did so out of disdain for the army of snickering moralists (at the time including me) telling them that a vote for Trump was unpardonable?" is right on the money. Trump has many flaws both in his person and in his views, yet those who so "righteously" condemn him come across as far worse, both as individuals and through the genuine threat they pose to free expression, exchange, and scrutiny of ideas. The left would impose an inflexible totalitarian society where impure thought itself is banned, yet they accuse Trump, of all people, of posing that threat. In the Trump world there is no filter. In fact, nearly all of the left's criticism of Trump can be traced back to projecting their own thoughts onto him. There is a great Joe Rogan interview with Andrew Doyle discussing the threat of woke/cancel culture. Some people are waking up. Perhaps there is hope.
7
@Daphne Wow. If I am concerned about the threat the Trump administration poses to the rule of law, I "pose a genuine threat to freedom of expression?" Really? What if you were tried and acquited, only to have the president order that you be re-investigated -- wouldn't you want someone to have spoken up for your protections under the law?
1
Bret Stephens might have missed it, but Kevin McCarthy, a Republican just said that "they (Democrats) hate us." He wasn't whispering either. He and others on the right are the ones who are preaching to their followers that the Democrats hate them, mock them, look down on them. They do this because it riles up the base to come out and vote.
Where are all the examples of Democrats mocking Trump voters? Comedians? If so, would Bret like to make the case to sensor comedy? I though that he was for free speech. I guess he doesn't realize he meant mostly free speech for conservatives and Republicans.
7
@USS Johnston
All it takes it to read a few columnists in this paper, not to mention comments here, to know that the left hates, mocks and looks down on conservatives. I don't need Kevin McCarthy to rile me up. I just canceled my subscription but maybe I'll re-up just before the election to keep me motivated.
2
Not all the secret Trump voters were voting FOR him. Many were voting against an unpalatably poor campaigner with a closet full of skeletons.
The question is, will Democrats produce a superior presidential candidate team that promises an end to chaos and lies, and offers most voters a positive economic future?
There is no need to vilify Trump - every voter knows him for what he is and no Democrat will attract those who like him. The object is to reach everyone else with a vision for a reasonable, honest, law-abiding future.
1
I have a question about your column—a real question: does treating Trump supporters with respect include the GOP members of Congress who don’t whisper their support of Trump, but revel in broadcasting his great achievements?
The fastest way to scuttle a second term for Trump would have been conviction in the Senate, but even if there were a handful of Republicans in Congress with the integrity shown by Mitt Romney, the voter base might be willing to consider that there is a better path for this country. Trump’s lies about collusion, extortion, emoluments, racism, trade wars, coal mines, climate change, affairs, and rapes might not be taken as truth by a percentage of his base if just a few in the Republican Party had the moral clarity to stand up to the avalanche of daily sleaze coming from this President.
Should we try to win over these Congressmen by respecting their First Amendment rights?
4
In my opinion, if Trump openly campaigned in CA, and it wasn’t “unfashionable” to be conservative, he’d swing millions of votes. Probably not enough to carry the state, but enough to materially narrow the popular vote. Probably the same result in NY, IL too. Then the “he didn’t win the popular vote” argument would be lost. Then the progressives would learn they need to stop and reconsider their principles and approach to the voters in the middle. And then they’d win huge.
2
@Paul Statistically, your assertion about CA is just wrong. The only people who would vote for trump are either members of his cult or die-hard republicans, which are scattered throughout the state. trump could never carry CA. Anymore than CA will vote in a slate of GOP state reps.
2
@Paul By what definition does the Trump administration represent any kind of middle?
1
So your plan is to lure Trump voters to the Democrats by treating with respect. That is so delusional. First, you have to start by treating Trump with respect, apologize for the Russian Collusion Hoax, the spying on his campaign and the railroading of his associates. Next, admit the Impeachment was a hysterical overreaction to a non-event that looked bad, perhaps deserved censor, but was far from impeachable. Admit also that Biden is corrupt, have him withdraw from the race and stop calling Trump and his supporters racist because they want secure borders. Then denounce Socialism, the Green New Deal, identity politics, intersectionality, open borders, tax the rich to solve all our problems schemes (which are in fact just raising taxes on all of us), support a strong military, stand up to our adversaries and are allies and abandon the trade deals that have hurt our economy. Then we can talk.
4
Uh huh. So after three years of 'listening' and 'understanding' Trump voters, I have concluded that the ones I know are filled with resentment and/or willfully ignorant and not the least bit inclined to be educated.
Also, they sure don't want to listen to or understand me.
Now what?
8
@C.L.S.
willful ignorance is the foundational principle of Conservative ideology.
4
Very well written. The Democrats are loosing many hard working Americans who find it unfair to give away free healthcare, free college and free housing to undeserving people.They see that in everyday life.Then you have the likes of Ilhan Omar who are finding support in her party but has views which many independents would turn away from voting for her party. The party should become centrist like in the past.
3
What has surprised me is the number of folks I run into that will accept any moral or ethical breach in the GOP as long as the market is going up. Kinda tells you something about them and the our place on the planet.
10
Secret voters may have voted for Trump as a reaction to Democrats as “snickering moralists”. A good part of our concern for Trump at the time was because he so clearly lacked a moral compass. One hopes the Mr. Stevens understands that this election is about much more. Our concern now is apparent and justified not only on moral grounds but also and more importantly on ethical grounds. Hopefully more of the whisper voters will realize that our democracy depends on for whom they secretly pull the lever.
3
I agree with Bret's point, but I wouldn't extend it to saving the Republic this election. Traditional conservatives who didn't like Trump but went for him because he was their only choice are not going to change their minds about voting for him unless they truly can't stand the behavior they've seen over the last 4 years. The benefits for a traditional conservative under Trump are far too great. You get reduced taxes and regulation, stock market highs, militarism, gun liberties, increasing judicial restraint on cultural issues like abortion and immigration - the list goes on - for some bad tweets. If a conservative is mildly uncomfortable with Trump's behavior, my polite Dem pitch may add to their discomfort momentarily. But they'll convince themselves he isn't that bad once all their friends are voting for him and they look at the DJIA.
Those who vote for Trump because they loathe liberal elites also won't change their minds and vote Dem because I treat them with respect. At best, they're going to see me as a nice person, for a liberal, but an idiot anyways.
If they have changed their minds like Bret Stephens, or are super on the fence like Mitt Romney, I may add to their sense of certainty. But by then, they are conducting their own whisper campaign among their friends, wondering if they should support Buttigieg or Klobuchar. I can't worry about them right now. I'll be nice to everybody, but I have to get our voters to the polls otherwise we'll lose.
5
"Even a president who called the media the “enemy of the people” has a case to make that his opponents are more hostile to the letter and spirit of the First Amendment than he is."
Right. Just like Stalin. And I'm not being out of line in saying this; the "enemy of the people" phrase IS a direct quote of Stalin's! And I'd give as much credit to Trump for taking up the "banner of free speech" as I would give to Stalin.
And pardon me if I'm not sympathetic to those on the Right who suffer from being called out; being a liberal in a red state I see the call-out culture from the other side. Brett, Let me show you some of the emails I've gotten from the MAGA hat crowd, sometimes.
5
@Thucydides: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" is the most scoffed-at law in the US, and the present coup d'etat strives to erase it altogether.
1
The all-too-common lesson from this article, by a reliable conservative Republican, is that progressive Democrats cannot win unless they treat Trump supporters with respect. As far as I can tell, no one has even suggested that Trump supporters should treat Democrats with respect.
9
Free speech is not free, it just means that the government can’t imprison you for what you say. Why is this fundamental fact so lost on otherwise intelligent people. I sometimes think that columnist don’t make the distinction because if they did they would have less to write about. Like pro-choice/pro-life. Everyone defines these terms differently, which allows the pundit crowd to endlessly argue about terms, not thought.
1
As a true blue Dem and active, i have been taken aback by the vehemence of opinions on both sides. My blue friends cannot in large part fathom why anyone would support Trump. Some sputter , many impugn , and all mystified about the attraction.
As a grey beard I point out that some beliefs are only represented by "one" party without recourse in the other. Not a collegiate gee opinions matter , but a Show trial exhortation of the utter dismissal....or criminality. Proportion has faded. This is not 1968 with thousands dying and millions in the street.
So why all the noise about pending doom? IT WORKS , and the real politics of inclusion suffers. Will any DEM acknowledge not all fellow citizens agree on belief issues and offer what?
3
@Kevin K Your restraint is admirable. But maybe you haven't noticed how Trump and the GOP have discarded the Constitution? Checks and balances gone. Three branches of government all under Trump's control. I lived the greater part of my life elsewhere, experiencing the divisions of the Irish border just across our street; the excesses of Margaret Thatcher; the murder of Olof Palme... "Normal politics" swung like a pendulum. But this is no pendulum. Unchecked, Trump resets us into an illiberal democracy---at best. Please talk to Trump and McConnell about inclusion.
5
At 78, Bernie may simply be the "imperfect vessel" for the modern progressive youth vote. I kid.
It was strange to hear the at large political operative Steve Bannon's interview on GZERO Media with Ian Bremmer the other day. The full interview is on the GZERO website. Bannon said he likes Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (AOC). At least her political savviness - not her political views apparently. He said something like, "Bernie would be the first term of three term AOC's presidency."
Anyway, it's important to learn what the opposition is saying. It's even more important to know what the opposition is doing. It's like watching game film on opponents for football. It's good to have that information available so to prepare and hopefully avoid losing.
Anyone who is ashamed of their support of a candidate should probably look internally as to why they support that candidate. Forever Trumpers live in an altered reality. I have been in conversations with them and there understanding of outcomes is the exact opposite of what I observed. This was particularly evident during the impeachment trial.
3
But trump and his followers are free to degrade the other side and to threaten their lives and the lives of their families. That is just a natural right for the right wing.
5
@Bill: These folks live lives of provocation without a clue. And then they wonder why they are shunned.
I was recently called a snowflake because I accurately pointed out Trump's faults. I see bumper stickers encouraging blowing the minds of liberals - an "exploding head" syndrome. To the extent that Trump's supporters are not all bigots, which I suspect most are, it could be that Stephens is correct and that Trump's appeal is that he repels liberals.
3
@Mark Cohn: People who believe they know what God thinks feel threatened when people who are obviously better educated than they are undermine the bases of their claims. Guess whose heads explode from these confrontations.
1
Trump and Republicans have the luxury of pandering to humanity's most primal instincts: racism, sexism, religious intolerance are just a few examples. Democrats are always burdened with needing to push back against those instincts. I agree Mr. Stephens that this can go overboard at times but, now that the Republicans have completely capitulated to an ignorant bully and bigot, Democrats are the only thing strong enough to resist turning the US into an autocratic dictatorship that happily throws out our constitutional democracy-a third world banana republic. Really, you see the need to criticize liberals right now?
4
Away from politics, whisper networks will come in very handy when airlines return the 737 Max to service and engage in trickery to fool their passengers into thinking they are flying on some other airplane. If the airlines do try to fool their customers into flying on a death trap, a whisper network will be just what we need.
But he lies and exaggerates all the time! I don't get it. Why do people flock to Trump?? He openly says that as President, he has the right to do anything he wants. For me, Trump is disgraceful. If you vote for him you are inviting more disdaining rhetoric that will tear our democracy to the brink of literal chaos!
Yet another nonsensical bid to engage those who are not to be engaged. What Democrats _simply_ need to do is become the news cycle. Fight on their own terms and without regard and with no engagement of Trumpville, and become the news for a change. I would hope that includes refusing to debate Trump too.
Trump is bad, evil, a criminal - but it's his supporters who scare me the most. Trump would be nothing without them.
8
I will not whisper about the articles in November 2018 that claimed Ivanka Trump got a trademark for voting machines. I will yell it from the rooftops.
3
I'm sure this comment will be echoed many times over, but please do not confuse people further about the First Amendment. It has nothing to do with how liberal activists respond to your political and religious views and everything to do with how Congress responds.
4
I think Mr. Stephens' column is both insightful and terrifying, and I agree with his criticisms of the call-out culture.
That said, I'm sick and tired of tiptoeing around these Trump snowflakes. In order to have sympathy for a whisper campaign there needs to be some kernel of merit or truth to the thing that need be whispered. I frankly haven't been able to figure out what leads many people I love and admire to disregard the enormous damage being done by Trump's presidency, but I have no sympathy for their blindness to it. I have no respect for it. Frankly, it must be something in human nature that crawled out from under a rock. The fact of the matter is they feel the need to whisper because their viewpoint doesn't survive in the light.
11
@Eric
Republicans are the original call out culture.
I think your concluding paragraph is beautifully written. I think if more people took your advice the country might be less divided. What a radical concept. Actually listen to the other side rather than abhor or dismiss. Empathizing might even be educational and disarming to those whose views we have come to question and discredit. I still recall an interview in 2016 with a Trump voter in western Pennsylvania whose town was hollowed out by unemployment. She told a reporter that Trump was her town’s last hope. I would have loved to know why she felt that way. I also remember secretly hoping that if Trump were elected, he would come through for her—even though I believed otherwise. And still believe otherwise.
1
“How to pull it off this time? By treating Trump voters with respect. By asking why so many of them wound up in his tent to begin with. By acknowledging that not everything that’s said in a hush is shameful, and that not everyone you disagree with is a bigot. By listening, not denouncing; empathizing, not ridiculing; understanding, not dismissing.“
I wonder what could be said by conservative writers to the aggrieved Trump voters to help them become more receptive to
the listening, empathizing and inclusion by those who will never support him and want him out of office because of the danger he presents to our democratic system. I somehow think they would not be open to anything beyond full capitulation to their point of view, which brings us full circle back to conflict.
It seems Stephens is conflating the opposition to Trump with other social movements that would be ongoing regardless of who occupied the Oval Office. The crisis in leadership is far more serious at this point to suggest the solution is so easily achieved through respect for political differences.
4
Admittedly, I don't read much conservative commentary, aside from Douthat, Stephens and Brooks. But I have never seen in conservative commentary a plea to conservatives to see that not all progressives that you disagree with are elitists; that they should listen to progressives, not denounce them; empathize, not ridicule; try to understand them not dismiss them. Never.
Probably has a lot to do with a sense of victimhood. It would be worthwhile looking at who has actually been victimized, historically, in this country. Not victimhood as losing any unjust privileges.
13
I am an unaffiliated left of center voter. Coming from New England there are Republicans I would support if I still lived there. But I am appalled at what has happened to the Republican Party. The fact that Republican support is so high for a man who is to me a danger to our Constitution, the rule of law and basic civility both puzzles me and I will admit enrages me. Precedents that are being set that will be difficult to set right scares me. Governance by executive order is an abdication by congress of their own stated power. I may not have approved of the policies of Reagan and the Bushes but I respected them as human beings and those who supported them. They weren't in it for power and self-aggrandizement. I should respect those who continue to support Trump after all that has happened in the last 3 years? Remember the old adage that evil flourishes when good men do nothing. Respect is a two-way street. Am I respected as an educated east coast liberal by Trump supporters? Somehow I doubt it.
14
Maybe in 2016, Brett's point was valid. But having lived through 3+ years of this administration, anyone who will again vote for this nightmare deserves every bit of scorn I can muster.
24
Mr. Stephen's clever words skirt around facts with statements like "Republicans will organize their campaign around the country’s material prosperity under Trump; Democrats around its moral deterioration". Democrats campaign to bring health and other improvements to all Americans--they don't focus on "moral deterioration". It makes one wonder if conservatism results from hardwiring in the brain, because even intelligent believers in right wing theories seem to veer away from what the majority see.
4
@Elizabeth Bennett: I suspect that the human brain can run in endless loops that manifest as tautological reasoning.
Screaming “you are an idiot,” “you are stupid,” “I am right and you are wrong,” ad infinitum, will not win converts to your side. Both political sides are guilty of this. If you want to change someone’s opinion, first listen to and try to understand their viewpoint. I am not say agree with it, but try to understand the basis of that opinion. People’s life experiences may be different from yours, not better, not worse, just different. Once you see where they are coming from you can frame your argument and attempt to bring them to your position. One of the worst examples of failing to do this was Greta’s speech on climate change at he UN last fall. Her hostile “how dare you” remarks may have played well to those who already agree with her, but in terms of bringing other people into the climate change camp, she set the cause back about five years,
5
@T Smith: The wise simply articulate a rational position patiently. Patience is the hardest part. Active scientific minds eagerly follow exciting developments in electrochemistry and quantum mechanics.
1
I don’t empathize with Neo Nazis. I don’t think they’re “good people” .
12
@JL
I also don't like "Neo- Nazis". I was born in 1950 my Dad and my Uncle fought in WW2, my parents took us to the Spencer Tracy's movie about the Nuremberg trials. The photos and the soldiers movies on the liberation of the concentration camps were appalling. I had nightmares about that for a while.
We studied in school about the horrors the Nazis inflicted on those who were not like them were horrifying.
I had hoped as a species we humans had progressed beyond that disgusting behavior. And then came Mr Trump and what had appeared as "Fringe groups" suddenly became a movement.
That truly scares me and I am not Jewish...
Just an old white man's opinion...
3
@JL
I also don't like "Neo- Nazis". I was born in 1950 my Dad and my Uncle fought in WW2, my parents took us to the Spencer Tracy's movie about the Nuremberg trials. The photos and the soldiers movies on the liberation of the concentration camps were appalling. I had nightmares about that for a while.
We studied in school about the horrors the Nazis inflicted on those who were not like them were horrifying.
I had hoped as a species we humans had progressed beyond that disgusting behavior. And then came Mr Trump and what had appeared as "Fringe groups" suddenly became a movement.
That truly scares me and I am not Jewish...
Just an old white man's opinion...
I don't understand this "censorious logic".
OK. Here is some censorious logic: I believe that people who in this day & age continue flying in jets should be condemned to hell. Why? Because flying in jets is one of the most carbon-expensive activities one can engage in.
Does that make you want to vote for Trump??
1
This is interesting. I’m a Democrat living and working in a very conservative Trump supporting district. I feel very much the need to keep my views to myself to the extent that I fear for my well being if I actually said what I thought.
16
Brett go to the ArkLaTex area.?! Talk to the men about women in charge? Ask them about racism in America. Ask them what is more important God's laws or America's? Just those simple questions will throw them into a tizzy. Brett, these people want an America that exist only in their head. Either they don't know or they forgot.
IT's really the people that want the world to stop and Go Back! Against people that want to make things work. Nazi's marching isn't where the good people are!!
5
There he goes again. Bret Stephens, like legions of pundits before him, determined to convince us that "both sides do it."
You know what, Mr. Stephens? Big deal. Yes, both sides do it in the sense that we are all imperfect, and have perhaps become harsher, under the tone set by our abuser-in-chief.
But the significance - the meaning - is NOT the same on both sides. The intimidation spawned by the leader of the free world calling the press the enemy of the people, using his power to manipulate elections, and interfering in trials for political reasons is simply of a different, far worse order than the "intimidation" someone feels when they announce at a dinner party that they support restrictions on abortion and are met with an uncomfortable silence.
Sure, we all feel some hesitation to disagree with our peers. But that is simply not the same as having the institutions of government turned against you by a would-be authoritarian.
To imply that the two are the same - and, so much worse, to vote as though they are - is crazy.
25
Defending Trump yet AGAIN, Bret?
At what point does the letter-and-spirit of truthfulness actually count insofar as self-serving usurpers of the First Amendment are otherwise far more hostile?
5
@Chris Morris: Trumpism is a laughable condition of despair. People can and do prove themselves fools with their own speech. But they believe the first amendment makes their words divine.
1
Here we go again in pursuit of the mythical swing voter who can be convinced to change his/her position with gentle persuasion and respect.
There maybe a few people who fit this bill, but most Trump voters of this stripe will have already withdrawn their support.(see George Conway).
Dems lost due to low voter turnout for Hillary.
Want to win? Gin up turnout.
11
Brett,
Thanks for this commentary, I do believe that there something extremely powerful afoot. We have been lucky in life and are comfortable, because of our status we have many friends in very similar positions. That said, there are numerous individuals who either state unequivocally their support for trump, usually by first announcing that the economy is very beneficial to their bottom line. But there is something else here, these are quite intelligent people, hard to believe that they can not see the truth that is destroying the twenty-first-century America?
Certainly, there something important happening in America, power for sure but also raw tribalism stoked with white nationalism, is this our dog whistle? Are we that fearful and insecure in our position as citizens? This is not exactly right, we are Jews and should know better, than what is it?
3
Bret Stephens was a guest on Bill Maher last night. A good part of the panel discussion was spent on Maher's contention that Trump won't leave office if he loses. Maher says Trump will insist Democrats rigged the election and his followers will believe and support him remaining in office. Few people seem to take Maher's suggestion seriously.
A number of knowledgeable Russia specialists have said if Vladimir Putin ever loses power, he'll end up either dead or in prison. It's becoming the same thing with Trump. If he gives up his power he'll lose his protection from American justice and foreign criminals. Maher may be right because Trump has no choice.
10
@JimmySerious: This is the ultimate danger of politically motivated prosecutions. The ruler must cling to power or be trampled by the mob.
3
@JimmySerious
How funny is it that the democrats' latest "savior", Mike Bloomberg, actually changed the laws to allow himself a 3rd term as mayor of NYC?
Perhaps he should be the one they fear.
3
@JimmySerious Putin will take refuge in Sunny Isles Florida. Numerous mega-buck, beachfront, Trump properties to chose from. DJT might wind up in Trump Tower, Moscow.
A secret clause in the Yalta conference, I'm sure!
Bret Stephens wants us the opposition to Trump to recognize that “by listening, not denouncing; empathizing, not ridiculing; understanding, not dismissing” we can influence the Trump voters who are persuadable. The question is are any of them open to persuasion. I don’t think so and consider it a waste of time and energy. The people that the opposition to Trump need to persuade are the ones that didn’t vote at all. While its true that voters of all types have issues and concerns in common the very effect of current political tribalism negates open discourse. In the end it’s about turnout, in 2016 Clinton lost Michigan because of poor turnout in Democratic strongholds like Detroit as well as voters turning to third party candidates. Either of these groups of people could have changed the outcome here in Michigan. So why did people not turn out to vote or vote third party. Why especially did many voters inclined to support democrats simply not vote? Answering that question is far more important than persuading the unpersuadable regardless of why they are that way. For 2020 that question is mote. I agree with Stephens that more listening, empathizing and understanding is needed and not just by the opposition. The question that conservatives and supporters of Trump can ask themselves is the same they would have us ask of ourselves, why? The answers to both sides questions might surprise us all. The answer to the questions no one is asking might surprise even more.
6
I have been struggling for several years to maintain a friendship with an individual who hosts a non-syndicated right wing radio program. I have never thought of myself as anything but center left, yet for at least the last 15 years I have been consistently labeled anything from a commie/collectivist to a traitor. Like many on my side, I've tried to understand--to climb the "empathy wall"--as Arlie Hochshild describes it. But I see little or no reciprocal behavior,--only more invective, and this friend who claims to respect my opinions, only eggs on his listeners to do the opposite daily. Conservatives seem to consider empathy a human weakness while turning the word the word "liberal" into an ad hominem, to the point of where the average Trump supporter now thinks the Western liberal tradition is something to be feared. How in the world can I respect this?
37
@Rich. Exactly my experience.
8
@Rich P Thank you for this succinct, articulate comment. There must be something important about the friendship if you are still trying to maintain it; I think most of us would have long ago given up.
For someone who is so quick to call fire and bring their column to figuratively shame people over certain topics or perceived slights — aka free speech, this is a bit ironic.
Come back to me Bret when you want to address Trumps “shouting network” where he and his supporters chant about locking up and enemies of the people, and denigrate desires, needs or appearances of classes of people, etc.
Free speech is not a panacea or a guarantor of democracy or even decency. It can be used to destroy it as well. 1930s Germany had free speech — and a vote — look what happened.
12
@BiggieTall :"Come back to me Bret when you want to address Trumps 'shouting network”' "
Have you been to a campus speech or talk given by a conservative lately? I don't think those are Trump's "shouting network" in the audience.
1
@Jp
The leader of the student group causing trouble at the campus speech is not the most powerful person in the world.
Whataboutism is not a moral argument; it's a technique to avoid having to make one.
2
It is difficult to see how accommodation to racist and criminal behavior is a winning formula. I also do not see how acquiescing to our neighbors poisoned views makes us a better society. In the past polite disagreement over politics was indeed the normal course of the election cycle. Trump and his ilk are not normal and pose a threat to the Republic and democratic institutions. Going silently into that dark night is a prescription for disaster. Call it out when you see it people because there is no way a smile and a nod will induce these Trump’s legions come to their senses and vote differently. His supporters may have their reasons, but their reasons are suspect at best and more than likely destructive in genesis.
13
Trump supporters want the priviledge of the past to be forever present. Trump opponents want the deprivations of the present to be forever past. The former want their advantage to stay. The latter want equality today. Mr. Stephens wants to blame the liberal egalitarians for the rise of the illiberal totalitarians whose so called whispers have turned into government policy under Trump. It's equivalent to saying that fighting against the sexual assault of women actually encourages it so one should not fight for human dignity - a logic that encourages all oppressed groups to stay quiet and to "know their place".
5
Uh, you can listen all you want to Trump voters and you can empathize with them. It ain't gonna change their vote.
No one's on the fence about Trump. They're either for him or against him. Period. If they tell you they're voting for Trump because you hurt their feelings or made them angry by making fun of them or calling them names, that tells you all you need to know about them as people. They have zero convictions about anything in life.
But for most people that's the not the case. The truth is, they were going to vote for him regardless of what you say because they either love him or believe his policies are helping them. Nothing you say or do either way will change their minds.
13
Treat Trump voters with respect? Why? For the past forty years, the modus operandi of the right-wing echo chamber was to dehumanize and disrespect Democrats. Remember Bret, it was never about policy disagreements, it was that as a Democrat, I was labeled a godless, baby killing, terrorist sympathizer. If you turned on any given AM radio show, that's what I was being called. While Republican voters themselves weren't necessarily calling me those things to my face, they believed them. And now my point, regardless of me getting a better understanding of the psyche of a Trump voter, a significant portion of Republicans have been voting against their self interest for years in exchange for the illusion of cultural and racial status quo. I can't change that. It's been baked-in for forty years and Trump has validated it at the highest level.
19
@Danny Salvatore’s Yes! More proof: for this kind of invective, Rush Limbaugh was awarded the Medal of Freedom!
Trump's approval ratings are in the high 40s. I suspect his vote total will be in the high 40s too. I'm not sure there are many "secret" Trump voters. Most of them I know can't keep quiet about how much they love Trump and hate Democrats. I wish they would be more silent. They annoy me.
On the bigger issue of free speech. Three points:
First, speaking freely doesn't somehow exempt you from consequences if others don't like what you say. And your critics have just as much right to condemn your ideas as you have the right to express them.
Second, speech is always an act as much as it is an expression of ideas. We use speech not just to express ourselves, but to manipulate those around us. At times we can use speech to manipulate in bad ways: harassing, slandering, deceiving, or cheating others. Those forms of speech maybe should not be so free. As acts, not expression, they can be damaging to others in material ways.
Third, a lot of the "free speech" debate in America boils down to "conservatives" demanding permission to say hateful, bigoted things without facing any social consequences and without the targets of their bigotry being allowed to escape their hateful braying. It's an argument not so much for the right to speak freely but for the right to be rude.
20
@617to416
Conveniently, progressives are judge and jury when it comes to deciding what is "hateful" speech. I've seen the most biased and hateful things written about Christians right here in the NYT comments section.
Trust me when I say progressives have given themselves free rein to say whatever hateful things they want. Here, especially, they have given themselves carte blanche.
3
The cancel culture and identity politics has gotten so nauseating and infantile that it spawned the “whisper network” but it has gotten past that. Many in the “whisper network” now don’t even acknowledge the self righteousness and the so called arguments of the woke culture. They now turn them off. They don’t even respond.
And then the cocoon only gets bigger because the only discourse is amongst themselves. Look at Facebook- there used to be good political discussions... now they are almost gone.
People won’t interact with the online mob as civility has left the discussion. But there will be a huge punishment meted out in the Election unless someone like Bloomberg is the nominee as he is the only one that can beat Trump.
3
Nobody in the world knows more about the intimate workings of banking and securities markets than Mike Bloomberg.
4
@Steve Bolger
What is the secret to getting so many posts instantly published?
The left continues to mystify and confuse me. On the one hand you/they decry that Trump is a moral disaster yet fall into his trap of only good guys create good results and therefore he is a good guy. The chicken in every pot bit has been tried before and it works...every time. People like free stuff and the current leader of the democratic campaign promises much that he can never deliver. This country has no affection for communism. Better make Klobuchar the nominee or it is four more for the king of political poker.
2
So, I know African Americans who are prettier, smarter, richer, more atheletic, harder-working and kinder than me and, as far as I know, I treat those I come in contact with respectfully. Also, the current economic statistic I'm happiest about is the one touting the lowest unemployment rate among minorities in history. I did( and will again) vote for Trump. Does that make me a racist via some guilt by association theory? Could somebody in the Dem camp please explain that to me?
5
Do you not perceive that Trump is degrading and damaging our constitutional structures, democratic institutions and culture? That he is tearing away at representative government with balanced branches? Is the damage to our fundamentals worth a sugar-high economy based on tax giveaways upward and huge deficits? A mess of pottage in exchange for cultural and political ruination.
4
Trump isn’t intelligent enough to create anything, least of all a broad world view and political movement resembling nothing if not a cult following. He simply is a simpleton.
No, the members of his tribe did not materialize out of thin air. They have always been there. They remind me of the fan base of a perennially losing team that finally has a team, or player, to cheer for. Associate with others in the same situation. Jeer at the opposing fans. Feel like you are part of something big. Demand respect because ... just because.
Of course, they are not really part of anything; certainly not anything big. They are just being used to enrich the users - the 1% and all their enablers. And, naturally, the biggest user of all, Trump.
It’s hard to respect anyone who has no self-respect and I decline to do so.
5
I was cheering you on until I reached the last paragraph. No, there are some Trump voters (and in fairness I'll say not all) who deserve no respect or understanding. Their attraction to him is a case of his validating and encouraging their own deep-seated bigotry and hatreds.
At last they see a "leader"who disdains reading, thinking , nuance, analysis. It is pure gut feelings and bile, and making it OK to say out loud things they've whispered about or kept to themselves for their whole life. A world in black and white. Enemies and us. It is the playbook of authoritarians throughout history.
That said, you do correctly condemn the censoriousness of the hard cultural Left. If free speech makes you uncomfortable too bad. A world in which only your point of view is heard is a world without free speech.
3
Oh come on. Any thinking, mature person who votes quietly for Trump out of anger at the self righteous, loud, judgmental protests of the never Trumpers is neither mature nor thinking. Voting for Trump in 2016 could be seen as a rational choice for many reasons... in 2020, after 4 years of Trump, nah.
5
So Brett, If Bernie Sanders is the democrat's nominee will you tell us that you pulled the lever for Trump or will you just whisper it to someone?
5
Perhaps they are ashamed to support such a horrible person?
7
Bret makes a major league mistake in this column when he references only very indirectly the Denver Post column he bases an argument on. Not being familiar with the case I wanted to read the column, but was directed to a pinknews.co.uk article about the issue, but not the Post Column. Assuming everyone is aware of all conservative (or liberal) red meat issues is making it harder for genuinely skeptical people to come to make up their own minds based on original facts/material.
The offending text, the link not shown due to nyt formatting restrictions is:
"A columnist for The Denver Post thought so and last month lost his job, he claims as a direct result. Should writers of one race or culture be able to create characters and inhabit cultures not their own?"
The chief problem with this analysis by Mr. Stephens is that a vote for Trump IS shameful. Period.
16
This was very gently stated, and will convince very few. Why not simply point out the obvious - progressives tolerate no discussion, are absolutely certain of their positions, are indifferent to the views of others, and assume anyone with whom they disagree is either a bigot or ignorant. As Gibran so wisely noted ““He who wears his morality but as his best garment were better naked.”
4
Politics aside, I get what Bret is saying. And I think from a practical standpoint, so much of what is wrong is an inherent artifact of our social media-driven world. Even a neutral email in the workplace can easily be misinterpreted and cause a huge kerfuffle, due to a lack of context and tone that would be present in an actual conversation. It is similar to the dynamics of road rage--the other driver, or person at an unseen keyboard, is a nameless, faceless 'other' for whom it is all too easy for any of us to think of and treat in a way we would never dream of doing to a person in front of our own faces.
My solution? PUT YOUR PHONE DOWN and interact with the living, breathing world around you. You might find that it can actually be a pretty nice place.
2
NYT readers seem to have become exasperated because despite their best efforts to convince Trump supporters why he is [fill-in-the-blank], his supporters haven't changed their minds.
That's hardly "tolerance." Tolerance involves acceptance of others' viewpoints. Theirs is just a unwillingness to engage further unless Trump supporters agree to think as they do.
3
Before we get to the issue of free speech, per se, as a Constitutionally guaranteed right, we should discuss norms and normlessness.
Merriam-Webster refers to the late American sociologist Robert K. Merton's definition of a norm as "a principle of right action binding upon the members of a group and serving to guide, control, or regulate proper and acceptable behavior."
Norms change and evolve, and clearly under Donald Trump, they have done exactly that. A significant percentage of the American population has adopted what an equal or greater number view as Trump's normlessness.
Compounding this is that neither Trump nor his acolytes are whisperers. They are full-throated, in your face screamers of what they believe in, and what they believe in seems to fly contrarily in the face of long held precepts of what is and isn't appropriate behavior.
One can argue whether those referred to as whisperers are merely afraid to openly assert their beliefs, but when all is said and done, and while the Constitution is not without relevance here, what Trump has done and continues to do is force a change in the norms that govern behavior, and that is something that is at least as dangerous as an outright assault on the legalities imposed or implied by the Constitution, because it skates under the ice in the form of whispers.
1
I agree with Bret. As a liberal, I’m sometimes appalled at the inability of self proclaimed enlightened, condescending thinkers to minimally try to understand Trump supporters. If I can see it, imagine how they feel.
4
All well and good, Mr. Stephens. In the end, the typical Trump supporter will not reconsider.
3
@Kevin Rothstein: I hang out here because it records speech. What is said about speech in the US is typically second-hand.
1
I agree that nothing is gained by suppressing free speech or insulting others but ... every time someone writes about needing to respect the other side, it is about the left needing to respect the right, Trump non-supporters needing to respect Trump supporters. Does anyone write to the right about needing to respect the left or even the center? Trump and his supporters can use all kinds of foul language to describe those who disagree with them, but clutch their pearls when someone privately calls them deplorable? What's that about?
15
This is it in a nutshell. Progressives have to apologize but conservatives get to play the victim. When it becomes a two way street I’ll pay attention.
12
@Mary: People subconsciously insult intelligence promiscuously in the US. The most common manifestation is to drag God's alleged opinion into the subject.
1
Free speech?
Trump's bellowing at his rallies against anyone and everyone who may not like what he's doing, or who continues to uphold the rule of law is the equivalent of yelling "fire" in a crowded theater. There is no more clear example of this than when he casually mentioned "You Second Amendment people know what to do."
There's been plenty of slanderous speech, too. Not enough space here to include examples.
Democrats are already doing the heavy lifting as they try to preserve the rule of law and what's left of our democracy. Now, on top of that, you'd like us to be more polite?
15
Don't you realize Mr. Leonhardt all of the criticism of Trump is justified? It is infuriating the man who holds the highest office in the land talks trash that I wouldn't tolerate from my children when they were five years old. Think before you speak, you have a problem address it intelligently, name calling is ugly and unproductive, be analytical and listen to the other side to avoid judgemental statements, your conduct is a reflection on your family, respect others. I can't imagine how spoiled Trump had to be growing up and it appears to be generational they all possess inflated egos and they are speculating on a trump dynasty. Since he stepped into the primaries it feels like we are living in a horrible nightmare that never ceases even when the sun rises.
6
Over the past several years I have participated in groups that promote discussion across the political divide. Trump voters have been treated with respect on those forums and liberals have striven to understand where they are coming from. We have in fact learned a lot about what motivates Trump supporters. But probably the most important lesson I have learned is that all this listening and respecting will not change what they believe or how they vote. I admit that I started with the bias that concern with listening and respecting the other side was a liberal thing that conservatives thought was silly, but I honestly hoped I would be proved wrong. I wasn’t. They see no point in it because they already know that liberals are crazy so what is the point of trying to understand their point of view? When the NYT again this year ran the article about the Angry Uncle Bot, I looked to see what conservatives were saying about it and found that it was met with complete derision. We will not win elections by listening to the other side. Rather we need to make our case as clearly as possible and motivate people who agree with us to actually vote.
19
I wonder how many people in these comments would agree that shaming children for behavior they don't like is ineffective and unkind. That it doesn't drive positive behavior changes, but merely makes children feel bad and angry.
Yet these very same people can immediately swing into shame mode against adults, as if it is somehow more effective.
Shame doesn't generally make people change. They may modify their public behavior and delete their Twitter account, but underneath where it counts (say in the privacy of the voting booth) they will not change at all.
5
"Republicans will organize their campaign around the country’s material prosperity under Trump".
The crux is that mostly rural bright red states like West Virginia have not prospered during the Trump Apprentice presidency.
WVA is one about 97% white, far away from the Southern border, yet those living there still believe that them brownies are going to steal their low paying jobs.
I actually love The Mountain State and spend some time there in the summer to flee the high humidity and temps in the DC area, yet avoid talking politics with most of the friends I made there.
Talking about the weather and wild life is safe though.
6
Bret painful as it may be for me to admit you are right again..
Here are just 3 examples that I came across after the 2016 election that got me thinking about the closet Trump voter and how many of them there actually were and in unexpected places.
A friend who is a Labor Attorney shared with me that a number of Union Leaders in Philadelphia confessed to him privately though the Union had put their time, money. and effort behind Hilary. They feared that many of their members none the less voted for Trump.The good news is that in talking to my friend recently, the feeling now is that these men realizing their error will not be making the same mistake this time around.
After the election another friend of a friend told me he voted for Trump,after he saw the look on my face he explained he did so because the "Cops Union" I assume he meant the National Association of Police Officers supported Trump, 'their son is a police officer '. He did find out after the election that his son actually voted for Hilary, an apparent Whispering Hilary supporter.
Thirdly a colleague who is African American said her husband a Bernie supporter was adamant that a large number of their black male friends voted for Trump,as they could not wrap their mind around a woman President.
These are just a few of what I fear like Bret were many Whispering Trump voters.
One can only hope like the Union members having experienced the Trump Show , in 2020 they will turn to another channel.
6
@Alec: These folks won't vote for a presidential candidate who isn't white, male, heterosexual, and ostensibly religious.
1
@Steve Bolger
Do you seriously bmp Mr Trump is religious?
I don't I think he uses religion as he uses almost everything and everyone else to get what he wants.
Just an old white man's opinion...
Every village needs its idiot. Mostly ignored, his mumbling, always confused and misshaped, forms the flowing backdrop to what passes as social discourse. No one has a right not to be offended by what he says, but he is always laughably ignored, whispered about and, if nothing else given a position in the community. Because we cannot understand the idiot, the associations his mind makes with inanimate objects, his affection for colors, his habit of talking only to himself even when encapsulated in a crowd, we ignore him. There is little to question when society draws a curtain on thought, on speech, even irrational, vicious, hateful, eruptions more sound than syllable. There is more to learn from any idiot. They should be protected, cherished. They are blessed by the gods, unless your name is Socrates.
2
@Mhollowa: Dunces take their revenge after graduation, when adult supervision ceases.
1
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/13/us/politics/elizabeth-warren-bloomberg.html
“…A video just came out yesterday in which Michael Bloomberg is saying, in effect, that the 2008 financial crash was caused because the banks weren’t permitted to discriminate against black and brown people,” Ms. Warren told a crowd…”That crisis would not have been averted if the banks had been able to be bigger racists. And anyone who thinks that should not be the leader of our party…
Bret, the only reason this isn’t Warren’s Gillibrand moment, is because it’s just one of probably fifty such moments she’s put out there over the past week…
The banks were pressured to make loans to people who were part of a high-risk – financial – demographic, that undeniably correlates to a racial demographic…
But to call the policies racist is to look through the wrong end of the binoculars…
There’re many communities where – apart from any race/ethnic distribution – real estate prices can vary 2X for the same house…Sometimes, because some zip code is more prestigious…
Not as extreme as the stock market – but markets have a way of amplifying valuation differences…
At least Gillibrand’s just an opportunistic schemer…
Warren’s an opportunistic socialist schemer…
Actually, an opportunistic Democrat socialist schemer…
5
@W in the Middle: Fraudulent valuation of mortgage-backed securities combined with regulator approval of counting them as bank assets when temporarily insured by derivatives combined to create the liquidity crisis of 2008.
1
The Me Too movement is the latest incarnation of the Betty Friedan/Gloria Steinem Women's Lib movement. What happened then? Many men abandoned politeness, such as holding doors open and helping women over puddles. The Harvey Weinsteins of the world will never stop savaging women but that should never result in Me Too activists bullying women into demonstrating broad hatred and mistrust of men. Deal with each ugly incident on its own.
2
Your essay misses a very obvious cultural matter, and ignores a genuine threat to this country. First of all, people on the right have been complaining about political correctness and “PC squads” on college campuses for at least 40 years—the clash between an uncompromising leftism and a right wing that uses canards like unlimited free speech and, in a larger argument, states rights, to deny citizens their authenticity goes back even further. And while I agree that the “Me Too” movement has exceeded its legitimate moral authority in many cases, and that “The Squad” and other frankly radical representatives of progressive thought does more harm than good, to use incidents of such overreach in attempting to explain why people thus have the right (I suppose born out of indignation) to support a criminal regime led by a fascistic personality is tantamount to excusing brown shirts in Berlin circa 1930 for supporting national socialism because they found the intellectual sanctimony of leftist professors irritating. Please do not confuse your natural distaste for American liberalism with the real, remarkably grave, and immediate matter at hand.
9
Brilliant!
A 3rd congressional district candidate, Emily Rafi, started to run s a Democrat, but switched parties. The election is months away. Speaking to her when she was a Democrat, she hated trump, thought he was the most despicable thing ever born. Now that she’s running as a Republican, she says he position on trump is the same, all her policy positions are the same (although she admits tweaking them somewhat, like from pro choice to every woman should be supported in pregnancy). She thinks she can control trump from within the party. The irony, is this is Justin Amash's seat, and we all know how that worked for him.
3
Trump's supporters are complicit in Trump's moral degradation of a great country. Play nice with them? I don't think so.
11
The opinion is on target, thank you Bret. I wear a MAGA yarmulke just to irritate fellow Jews sitting around the pool. I am on my home turf and feel safe. That said I have changed over the past 3 years for worry of violence. I am more outspoken that many. But, I figure that if a person like me hesitates to act freely, then weaker characters will simply hide. I cannot say if there are more converts, but I am convinced that secret Trump voter ratio is much higher now than 2 to 1 after 3 years of harassment by the media, politicians and the excitable voter types.
5
@SK
I have a longtime dear friend, an 82-year-old New Yorker, born and raised in the Bronx by Socialist parents (they weren't permitted to say, "Thank you", which was for the bourgeois).
He astutely predicted Trump would win in 2016. He predicts Trump will win again with bigger numbers this time.
Bret is seeing something that Trump's critics cannot. The Democratic establishment secretly knows it too. Someone who worked in the Obama White House recently said that the party believes Trump will win. This means Schiff and Pelosi are just furiously spinning to limit the damage they know is imminent.
2
“Excitable voter types”? Is this meant to be a slur, or sinister, or just jejune?
It is wishful thinking to believe that there is a silent cohort that is too shy to tell pollsters that they support Trump. After so much propaganda to help these supporters believe beyond all facts that their reality is more real that objective reality?
Don’t make me laugh! I need to cry for our democracy.
3
It feels like the media is part of the problem here. Who is obsessed with twitter? Who is obsessed with "call out culture"?
The vast majority of people do not follow twitter, yet we have to hear about random tweets from random people because media picks up on anything that destabilizes.
It started when journalists all thought they would be unemployed because of social media. Now they are complicit and worse, they value social media so highly and treat idiotic tweets so seriously we all have to suffer.
5
The media provides what people buy. No buyers? The narrative will change.
Those that beat up the media maybe can’t face that they themselves are fueling the fire.
@Peters
The media -- specifically, the NYT -- provides exactly what its buyers demand. It is why the media now produces a steady stream of the its equivalent of anti-Trump infomercials.
3
I have to admit... I could go for more whispering and less bellowing among Trump supporters if those are my choices.
5
I can tell you from personal experience that Trump supporters are a cult of racism. My wife, an intelligent and well educated person, has in the last 4 years become a Trump advocate. She spends hours on Facebook groups and lives in the Trump information silo. In her world, all our troubles are due to illegal immigrants. AOC and the "woman with the headscarf" are responsible for 99% of all the problems in the US today. The only place she differs with the Republicans is with Obamacare, which she likes, because we are on it. But, in 6 months she will be on medicare, and then I'm sure I will hear all about how evil Obamacare really is.
6
By "understanding, not dismissing?" Yes, there are basic human, even tribal, traits at work here. And the puppeteers of the administration know how to use those traits to sell snake oil. We've come through half a century of the building the GOP persona--Southern Strategy, Reagan's dicta re government, Gingrich, Delay, and many others teaching nastiness, and above all, the "think tanks" that provided the verbiage to support the greed and authoritarianism of the oligarchs. At another level, we have the victims of all that, those who feel discarded by modern America. We also have those who take their orders from the Vatican or from other God Whisperers. In between the puppeteers and such victims, we have a broad swathe of somewhat educated people who are traitors to the Republic. For example, what is the source of Rudy Giuliani's nastiness? And that nastiness, BTW, was obvious to some of us even before he became mayor of NYC. Making nice to the foot-soldiers of white supremacy, whether they have no GED or have law degrees, is not acceptable advice today,
7
News Alert for Mr. Stephens:
"Stick it to the libs" is the animating force of Trump's campaign. It is not possible to NOT be sympathetic to Trump's views and yet vote for Trump to "stick it to the libs."
3
Its almost a foregone conclusion that the MAGA hat crowd is probably not ever going to shift and that trying to have a dialogue about Trump's character or anything relating to his administration is a waste of time. It would behoove the Democrats and whoever emerges as a front runner to repeat, repeat and underscore his lies and distortions in relation to the economy, jobs created, lack of infrastructure, the egregious budget deficit, the rape of the environment, etc. Unless people who are on the fence can come to the realization that the very few, and the very privileged, are the only ones that have benefited from this corrupt and stagnant administration then Trump will have four more years to trample over the law of the land, continue to raise the national debt and make the Country far worse than when he stumbled into the Oval Office.
8
This is such an important piece. “Speech is free ...except when it isn’t”! The “basket of deplorables ” phrase cost Clinton votes in ‘16 & nothing has changed in that attitude in the past 3.5 yrs.
AG Barr is a perfect example of this prejudice. Barr, during the confirmation hearings, was considered a highly qualified candidate by the vast majority of Senators based on a reputation built over a lifetime. Nine months later, he is vilified as corrupt. The left can not disagree; it must destroy.
8
@Gail Any destruction of Barr's reputation is self inflicted.
5
@Gail
The Left has called for the abolition or impeachment of everything and everyone it perceives stands in its way. The Electoral College. The SCOTUS. The POTUS. The Attorney General. The Senate Majority Leader.
Is there nothing or no one it can tolerate anymore? It claims it's everyone else that is having a deleterious effect on our country. It should take a long look in the mirror.
2
Free speech does not mean knowingly telling lies every day, every hour. Free speech means calling out the liar. That is the media's job and our job too. It is patriotic to be the "enemy" of the liars and corrupt.
Trump supporters have been told not to believe what they see or hear and the worst among them actually follow those orders. Republicans, real ones, should not share space or name or time with them.
11
Trump is a personality around whom an extremist cult of personality has formed. While he is not Hitler or Mussolini (yet), the nature of the adherence to him by his acolytes is quite similar. If this were Europe in the 1930s, would Mr. Stephens advocate that the same principles be applied to accommodate followers of Nazism (not seen through the lens of history, but at the time, during the period when a would-be dictator was advancing his program incrementally, testing for acceptance of each new outrage)? The situation is quite similar in kind, if not in degree. Shame is a very effective social regulator. At some point it has to be brought to bear on those who espouse ideas that are antithetical to American democracy and a civilized society.
14
Trump is putting into place laws and removing oversight to benefit real estate developers, i.e., his own business. While he is a self serving bully, his practices are still somewhat contained within the laws and practices that benefit some parts of the US (or there would be no one to buy what he’s selling). What’s even more concerning is that he is leaving society ripe for the next totalitarian bully who is pure gangster through and through. Republicans need to face the future. They may be able to live with Trump but it’s what comes after that portends true disaster.
2
No, all trump voters are not racist. Most who voted for trump fall into one or more of the following categories, that I call The 3 G’s and an R:
god: religious zealots who are so hung up on gay marriage, a woman’s right to choose, birth control, etc. that they will vote for a godless person as long as Roe v. Wade is overturned, gays get back in the closet, and women “know their place.”
Greed-the almighty dollar is paramount to these people and they have little empathy for those who are poor, or get in the way of them being richer. trump serves their purpose and is the poster boy for greed.
Guns: we all know these people, they are the ones who tout the 2nd Amendment while disparaging the 1st. They want to own, show, brag about and collect as many guns as is humanly possible, AND want no restrictions.
Racists: out and out haters of anyone who looks different, prays different, talks different. They think “the others” are not “real” Americans.
Bret wants us to understand and respect them, OK...Think about people you know who voted for this dark, evil man. I have 2 Greedies, 4 god zealots, and 1 racist in my sphere...Do you have your share too? If we get out the vote, instead of GGGR’s, WE have those who, 1)respect others with religious beliefs; just don’t infringe on mine, 2)work hard to have money to care for loved ones but don’t “need” piles of cash/Stocks, 3)may or may not have guns but are fine with regulation, and 4)have no time for hatred, bigotry, racism. Got it?
9
First, the proposed question of if the Left should "cede free speech" is ridiculous..I wasn't aware free speech was the Left's to cede (hey..guess what..it's not)
The "whisper network" exists because snarling, angry, delusional Leftists believe they and they alone, determine what is "just" when it comes to our country.
I know this is hard for the Left to understand (let alone accept) but there are tens of millions of Americans who are not racists or homophobic or rednecks or whatever other derogatory term the Left uses to describe those who support our President. So instead of having to defend their positions to these Leftists (like, why should they have to??) and get attacked, these supporters just "go with the flow" and have this whisper network.
But hey, Leftists. .keep making fun of these people...just don't be surprised by our President's reelection in November.
1
It takes a pretty selfish, cynical person to pull the lever on behalf of Trump just to stick it to political correctness and call-out culture.
It is also terribly ignorant as this vile president is putting the very foundations of our country at risk.
But I am sure those who do pull the lever for Trump think they are somehow being patriotic, supporting "traditional" values and structures which, of course, is another way of saying White values and structures.
The country's in trouble, friends.
8
Despot's energizing meal is respect from those they disdain.
I didn't know there was a whole army of "brave" women who dared to question the accusers of Cosby, Weinstein, Epstein and Kavanaugh-----and who were being silenced!
They are Joan of Arcs.
Bret has set us straight.
2
I have already conceded and will probably be destroyed by Trump and his MAGAs. The good news is once we're gone, they will surely turn on each other..The end and its afterlife will indeed not be kind to Donald Trump
I live is a different universe where the Fox News-driven Trump supporters aren't quiet Americans, but more often shouters who have no interest in dialogue. Having civil discourse with them is like training a rattlesnake.
5
Respect is earned. It's not a welfare program to make ignorant, selfish bigots feel more comfortable with their deplorable attitudes and behaviour.
154
Well intentioned, right thinking Democrats might agree in principle with Mr. Stephens but insist that Trump must is an exceptional case, the exception that swallows the principle. This is often the fate of principles. Mr. Stephens is quite right not to make it.
1
In particular, I think Klobuchar and Buttigieg get this. Attack Trump for his indecency. Don't insinuate that Trump's indecency makes his voters "deplorables."
218
@LewisPG
Honestly, this makes no sense. Americans have been listening to democrats criticize Trump nonstop for years. They want democrats to focus on other issues, like health care and jobs.
Do you really believe that anyone has anything new to say about Trump? I can assure you that everyone has heard it all before ad nauseam.
9
@LewisPG Pete is light on policy information so people won't know he is actually republican-lite. Democrats want to know the exact details on health care, climate change, and many other issues which Pete brushes over with catchy phrases.
4
@LewisPG What came first the tea party or POTUS Trump? These people have crossed the line into demanding disenfranchisement of their political opposition, demanding their party 'own' the libs. These people are far worse than Trump, and they will continue to wreak havoc on the innocent for years after Trump is gone.
12
I understand and sympathize with Mr. Stephens’ argument. I truly do. I also understand that some people, including friends and family members, believe that Trump is doing many things they like, such as reducing taxes, eliminating regulations and appointing conservative judges to federal courts. I may not agree with them but they have the right to believe the way they do. But what I cannot understand no matter how hard I try is their allegiance to Trump the man. When I ask them they all say that I’m paying attention to the wrong things, that while they themselves would prefer Trump to act differently, it is the policies and not the man what they support. But that is an argument I cannot abide because I know that is not something they would accept in anybody else. They would not put up with a bully among their kids’ friends or among their coworkers. They would never count a man like that among their friends. They would show contempt for any adult man or woman who mocks others with spiteful labels like the ones Trump bestows on all his political opponents or anyone who earns his ire. The list of things they would find objectionable on the man goes on and on. Yet, they support him.
No, something else is happening, something I cannot understand. And it makes me question my relationship with them, not a pleasant feeling. I bet I’m not alone.
13
@CEA
Trump voters elected someone to get the job done, and he is delivering. Trump is the first president to do what he said he'd do -- in the face of what would be insurmountable obstacles for most presidents.
Trump was hired to do a job. Period. His supporters don't derive their sense of value or worth based from a politician. They don't need a politician to scintillate their intellects or validate their emotions.
They just want someone to get things done. And he does.
1
@AACNY
So, what exactly is it that he has accomplished?
2
I have cut loose family and acquaintances who are Trump supporters. I work from home as much as possible and work with my door closed when I do have to visit the office. I am much happier this way. No muss, no fuss. Not everyone's cup of tea to be sure, but it works for me.
2
There is a reason Obama warned about the dangers of cancel culture. It's a tactic that alienates potential friends, for one thing. No one likes to be shamed, or worse, receive death threats.
If we cut off dialogue in the middle, we get only two extremes. And a small but vocal group can do that. It doesn't need to be the majority.
What of those who voted for Trump? Are any of them open to dialogue? Should we turn down the chance to change their minds? Should we not respect them as we would like to be respected. Is there a safe space for listening, for dialogue about gray areas?
I'm in favor of fighting Trump directly, like Bloomberg recently did, not letting a bully off the hook. It is important to do this. It may even help some of those on the right who are not happy with him. But attacking previous Trump voters is a different matter. Hillary's "deplorables" statement was wrong on many levels. Even if she was right about a proportion of them. You can be right, or you can will an election. Which will it be?
5
My problem with this type of opinion, most often offered from white men, is that it tends to give a pass to outright bigotry, and tells those who continue to suffer from it to simply accept it quietly. The ultimate privilege is to accept the benefits of inequality while telling those who don’t share those benefits to be quiet.
9
There is a vast difference between condemning a set of ideas, on the one hand, and condemning the people who hold them on the other.
Trumpism is a set of ideas. My own view is that Trumpism is rotten to the core. As a set of ideas it is destroying everything good about American democracy, and indeed about the Christian faith it professes to defend. These ideas should be attacked, vigorously and with persuasive arguments.
But the people who hold them should not. I agree fully with Bret; attacking people, rather than empathizing with their life concerns, is always a mistake, and especially now, when feeling neglected may well be one factor that pushes people over into Trumpism in the first place.
Donald Trump does not attack ideas, he attacks people, viciously and brutally.
The way to beat him is NOT to respond in kind. It is rather to expose and defeat the nefarious set of ideas he has let lose upon our country and indeed the world. Trumpism is a moral disaster, a moral epidemic. It is time to defeat it, but the with the right medicine.
5
William Buckley said this many years ago and it still rings true: “Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.” Last night I with my wife at a restaurant. I commented that Trump is often his own worst enemy given his recent tirade against Attorney General Barr and that he should limit his tweets. I added that given the main stream media's hatred of Trump and how the Democrats used in the Mueller investigation, unsubstantiated charges (to be nice) to attack him, sometimes going directly to the American people is warranted. It was at this point, my wife tried to hush me because my views might anger those around us.
I also happen to wear a red NY Giants hat and my daughter asked me not to wear it as it might "trigger" an angry reaction Have we really gotten to the point that others can't have different views or a hat causes a visceral reaction? For the record, I didn't vote for Trump.
3
@Gary
NYC residents can be the most intolerant. At this point, many probably won't even associate with Trump supporters.
At a NYT event last year, I was at a table with someone who bragged he doesn't speak to any of his friends who support Trump. He wore this like a badge of honor, not realizing how petty and narrow-minded he sounded. Climbing atop a moral high horse to justify intolerance doesn't fool anyone.
2
Why doesn't anyone, Bret Stephens and commentors here, talk about FOX NEWS and its out-sized influence over Republican voters?
Reasoning kindly with Trump supporters--listening to them with respect or refusing to engage--is pointless. When a network like Fox has the bullhorn, it's pointless.
10
@Mary
FoxNews viewers represent less than 1% of the population at their peak (ex., during Sean Hannity's show).
Blaming FoxNews is comfortable and habit by now, but it's a red herring.
2
Whisper campaigns in the modern age?
The artist in England, Banksy, the one who remains anonymous but puts in the occasional appearance with a painting on a wall done overnight shows our future and the extent of the general whisper campaign of the modern age. If you are the right kind of person according to increasingly manufactured and correct public reality you can remain anonymous (right) and even perpetrate all sorts of transgressions, but if you are the wrong kind of person, well you are rapidly smoked out but ironically smoked out to be kept unknown, only whispered about, and to be sidetracked, shunted, put into a safe place (according to society) where you can entertain your alternative reality with least possible harm to society, and where you are subject to whatever study/experiment correct society chooses to make of you, and your hope is truly subject to a whispering wind which when it's not whispering is speaking loud its own reality from which you're excluded.
All of society seems increasingly designed according to intelligence agency methodology, a vast game, sting, con, a Truman Show, Michael Douglas the Game, Matrix reality where you have the official face and permitted to be public and permitted to remain anonymous and then you have the rejected from public life existence which is whispered about only but certainly known, an undercurrent which if less unconscious than in the past all the more severely controlled for sake of designed ego of society.
The dilemma with Trump is Trump---he is truly a very bad person---So, in discussing his presidency with someone who supported him, it is almost impossible to talk policy--because there is no policy, nothing....But, there is Trump's juvenile name calling, his authoritarian manner, his treatment of cabinet officials, of migrant children,of deep state employees, his wife...on and on and on....Under normal Republican Presidents, I could have spirited conversations with my conservative parents over policies, over belief systems---with Trump---he is an empty ideological/policy shell--what fills up the shell is a moral/ethical/intellectual swamp. So, within minutes of attempting to carry on a conversation with a Trump supporter, you find yourself in that swamp within minutes.
11
Not so fast. If we on the left kill free speech, why did only one republican senator speak out to declare Trump's actions shock his conscious? Only one.
5
Is Brett just realizing now that many Trump voters lied to pollsters prior casting their ballots? It's been obvious since the Dewey-Truman election of 1948 that political polls are worthless.
1
One other way to talk to Trump voters may be to show Trump voters in red states how they are voting against their own interests.
Some people seem to think Free Speech means it must be free of things that offend them personally.
That said, isn’t this “whispered” sympathetic vote for Trump more likely whispered because they are ashamed to do it (and ashamed to want to do it?)
4
Treat Trump voters with respect, but those voters should not bother treating those that find Trump abominable with respect. No one sees something wrong with that picture? Is the right response to fascism to treat fascists with respect? The majority of Trump voters are not deplorable, but Hillary was certainly correct in stating that not an insignificant number of them are deplorable.
Intolerance, racism and xenophobia cannot be shown any respect, they must be condemned. It is also hard to have respect for people who despise you for saying out loud that Trump does not deserve the respect normally due to a US President. One should put the acrimony that has become almost common place today in political discourse on those responsible to having poisoned the well, not least of all the latest gasbag to have received the Medal of Freedom. Should one show respect due to a Medal of Freedom recipient for that person? Indignation is sometimes warranted and should not be dismissed as sour grapes or inability to understand the other person's point of view.
5
So it is important to respect folks who revel in “owning the libs”? Everyone deserves to be treated with respect as a person. All political speech is not worthy of respect. Brett this column takes the cake.
3
I live in the Midwest and know many Trump supporters. I will have empathy and respect for them when ONE shows empathy and respect for non-whites, non-Christians and democrats.
As that will not happen, I have no desire to show them anything but the contempt they so richly deserve.
5
@Adrienne underneath the contempt we are all the same. We are even 99% genetically similar to those who favor trump.
Fact: “ Our bodies have 3 billion genetic building blocks, or base pairs, that make us who we are. And of those 3 billion base pairs, only a tiny amount are unique to us, making us about 99.9 per cent genetically similar to the next human”.
Believe when they weep it’s the same salty tears. When they bleed it’s red blood.
Every baby is born in this planet so joyful so hopeful so full of dreams ambitions! But we the society conditions them into labeling everyone: gender faith color tribe nationality superiority inferiority. And then we proceed to reinforce these 0.11% superficial synthetic differences between us.
The media is most unhelpful because they have become a tool a machine that generates propagates: he said she said omg did he really say that!
2
Twitter, Facebook and Fox are giant bugs that obliterate America's windshield. Secret networks? It's called self-important, idle gossip. There are plenty of places where we can shout our political views. There are plenty of places where it is grossly inappropriate, specifically the workplace and on Sundays at those little buildings with the silly steeples. Mr. Stephens seems to think there are many secret sympathizers for the horror of this administration. I suspect that most were really disgusted with the democratic candidate and wanted to send her a hard message. There are a lot more than 300,000 of them in the states mentioned. Secret networks? No one in this blighted country can keep a secret, especially when their ego demands recognition by those of us in the unwashed masses.
2
I think we are in a strange and difficult place with speech--in terms of its suppression and its liberation. On the left, simplified assertion sometimes impatiently overrides complicated truths. A dreary--though decentralized--enforcement can shut down conversation.
Mr. Stephens, however. fails to mention the megaphone DT has given to hatred, pure and simple. In 2016 many Trump supporters crowed that DT said what "everybody" was thinking. Apparently, their "everybody' thinks Mexicans are rapists and that anyone who voices opposition at a DT rally deserves violence, that the vote belongs to them, but not to those who don't share their views, and that women's bodies belong to any man who thinks he has a right to them. They seem convinced that everybody shared their views: Fox (to call it Fox News is to lie) reinforced that conviction.
I can understand that some 2016 Trump voters wanted to overturn the apple cart, that they thought Trump might even the odds a bit. But he's pulled up the orchard, and as in any casino, the house always wins. After three years, the orange infantine emperor is naked. A 2020 vote for Trump is a vote to keep hate alive.
All human beings have an innate dignity and value: all deserve respect until their actions forfeit that respect. To me, a 2020 vote for Trump denies the dignity and value of so many people that a person casting it reaps the disrespect he sows.
4
The holier than thou attitude has been an uncomfortable byproduct of human nature since time began. Unfortunately, this time around it's been cunningly manipulated by a political party and its leader who have declared that the law is no longer the law
and ditto for the truth. This quicksand of amorality is rapidly on its
inexorable path to destroying our democracy as we sink into a festering, undrained swamp of evil.
Wishing it away is a fool's game.
Vote while you still can.
3
Two thoughts
1) We have been exhorted since Nov of 2016 to try to understand, listen to, ask 'why' re Trump voters. Frankly, I'm a bit sick of that. Month after month I watch them cheer as he says cruel, nasty, or bigoted things at rallies. I hear them tell reporters that "he says what we all think." How much more trying to understand do I need.
At this point, I think there are several subsets of Trump voters: those who really are racist, enjoy meanness, nastiness etc.; those who don't like that, but vote for him because they get something they like, e.g., deregulation, conservative justices/judges (& a chance to overturn Roe), those who are feel left out and respond to his messages of resentment...
2) My other question is why you assume that all of the whisper voters are voting for Trump. Might there not also be a group who do not what friends & family to know that they voted or will vote for a Democrat or for a "liberal"? Surely, there are some never-Trump folks who live in a very red environment who will hold their blue vote close to the vest.
5
I think Bret is spot on. You can't verbally beat, shame or intimidate Trump voters to become anti-Trump voters. We should oppose Trump and his enablers at every opportunity but beating up people in MAGA hats or de-humanizing them on social media won't stop them from voting for their man in November.
There have to be some unstated agreements that we respect each other as fellow Americans and human beings. If we don't the paralysis of our society will increase not decrease. There is a fine line here. Under no circumstances can we allow Trump's pundits to gaslight the public. That has to be distinguished from ordinary Trump supporters. But when Mark Lauder goes on NPR and gloriously references Trump's coming down the escalator at Trump Tower to launch his campaign we have to make very clear that Trump's agenda was inherent and calculated racism. He referenced Mexicans as "rapists." Lauder didn't mention that. Instead he wanted everyone to imbibe an Alice in Wonderland view of Trump and his agenda. This is what must be condemned loudly and with great persistance.
1
"How to pull it off this time? By treating Trump voters with respect."
Sorry, no thanks for that advice. The most honest, transparent statement I can make to Trump supporters is that I don't respect them today and won't respect them tomorrow either. I'm not giving credibility to a group of people who blindly follow a wannabe dictator. As to the Liberal PC crowd, they give me a good laugh because they will be the architects of their own irrelevance.
2
Why should we cede respect to Donald Trump and his maga people? Bret Stephens, your words gainsay President Trump's actions, behavior and speech in the past 3 years. Free speech is censored now in America. Who has "inner flashes of sympathy" for Trump? How can we the people empathize with a dictator in all but name?
1
Aren't there voters in red states who are unwilling to speak out against Trump's immoral, unethical, divisive persona? This phenomenon seems to be a proverbial two way street.
1
So how about giving credit to President Obama for taking a stand against ‘call out culture?’
6
In WI it is a myth that in day to day living Trump supporters are demonized in pulic or in private as Stephens seems to think happens.
We live in a town that went for Trump and in a county that went for Trump. I live with them.
It is senseless to ask Trump supporters why they voted for Trump for I know the reasons from what I hear and what I know about them.
Some like his tax cuts. Some like his support for defunding Planned Parenthood. Some like his deregulation of pollution controls. Some dislike foreigners and fear Blacks. Some want women to go back to the home and stay out of the professions. Some want their religion in public places like public schools. And some just like his bravado and lack of restraint.
Trump won WI because HRC did not even campaign here and was a very flawed candidate.
This state voted twice for a Black man to be President and just re elected a lesbian to the US Senate.
Any reasonable Democratic candidate will beat Trump here without people like me pandering to his supporters.
They are as unlikely to change their minds as I am..
2
If the senators who voted for Trump's acquittal were capable, like the Trump whisper's you refer to, of feeling shame the country would be in a far better place.
2
Get the facts straight!
Disdain is not constrained to what one says or thinks. It invades and regenerates like a non-living virus entering a cell. The causative agent is often a lie.
Quote from a certain novel, Discarded Souls.
He paused a moment. "People lie all the time."
I tried not to smile and stood quietly...…….."No." He laughed. "They don't do it intentionally. They lie because they don't know what the truth really is. They only think they do!"
The hero in that book, (if there is one) is a journalist.
Unfortunately we've returned to a primitive way of living, where a lie can be superior to the truth. That's how Trump may win again.
3
So, we limit our own free speech in order not to hurt the delicate sensibilities of those who might secretly love Donald Trump?
3
Has Bret Stephens ever written a column exclusively and uniformly critical of the right -- or of the Republican party?
Is absolutely every occasion fodder for attacks on the hated "left"? Meaning, of course, "centrist" or "center-right" in any other country?
Yeah, the woke culture is pretty tiresome and oppressive. And yes, "speech is free, except when it isn't." Bret should know, and no need for "hunches" -- just look at commercial censorship, and it's effect on both public discourse and employment. Who has the megaphones in this country?
You know, the sort of thing which keeps Bret and his ilk on this page forever, and actual liberals off....
1
“How to pull it off this time? By treating Trump voters with respect.”
This will be an impossible ask for the majority of the NYT readership. However, I think you are correct. I say this as a life-long social democrat with solid liberal credentials. The “censorious left” — often highly educated and stupid at the same time — may well hand the coming election to the most odious man ever to inhabit in the White House.
Liberal ambivalence about free speech had a tentative beginning years ago, before today's progressive vanguard was born. Remember when the great moral question of the day was whether the ACLU should stand up for the rights of neo-Nazis who wanted to march in Skokie, Illinois?
It's true that not every conflict should be resolved in favor of freedom, or has been in the past. But it's also true that ambivalence about a principle is fatefully different from reasoned inconsistency in applying it. Liberals entered a phase of attitudinal shift that increasingly cast uninhibited speech as the enemy of this or that social good without weighing the cost of stigmatizing it. Now, what was the most wrenching kind of dilemma for one generation of liberals has become a no-brainer for another.
Two or three decades ago, a certain linguist wrote that the twentieth century's foremost believers in word magic were Western intellectuals. He was remarking on their attempts to improve society by modeling the use of certain words while abhorring others. In the twenty-first century, the manipulation of language has progressed to the manipulation of intellectual intercourse itself, and the aim of improving society has been reduced to mere cover for cutthroat ostracism.
It is enlightening to see a conservative say that shame should not matter. That is what this piece argues and that is just not a moral or ethical position. Of course shame matters or we cannot have a civil society.
It is shameful not to vote. It is shameful to brand an entire group of people with one unfair brush. It is shameful to prejudge people.
It is not shameful to view a litany of actions by public figures that does not comport with civil society and to then call out those that traffic in that activity. The obese, artificial intellectually impaired president we have is provably all three. He is obese by the nutritional definition. He is artificial because he makes a number of claims about his wealth, golf prowess, heel spur, business acumen ...., with no proof. Intellectually impaired by his failure to use proper grammar and spelling errors, and failure to release his college transcripts. The same can be argued about the rest of the republican cult and their numerous unpatriotic acts of public discourse.
It is perfectly honest to view the acts of public officials and find them wanting and to then call them out for it. The right wingnuts call it branding and they do it intentionally and very publicly all of the time. I personally find their actions to be reprehensible and shameful the vast majority of the time and will not be silenced for it.
King George III was within his rights and the colonists were not. Who was shameful and who was correct?
1
Some serious psy ops here...abandon #MeToo or else face a Trump re-election. Be even more understanding while the Right's war to own the Libs continues, and above all be more respectful of the Republican men, ladies.
"How to pull it off this time? By treating Trump voters with respect. By asking why so many of them wound up in his tent to begin with. By acknowledging that not everything that’s said in a hush is shameful, and that not everyone you disagree with is a bigot. By listening, not denouncing; empathizing, not ridiculing; understanding, not dismissing."
To suggest that the left should moderate their overt disgust with Trump supporters in hopes will make them sanguine is a ridiculous notion.
Did you watch this the State of the Union this year? Did you hear the rants of a supine Republicans as they chanted “4 more years” like they were coeds at a high school pep rally while the Florida father of the 14 year old shooting victim was escorted out the chamber for challenging Trumps defense of the 2nd amendment.
No, Trump supporters have been way to emboldened by the GOP senate to feel anything less invincible.
No amount of vitriol will suppress a Trump supporter’s voice.
1
The lead-up to Stephens' big reveal was what Stephen Colbert would call a long walk. But Trump it isn't political correctness to detest, abhor and refuse to hear anything good about a man (Trump) who has willfully created a cult of personality around himself that he fuel it by promoting hate for the other. No sale. And the long walk, that part was boring.
2
Mr. Stephens thinks that "Whisper networks ought to have no place in the land of the free."
Mr. Stephens is correct. If we lived "in the land of the free", whisper networks would have no place.
We do not live "in the land of the free". We live in a proto-fascist state with a population that is sliding into full-blown fascism.
1
The discussion of liberal vs conservative in the context of this column is deceptive. Bret Stephen is a “conservative” in the definition and mold of Likud politics, not US politics. It’s the reason why he’s always interpreting the country from the wrong prism. We’re not Likud and we’ll never be Likud. We don’t want to be governed by Likud and never will; much as they try to divide the country by radicalizing and blaming refugees for the economic woes they caused and created , it won’t work in the end. Now we have Bloomberg to deal with, a man that’s a little less racist than Trump. As Stephens wrote not long ago: Run Mike, run! Indeed.
@TH "those who disagree with us are not necessarily 'evil' "
The Republican Party has become overtly racist and anti-democratic: (promoting voter disenfranchisement, extreme gerrymandering and outright thuggery ignoring Merrick Garland for the Supreme Court.
And how about ripping children away from their mothers arms and putting them in cages in inhumane conditions in separate locations without any chance of reuniting them... Don't you consider that evil?! And refusing to enact reasonable gun-safety laws in the face of thousands of deaths from mass shootings? Evil enough for you yet?!
These are just a few examples of the evil that is the Republican Party. Add to that the constant lies including the one about a "middle-class tax cut" which actually exacerbated an already-extreme level of income and wealth inequality while creating the largest deficits and national debt ever. And the corruption of holding a sham impeachment "trial" without witnesses and documents so that we now have a lawless dictator! Homelessness, no health insurance, vicious capitalism... it's all the work of evil Republicans!
And if Trump gets a second term, you'll see evil alright: cutting food stamps to poor children, Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security and SSD. EVIL on steroids!
3
The "whispering" is because of the racism and bigotry that have propelled Trump to the Oval Office and permeated Trumpism across the land. I have never attributed this phenomenon to Trump himself. He is an inarticulate and generally ignorant man-child who could not be a leader of any social movement. No, this is the work of right-wing media (hate radio and "Fix News") and their bankrollers. When Trump descended that escalator in 2015, he uttered the magical words about criminal, rapist Mexicans. None of the other "conventional" Republican candidates would go there. And the famous "base" was hooked. Trump is president because of immigration. The most important issue that could decide the November's election is immigration. Democrats need to wise up and stop saying stupid things such as healthcare for illegals as this will only give Trump and the GOP an easy electoral victory.
3
The public sickness in the US revolves around preservation of institutions rooted in slavery as divine revelations.
1
Hillary Clinton said it better and briefer, Bret. Please read to the end:
"You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right?
The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic — you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up. He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people — now how 11 million. He tweets and retweets their offensive hateful mean-spirited rhetoric. Now, some of those folks — they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America. But the other basket — and I know this because I see friends from all over America here — I see friends from Florida and Georgia and South Carolina and Texas — as well as, you know, New York and California —but that other basket of people are people who feel that the government has let them down, the economy has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures, and they’re just desperate for change. It doesn’t really even matter where it comes from.They don’t buy everything he says, but he seems to hold out some hope that their lives will be different. They won’t wake up and see their jobs disappear, lose a kid to heroin, feel like they’re in a dead-end. Those are people we have to understand and empathize with as well."
http://time.com/4486502/hillary-clinton-basket-of-deplorables-transcript/
6
"I would also guess that the number has only grown as the censorious left has become more aggressive and promiscuous in its condemnations."
Bret, I was following your column until this sentence, at which point, I almost fell off my chair. How on earth can you point to only one side of the political divide and cast all the blame for public aggression and condemnation in our culture today?
This is the oppostite of "what aboutism". You're actually taking sides and blaming Democrats for the pickle we're in as a society and a culture.
Who's chanting ugly lock-him (her) up slogans at ralllies? Who's spreading conspiracy theories? Which network is spewing nonsense to prop up its king?
I agree we need to offer respect to Trump supporters and hear out their views with reason and evidence. But it might be helpful if conservative writers aren't allowing them to tar us all with the same brush in the first place.
6
In the “I know you are but what am I” world of trump bullying, we have only to expect that the best argument(s) against trump will automatically be turned upside down, inside out and paraded about as gospel.
1
P.S. Brett is obviously talking about himself here. While he has been given the freedom to shout everything he wants - from transphobia to denial of the humanity of Palestinians to literal eugenics - from the most important op-Ed page in America he somehow STILL feels that he’s forced to whisper. Just like his imaginary Trump whisperers feel that having a whole TV news network, all of talk radio, most radio stations (usually all but one or two) where they live, innumerable Bretts and mini-Bretts in the so-called “liberal media”, an unending line of rightwing provocateurs touring every campus in America, Facebook and Twitter, the whole enormous evangelical cultural universe repeat all their bigoted beliefs is - not enough. Just like fascists of the past, fascists of the present won’t stop whining until all political, social and cultural institutions are under their control.
3
I don't think so. Bret seems to be saying that the left has gone too far by being really angry over what has gone on for so many years. Want to make the case that Trump isn't the foul slime that he certainly is? Fine, but don't expect us to sit by and just thank you for your opinion. Want to go on about how all the "illegals" should be dispatched back where they came from? Okay, but you're gonna get piled on. For centuries racial caricatures were just fine in white circles. Now, not so much. Horrors!! What's happened to free speech?? You mean to say those clever jokes actually are painful and damaging? Naw. Free speech!! Free speech!!
Bret seems to be invoking the "well, we've stopped killing you, you should be grateful" thinking that has characterized the rhetoric of the right. So waht if the Walton clan makes another $50B off the backs of their employees? Well, the losers should be grateful for minimum wage.
Recasting it as free speech gets you nowhere, Bret. It is the "Mussolini made the trains run on time" approach. Do you not think that the right is a bunch of race-baiting hyenas? Really? Should they be ashamed of their attitudes? Of course they should. No wonder they whisper. Adolescent urges to tweak the adults in the room? OK. We can only hope that four years is enough time to grow up.
2
We are enduring what happened in China during the cultural revolution. Anyone who doesn’t speak the leftist party line is disappeared.
@M
The one flaw is that it is, in fact, the people who don't speak the Trumpist line are being removed -- Vindeman and his completely blameless brother, just to name two of dozens of people who have lost their jobs because they stood up to Trump.
But I'm curious as to who has been disappeared because they did not speak the leftist party line. Can you name any names?
There is in a sense nothing new about Mr Stephens' advice. Conservatives have been saying for years that they have a real problem with liberals criticizing them -- always going on about how racism, and greed, and gun-nuttery, and anti-intellectualism, and misogyny, and homophobia, and xenophobia are bad, and we really shouldn't indulge in these bad attitudes quite as much as conservatives enjoy indulging in them. I never hear conservatives like Mr Stephens suggest that perhaps his fellow conservatives should perhaps indulge less in all these bad attitudes. That perhaps a half century of "the southern strategy" (i.e., pandering to racial hatred and fear and resentment) and pandering to the most repulsive religious bigots in the country, and lying incessantly about the evils of immigration and immigrants was not so good for the country. If only we're nicer to the greed heads and gun nuts and racists, why then maybe they wouldn't hate us so much, and might stop voting for racists and demagogues.
But maybe even if us nasty liberals don't give conservatives a big wet kiss of forgiveness, they could just stop the racism and xenophobia and all the pandering to our worst instincts on their own? I look forward to the day when Mr Stephens looks in the mirror and realizes that the problem isn't that liberals aren't nice enough to conservatives, the problem is conservatives themselves. I wonder if someday he will direct a corrective word toward them.
5
Censorious Left...yeah, right, but what about the censorious Right? Medalist of Freedom Rush Limbaugh who plays the victim card 3 hrs every weekday and reruns of weekends , claiming anyone who disagrees with him is thereby violating his free speech rights!! Michael Savage (Radio Hall-of-Famer no less - asserting that all liberals should be silenced by being institutionalized for mental disorder (this from the guy who said on air Obama was a rabid dog "that should be dealt with accordingly" and somehow evaded prosecution for advocating shooting the president; Mark Levin, Sean Hannity and other who claim that only their definitions of America should be allowed free expression? The years and years of right wing assaults on college professors who should be fired and barred from teaching because of their liberal views; the right wing state legislatures that insist on rewriting textbooks to take out references to slavery they find offensive to our national story. And of course Ann Coulter or/and Laura Ingraham (which one told LeBron to "shut up and dribble" ?And President Trump's attacks on media with his own fake news and then asserting that other views should be prosecuted. Some progressive voices have bought the temptation to follow the right wing pattern of asserting that all views but their own must be stamped out, shouted down and otherwise silenced -- but that is not a majority liberal view by any means -- but its all too common among conservative icons.
2
I am sick to death of the barrels of inky pixels spilled highlighting, analyzing and imploring us to understand and respect Trump voters. Like they spend one second trying to understand anyone else.
Last week the Times ran a story: “Inside A Trump Rally” with big pictures and everything describing what it’s really like to be at a Trump rally.
Except for the 6 gazillion other stories on Trump rallies I never would have known what it was really like.
The media gave Trump literally billions of dollars in free publicity during the 2016 campaign and you’re doing it again! Enough!
3
Yes. Bret, except ...
Freedom of Speech is the most misunderstood of our constitutional freedoms. often deliberately misunderstood with purpose. None of those freedoms is absolute, nor did the Founders see them as absolute. With freedom comes responsibility, whether in speech, in handling and discharging firearms. or in not attacking officers serving a warrant on you. We cannot stone our neighbors for blaspheming despite Freedom of Religion. We must tell the truth under oath in court. The Founders recognized oath-breaking, slander, and libel as crimes, along with treason, incitement to riot, and fraud.
So what does Free Speech mean? And Free Press and the 4th and 5th Amendments? You can say what you want without Prior Restraint (the Pentagon Papers case), but you are both legally and morally responsible for what you have said. You can own a gun, but not shoot anyone you choose. You can publish porn, but not libelous lies with malicious intent. Perhaps a given president doesn't think so now and then, but the Bill of Rights and Article II are not suicide pacts. My freedom ends at your nose, to paraphrase Shaw.
1
"[T]he army of snickering moralists (at the time including me) telling them that a vote for Trump was unpardonable?"
And guess what? It was.
So yes, if someone spouts racist, undemocratic, Trumpian nonsense, I'm going to judge them. The point of free speech is to communicate our views and attempt to influence others to our way of thinking. I celebrate that freedom. The other side of that coin though is that the exercise of free speech strips away the curtain. Don't complain if I turn my head away in disgust.
3
Well, you're starting to get it.
More and more of the reporting is referencing social media. The pundits get their feathers ruffled because of social media. The candidates focus on social media. Social media is a hideout for cowards who can’t be bothered to take a stand in public. The Occupy movement and the Tea Party are two examples of how public stances tend to make their participants look like idiots. Taking to the streets is ineffective and posting is a useless pastime meant to mollify and, conversely, to antagonize. Idiocracy is what we have and Trump is it’s standard bearer.
1
Mr. Stephens wants more understanding, less dismissing. Okay. I understand that a lot of people voted for Trump because they really disliked Hillary Clinton; or they thought an outsider who sounded populist would forge a new political identity; or they wanted to give the finger to the establishment. I understand that they are not deplorable. I also understand that they bought a lemon and are loathe to admit it. No one wants to cop to being a sucker. Tough. Trump is everything us never Trumpers said he was: a grifter, a con and a self-absorbed dope. Swallow hard and come in from the cold.
5
That lady in N.H. who called out the msnbc reporter, says it all. She said something to the effect, she was going to vote for Bernie precisely because you in the media keep bashing him. If you keep up this bash Bernie at every instance form or opportunity, there is going to be a backlash.
We expect the media to be objective, to report facts and truth. Instead with your slanted coverage, the public has no choice. It has to seek its answers through the whisper network.
All religions warn against gossip. Against lying. Against coveting. But who cares about the core teachings of religion anymore? Not even the pastors rabbis and clergy! Just look at the lies the Catholic Church has concealed. We have William Barr Catholic AG in front of us, not only did he conceal lies of George W Bush lead up to Iraq war, here he is concealing Trump’s lies for him.
3
Whisper voters have been there all along. The "I am not a racist", "I am not a xenophobe" " I am not a misogynist ", "I am not a cruel person" crowd. You know the people who deep down inside hate Black people living in their neighborhood, but hold their nose and attend neighborhood parties and 'pretend' to like the Black neighbors. Here is the real problem in America: people who nod, nod, wink wink and vote for Trump get the best of both worlds. No one really knows how they feel lest they suffer 'retaliation'. What 'form' does that retaliation take? Boycotting their business, being unfriended on Facebook, not getting invited to the Christmas party. But speak out against the Conservative right people and their causes and what do you get? Physically Threatened, organized smear campaigns, having to move or go in to hiding for having the audacity to speak out against the gun laws after your child is gunned down at school. Or saying you were sexually assaulted by a nominee for the Supreme Court. Or being kept in a cage as a member of the press at a Trump rally. If anyone has a reason to be a voting whisperer, it's the people on the left. People who do it on the right are cowards. They whisper not because they are afraid of what might happen. They whisper because they have spent so much time and energy creating a facade. They hate political correctness so much, they willingly practice it 24/7.
1
No...just no. This whispering has got to be right out of the white supremacist playbook. You said it yourself...it grabs people's attention, looking on forbidden fruit. It's paranoid behavior, cult behavior, and should be condemned loudly and persistently, because there is no understanding to be had with insanity. Treat the people with sympathy and help them recover, but this behavior, among others, of Trumps followers should never be acceptable. Period.
1
But how do you say, in the same breath, that Trump is the Antichrist and that I respect the fact that you support him? Buttigieg might be the only one who is able to thread the needle.
1
This is clearly an article written by a right-wing Republican! Someone who might have written for the WSJ perhaps. Just sayin...
3
How is it the Times cadre of rightists are physicians able to cure what ails the “left.”
It is a
Miracle.
Or.
Alternate theory.
Just say stuff to fill up space and don’t have any ideas what they are talking about and know the left about as well as quantum physics.
Have you ever met a Trump voter Bret? Try it sometime and see the civility they express to their fellow man. Listen to them Bret and let's see how you feel afterwards. Let us all know how being nice to them works, how a discussion using facts work. I met a woman who said she's voting for Trump. I asked her a question - Why? I asked what policies he is for, that she supported? The answer I got was "because" he is for "us". Can you guess her race Bret? It reminds me of that line from Forrest Gump about "stupid is, stupid does sir". We have a large class of uneducated Whites and a smaller class of just flat out racist Whites who vote for Trump. The racists supporting Trump at least have reason to support him. They are still deplorable but that's another issue. I travel in my job and people think I am a Republican solely because I am White and wear a suit. If I disagree with their opinions in as nice a way as possible I basically get rude reactions. The other class, who are truly ignorant of who outsourced their jobs or automated them out of existence, have no clue what happened to their lives but get all of their "news" from FOX. You hear FOX on all the time in the Midwest and South, in restaurants, bars and airports blaming Democrats for everything. It's all about the big bad government and "those other people" who stole their cheese. So I just don't bother talking to anyone with a MAGA hat or anyone who I think might wear one. It's just not worth doing. You can't fix stupid.
6
This is an odious fantasy.
Women are afraid to speak out against #MeToo because of the left? In their hearts they just know that #MeToo is an organized witch hunt in the spirit of Joe McCarthy.
Leave it to Bret to twist the reality of women being raped and abused into a fairy tale of backlash.
He speaks in very loud whisper.
3
Trump is a dictatorial thug, a psychopathic liar, and a master at garnering angry tribalists to support him. How many of those Trump supporters do you think are reading your columns, Mr. Stephens?
Root cause: Until we can get the Dark Money out of politics, nothing will get better, and we will be talking about everything we cannot fix.
1
Anybody that has daughters should be ashamed to vote for thump
1
"How to pull it off this time? By treating Trump voters with respect."
That is one impeachment, several investigations, many tell all books, dozens of anonymous sources,overwhelming evidence and proof beyond all doubt, too late. From the beginning, the left never accepted Trump's win.
The left did not analyse how Trump beat the smartest, most experienced woman in the world. The Russians helped him. No, that's an excuse to cover for Hillary. It that went on for 3 years.
How many people said they were Hillary supporters that voted for Trump? I don't know. But, if Trump's popular vote is significantly larger n November, the number whisper voters was and is very large.
I've become friends through the posting community with a fellow Democrat who resides in a red state. Because of her profession, she's told me she must keep quiet about her political views.
She tells me it's very lonely these days, given the role politics has always played for the civically engaged. We often text, particularly on days like yesterday, when the Barr judicial interference articles kept coming at almost the rate of one an hour.
I'm sure I'm a safety valve for her, but I write this to say, our political divide works both ways. Liberals in Trump states feel isolated from their neighbors, while I"m sure Trump supporters in blue states feel the same.
But moral judgment, censure, and intolerance isn't confined to one side, as Bret implies in this column. Societal tolerance must be built by left and right and I find it hard to do so when the biggest bullhorn in history tweets all day long.
3
I have seen that Trump supporters do not want to answer why, or get huffy and angry when asked, or think the economy is great so, therefore, all is okey dokey. I don’t bother asking. No point. Democrats organizing around ‘moral deterioration’? Much more than that, Bret, much more than that.
1
Sorry, Bret. I accord Trump voters little respect when these same people would not tolerate similar behavior from their neighbors, bosses, spouses, friends, or any others who value decency and democratic principles. Would these same voters feel similarly if these behaviors were exhibited by any member of the political opposition? Not on your life. I think there is a word for this: hypocritical.
Americans, throughout modern history, have always held deep seated feelings confined to the whisper networks. The problem is modern technology, which has allowed those feelings to be publicly expressed through social media outlets and Comment sections such as that which I am writing in now. I have been empowered to share my thoughts to the masses, even though I suspect it is far better, and certainly more prudent, to keep my opinions to myself.
But it is so very hard not to scream to the world when one witnesses the unraveling of our country in real time, aided and abetted by millions who don’t think ahead to the harm they are causing. And there are millions of Republicans who are whispering amongst themselves how true that is, but won’t stand up to the anger they would bring upon themselves by their MAGA neighbors were they to do so.
4
I agree that there is a hidden Trump vote. However, I believe there are far more potential voters who did not show up in 2016 because the polls for the entire campaign showed Clinton winning fairly easily. They never imagined there was actually a legitimate threat that their fellow Americans would actually elect someone so obviously unqualified and unfit for the office.
There will be an increase in the anti-Trump vote come November. The question is whether it will be in states that count, and whether they'll be smart enough not to waste their votes on third parties that cannot win.
As usual, a conservative accusing the left of that the right blatantly does. Censorious? Conservatives are much more about punishing anyone who disagrees with them than the left has ever been. Just look at what Trump is doing this week in retaliation. Never, ever before has any president publicly threatened entire wings of the government or individual people and Trump has done both this week. We all watched the wrath of the hardliners in the gop terrorize their senators into having to vote against their beliefs and let Trump off on mainstream TV for every one of us to watch as they one by one said "not guilty". This is only because up and down the lines, hardliner conservatives police anyone and everyone they can from chit chat at tailgate parties, parents at the PTA, on up to the Senate. Conservatives and even moderates, keep telling yourself this and wonder why Bernie Sanders is winning primaries.
2
There are two different ideas conflated into one in this piece. Both are noxious, but not even close to the same.
One is that Trump puts himself out as the defender of free speech, along with the GOP. Trump lies daily, demonizes the free press, quashes science, fact and dissent, and uses propaganda, bullying and threats to get his own way. And calls it free speech.
The other idea is whisper campaigns that quash questions and ideas. Essentially we have bifurcated orthodoxies - one group of powerful people using political, religious and economic doctrine to justify harming others. The other group, fighting for the rights of the marginalized, cannot tolerate dissent because of potential harm and become as unyielding as their opponents. They remember that the orthodoxy of prejudice killed 6 million Jews in the 30s and jailed babies at the border in our own era.
We can't solve the problem without becoming less judgmental, wiser, kinder, more tolerant and less sure that we ourselves are right and just.
That is a tall order, which is why we are left condemning modern Galileos. We are afraid of the outcome.
I know of one corporation in the Aerospace and Defense industry, based in Massachusetts, whose management uses whisper networks to strike at their enemies. The person who started the practice would excuse it under the notion of 'freedom of speech.' But it is simply a vehicle by which a company can commit black-listing without having to resort to legally contestable means. This persists over decades and offers the attraction of a dark notion of power for the petty.
Brett has morphed two entirely different issues to get to his conclusion. It's one thing to suggest that "political correctness" and the "cancel culture" (both of which are related to social issues) are causing people to whisper (or, I would contend, to shut-up entirely). It's entirely different to suggest that people concerned that our democracy is being hijacked by a cadre of right-wing extremists pretend that all is well with American democracy. It is not a pleasant time to be an American and this will be reflected in the national conversation.
4
The intimidation of original or dissenting voices are a side effect of our political naïveté and polarization. People on both sides of the spectrum frequently eschew nuanced arguments and embrace purity. They fail to understand that only through real discussions are minds changed. Further, click oriented extreme comments draw attention and funds to a cause in a way that respectful intellectual conversation would not. And bullying replaces free speech because too many focus solely on their own rights and forget that even people with whom they disagree share the right of self-expression.
4
Would Mr. Stephens consider trying to "cancel" an associate college professor because of a harmless tweet an example of "ceding the free speech high ground"?
2
I believe Bret is very correct here. Conor Friedersdorf wrote a very eye-opening piece in the Atlantic in 2016 about this very phenomenon “A Dialogue With a 22-Year-Old Donald Trump Supporter.” This was about successful tech workers who lived in San Francisco but couldn’t abide the onerous PS culture. As someone who told her evangelical relatives if they confirmed my suspicions about their voting for Trump, I would never think of them the same way again - I’m guilty too.
I have changed. The party of the left has left me for some illogically righteous and rigid and judgmental/mean universe. And I have left them too as I read more, and am now much closer to being a Never Trump Republican than a Democrat. What’s wrong with letting states decide on some issues like abortion and healthcare? It’s so much easier to abort now thanks to pharmaceutical methods accessible to anyone. And let’s see what happens when a state like California (the 5th largest economy in the world) passes universal healthcare. Other states can band together with it if they so choose. My main concern is paying for it (which many countries seem to be struggling with) and what may happen to medical device and pharmaceutical innovation without our seeming to subsidize it for the world.
5
@Karen
The reason we can't let states go their own way on issues of basic rights (including abortion) is that we are one country and I don't lose my rights because my company moves me from state A to B, and neither do you.
2
@Karen
Because decent health care and a woman's right to determine what happens to her body are universal rights that should be held by all Americans, and not be determined by an arbitrary line on a map.
1
I believe Mr. Stephens is arguing for the right to express opinions in a respectful fashion, even when those opinions are not popular. I am all for this concept, but there are some problems. Conservatives want to be able to talk about race and gender without being attacked and progressives within progressive movements want to talk about race and gender without being canceled if they don't agree with their peers. I am certainly all for free speech but the issue here is that when people question stories of rape or violence, usually they are questioning women, which is a power dynamic that has been abused. When progressives question racist and sexist speech, they are trying to overturn power relationships that have abused people for centuries. I am more skeptical of people who support historical abuse (generally conservatives), then of people that support the abused (generally progressives).
4
Let’s be real.
Trump protects free speech like he supports honesty in government and preserving the environment.
He’s a uniquely mendacious figure who is openly hostile to the 1st Amendment.
6
Hidden Trump voters in 2016 were either voting for an abstract concept or against a perceived greater evil in Clinton. Neither of those circumstances will exist next November. Using 2016 as a template for prediction might not even be as accurate as a Magic Eight Ball. However, your Trump whisperer condition is real. I try and stay as open minded as possible even though our President makes that a very challenging proposition. On those few occasions where I have strayed into positivity regarding a Trump mandate I receive the unspoken equivalent of hisses and boos. I've been on the planet long enough to recognize that this phenomenon has had a long lifespan but the Trump phenomenon has sharpened it to a razor's edge.
1
@JH
If anything, Trump has cemented his support. He has focused on jobs and wages like a laser. He has gotten our southern border under control (only his critics consider the wall a litmus test of his immigration success). He is actively promoting employer training for older workers and high school graduates. Workers sidelined after the financial crisis are finally returning to work. He's actively trying to get us out of wars.
There's a reason people are optimistic.
3
@AACNY
I agree completely. Although, the polar opposite is just as true. That is exactly why I think that the Hidden Trump vote is now a specious concept.
Trust, evidence and reasoned arguments are the foundation of a civilized society, one in which we can mitigate our differences. Trump supporters live an a fantasy land where these foundations have no place or meaning. So its impossible to have a discussion with them. Its not a question of free speech, its a question of shared epistemology. Bret what’s us reasonable liberals to have empathy for Trump supporters as they tear at the fabric of democracy. But there is no expectation that they would return the favor. I call that being on the wrong side of reasonable. But I’m still happy to stay ther.
2
Yes, there probably were voters who followed your point: “ For every voter who pulled the lever for Trump out of sympathy for his views, how many others did so out of disdain for the army of snickering moralists (at the time including me) telling them that a vote for Trump was unpardonable?
But they had on their side a strong distaste for Clinton, as manufactured by Trump.
So for these middle of the road swingers, it is probably very important to emphasis the positiveness of the eventual Democrat candidates, to fight the anticipated Trump slandering.
1
Kudos for this insightful column.
In many places, Trump supporters have to keep their views hidden. Who wants the odd stare or silence (or worse) at the high school basketball game, the fundraiser for the local conservation group or any other public gathering?
But it goes deeper than Trump. Many common views of common Americans simply must stay hidden today.
For example, one cannot speak publicly about the beliefs (1) that in many cases obesity is to a significant extent a volitional choice; (2) that public assistance can discourage a strong work ethic; (3) that it's good to have firearms for self-defense; (4) that immigration should be limited to people who bring specific financial, intellectual or cultural resources to our country; (5) that sex is binary; (6) that individuals born as men should not be allowed to compete in women's sports; and (7) that the mainstream media has a distinct pro-left slant.
Those are just some examples. Some or most of these beliefs are held by roughly 50% of Americans or more.
But we are shamed from discussing them.
3
@Stuck on a mountain
1) Why are Americans as a group so much fatter today than in 1960? How "volitional" is that?
2) Ok, so?
3) Have you seen the data on firearms kept for personal defense? Why is the gun industry squashing research into gun ownership, what are they afraid of?
4) Re immigration, you have cherry picked one facet and ignored all the other issues that make this a fraught topic.
5) See the science, or maybe you don't believe in it? In which case, listen to LGBTQ people tell their stories, and believe what they say about their selves and feelings. You know better than those who live in their bodies?
6) First define "men" and "women." It gets complicated when you actually bother to learn the science.
7) No point arguing that one here.
@Thomas
Thanks Thomas. Your tone proves my point.
As for substance, the character limit won't permit a serious, documented back and forth on these issues.
So I'll pick just one. Here's a link to a recent WSJ piece.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-dangerous-denial-of-sex-11581638089?mod=opinion_lead_pos5
Please note that, in contrast, I offer it in the spirit of respectful discussion and without demeaning anything you have said.
Sorry, Bret....I understand what you are saying, and yes, all of us need to have respect for each other.
But anyone who voted for Donald Trump to be the leader of the free world "out of disdain for the army of snickering moralists" doesn't really deserve my respect, don't you think?
And they won't get it, until they decide to have an adult attitude about the most important thing we do as citizens of the United States.
2
I don't disagree, but where are the examples such as Rush labeling people RINOs, or Mitch McConnell saying his goal is to make Obama a one-term president, or, now, with republicans trying to run Mitt Romney out of the party?
Why is Conservatism so homogeneous, if not for the network you just disdained? I think it is. Interesting that Bret doesn't go into that part.
4
great insight vis a vis the uniformity of GOP thought. this is why I read the comments.
Great point about how Trump's support is under-represented in polls. Those of us who want to see a Democrat in the White House and a majority Democrat Senate (very important) next year would do well to remember how we were fooled by polls last time.
2
If we want to endlessly replay the 2016 election, I think it is far more likely that the vote was effectively skewed by people who did not vote or "undervoted" by not filling in the their choice for president, than it was by so-called "whisper voters". That this was done in micro targeted districts of major urban areas where a robust vote would have tipped the scales the other way, should be enough of a clue to what happened.
This is a strategy that has a poor chance of working twice the same way. So what's next?
I try to treat everyone with respect no matter their political viewpoints, but when issues are so inflamed that logical and civil discourse is impossible, keeping silent is probably the best course.
I currently play in a jazz group that includes two Trump people. We have a good time playing music and politics is not discussed.
1
I live in North Carolina and work in the construction industry. It is pretty easy to pick out many of the Trump supporters. I assure you they are not all racists and bigots with many ardent Trump supporters acknowledging that "the wall" is more about theatre and less about substance.
I am pretty sure they can also pick me out of a lineup as a progressive.
However, I do have quite a few friends and associates who do not fit into a neat MAGA box, voted for Trump, and may do so again. They have no interest in attending a MAGA rally and are reluctant to say out loud that they voted for Trump. We can enjoy spirited political discussions because we have some measure of fondness and/or respect for one another. They can see through Trump's lies, agree he is petty and vindictive, and do not support all of his policies. However, many also benefited from the tax cuts, their 401ks have soared, and they tend to approve of either the dismantling of government or the many judicial appointments. Some of them state that they would be willing to consider one of the democratic candidates...unless that candidate is Bernie Sanders.
2
I live in NY, I detest trump. However, if Bernie is the nominee, I’ll be making all “correct” the social noises “vote blue”, but behind the curtain I’ll write in something else which is likely a vote for trump. I know a lot of people like me, so does everyone else, they maybe saying they will vote for Bernie, but in reality Americans will not vote for a socialist given any other choice. See his massive drop in support in New Hampshire. Against Clinton he won by almost 30 points, this time he barely won, specially once the second and third were viable choices.
3
@DS
"However, if Bernie is the nominee, I’ll be making all “correct” the social noises “vote blue”, but behind the curtain I’ll write in something else which is likely a vote for trump"
So you're ashamed to admit that you'll vote for Trump. Have you any insight into why you're ashamed? Is it because you know he's a terrible, unethical, greedy man and utterly unfit for the job?
Perhaps you should do a bit more thinking about what your vote for Trump will actually mean for your country and your fellow Americans. And eventually, for you.
1
Yes you can bet the result will come down to probably even less than 300K of voters in swing states. And when the results show Trump losing by any margin, he will contest it, refuse to concede, deny the results, cast blame, invent fake numbers and say he actually won. The sure to happen errors, mistakes, lost ballots will be used by him to convince his supporters that the deep state is out to get him.
We are headed for a showdown this November. The only thing more serious is coronavirus.
3
In the last few months,many of theN..Y.Times conservative opinion writers have written strong condemnation articles towards president Trump. Yet Trump is Trump only because of strong support from his followers. It is hard to just condemn the president and not the many who agree with his words and politics.
2
"...the biggest whisper network of all: the one involving inner flashes of sympathy, frequently tipping into support at the ballot box, for President Trump."
I do believe you're overstating your case, Mr. Stephens. Trump supporters are all not shrinking violets. Most of them are vocal, although I suspect they don't take to Twitter, as Trump does, to denounce their detractors, or opine on things on which they are not experts.
Writing about the narrow Trump victory in three states--Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin--Philip Bump of the Washington Post wrote, "Trump won those states by 0.2, 0.7 and 0.8 percentage points, respectively — and by 10,704, 46,765 and 22,177 votes."
Not exactly "biggest whisper network." Not to mention that Trump lost the popular vote by nearly 3 million votes, of which 1.7 million came from Trump's home state and Clinton's adopted state of New York. Now that is the biggest whisper network, if there was one.
He and his party lost big in the midterm elections, despite scaring the country about the imminent invasion of immigrants from south of the border and sending the army to quell that imagined invasion.
Too, Trump's approval ratings have not passed the 50% threshold, remaining below it throughout his presidency and only approaching 49% in one poll recently.
After his acquittal, Trump is unleashed, trying to use DOJ to help his friends and trying to "get" his detractors.
Hopefully, he'll pay a price for his transgression.
12
I wouldn't call it "fear". I would call it "indignation." Now Trump supporters are supposed to ignore the strong economy and their own optimism about their futures to indulge the democrats in their vendetta against him. Sorry, no.
3
@AACNY
Economies come and go, as this one will. Trump is borrowing at what a member of the Fed is saying is an unsustainable rate, only to achieve the same growth rate as the last President did. We are supposed to accept a modern monarchy for this?
7
@RG
You're correct.
Although nothing to do with Trump, it appears the coronavirus' impact on world economy will be significant, as China is still reeling from it and the US, like many countries, depend on China for various things.
@RG
"Modern monarchy" is something only someone whose thinking has been distorted by animus would claim.
This is the kind of thinking that demonstrates how out of touch and hysterical people have become. Our democracy is ending because they despise this president.
1
Whenever movements for social change are effective, those on the losing side consider themselves to be victims, who are being disrespected, unfairly, by their opponents. The religious right, losing the fight against gay marriage and LBGTQ rights, believes that it is under assault. President Trump is their champion because despite his personal lack of morality, or respect for the constitution or rule of law, they see him as fighting for them. This focus on being the victim, however, relieves the losers of the responsibility to truly assess whether or not their views are correct, and few actually undertake any serious examination of why the broader society is moving away from their perspectives. Some Trump voters flock to him because they believe he, thus they, are the ones under unfair assault. In a similar vein, southerners fighting to maintain the immoral system of slavery believed fervently that their very way of life was being attacked, that they were disrespected by the moralists from the north. Many of those feelings linger still. Well, they were right, But they were being attacked because they were wrong, very wrong. People who support this President are being attacked because if you truly value what has made this country great, supporting a President like Trump is wrong. Mr. Stephens, by playing the victim card, wants to avoid that debate.
8
@Jon
But according to Mr Trump he is the most victimized person who exists.
I agree with most of what you commented on. However to behave in a manner that disrespects those who are expressing their opinions is wrong. Using their actions and violent responses to different views is behaving as they want. That way they can make you an aggressor.
I disagree with most of what comes from Mr Trump and I agree he has the right to his opinions. But as POTUS he is too represent all of us so his opinions frequently are rabble rousing instead of representing all of us.
Just an old white man's opinion..
This piece reminds me of something I read about the 1972 re-election of Nixon during the Vietnam war. Few people would admit to voting for him but everybody did.
3
@Henry's boy
John Podhoretz revisited this back in 2011:
"The clearest example of the bizarrely naive quality of hermetic liberal provincialism was attributed to the New Yorker film critic Pauline Kael almost 40 years ago, and has been discussed in right-wing circles ever since.
.
.
.
On Friday, on the New Yorker’s website, the magazine’s film editor Richard Brody offers what may be the first accurate version of the quote I’ve ever seen (I’m assuming it’s accurate because it comes from the New Yorker itself):
'Pauline Kael famously commented, after the 1972 Presidential election, "I live in a rather special world. I only know one person who voted for Nixon. Where they are I don’t know. They’re outside my ken. But sometimes when I’m in a theater I can feel them.'"
2
Other than a few brief hints, Mr. Stephens and most of these comments ignore the huge two "elephants in the room" that permeate the essence of Trump's popularity; the first and largest is racism, pure and simple, and the second, a bit more subtle but equally pernicious, is the willful ignorance of facts. Enuff said.
11
@Tom Bleakley
Sorry, that elephant exists only in your room. It doesn't exist out in the real world. If Trump is "racist", he's a "racist" in the mold of LBJ.
1
Well said Mr. Stephens, This is exactly the message of Pete Buttigieg and why I am voting for him. I feel the far left has been too insulting and too anti-religion and faith. I have a few members of my own family of sixty and seventy year old siblings who would be afraid to speak up for fear of being crucified by other family members. They are part of this whisper network. My brothers are Republicans not because they are bigots or members of the clan, they simply feel strongly about less government and abortion and religious liberty. The far left megaphones practically shame you if you go the church or read the bible. Mayor Pete is the first candidate to say religion does not belong to a political party. I have been gently encouraging them to look at the moderate left candidates. Again the only candidate I see who has been welcoming former Republicans into his movement is Mayor Pete. The Trump haters need to move on, stop the attacks and put the right man on the ticket as the nominee. I live next to a very active large Catholic school and parish, and today I will proudly put out my Pete sign. Mayor Pete has the intellect, compassion and inclusiveness to lead this country.
Thanks again Mr. Stephens, I am always drawn to your articles.
3
People did whisper out of fear when a master, Lord, or a Captain Bligh controlled their very lives and survival in the past. However, today most whisper because they are uncertain of the reality of the situation or simply due to shame. Trump supporters be they voters or elected to office, have immersed themselves in that world of shame fearful of reality. The Left has not given up on free speech and are not pursuing a cause that denies the Right free speech. It is that the Left is unwilling to succumb to a world of twisted "logic", false narratives, and lies pedaled by cheats, greed, and a "magical" past. When the Left defends free speech through word and action, it done so in the quest of rights, freedoms, and equality for all. The Right should be challenged and stopped when their use of free speech becomes dangerous, cruel, and unfair as it pursues causes that demean and divide Americans to reduce rights, freedoms, and equality. Mr. Stevens, it is laughable and deeply troubling of how far the Right and their deep state has come to suggest that "Even a president who called the media the “enemy of the people” has a case to make that his opponents are more hostile to the letter and spirit of the First Amendment than he is." That view and others like it must be SHOUTED down and the assault on the Constitution by Trump must be ended November 3rd.
7
Republicans have taken up the "banner of free speech" because the bill of rights provides an effective tool to enforce draconian conservative policies that can't be achieved politically or legally through the legislative process.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;..."
Conservative lawyers routinely ignore the first clause and focus solely on the second.
"... or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Meanwhile, the press is at war with the Trump administration and people have a government hostile to their grievances. Trump is silencing far more speech through executive abuse than anyone on the left. I need only mention the Vindman twins to prove my point.
The only argument that possibly carries water is the protection to "peaceably" assemble. I think we can agree the online community represents a public assembly. You don't have the right to deny someone the public space with virulent, personal, verbal assault, moral or otherwise. However, once again, the Republican President is the poster child for abusing this protection.
No Mr. Stephens. The left has not ceded the moral high ground on free speech. Quite frankly, I think this election should take place on an open ballot. Democrats would win in a landslide if Trump supporters were forced to face their communities honestly.
4
@Andy
There's much truth in your comment. I learned over the past three years that even though I couldn't complete college and I had to make do and advance by myself. The two things I learned are:
I am one of those Mr Trump decries as the "Elites" who reject him and his beliefs. I truly believe in a level playing field for all of us.
I am more of a Democrat than I thought as watching the dismantling of our Government, Rights and Responsibilities, the demeaning of the "Fourth Estate" ( the media) and the rise of the screeching Right Wing annoys me more than I ever believed it should.
Realizing the above I shocked myself but I also believe that as in the movie "Roadhouse, Opinions vary". So I walk away when a conversation starts getting out of hand. Folk are entitled to their opinions and to voice them. Violence against others with opposing views is just nasty.
However even though Mr Trump has the right to hold and discuss his views as POTUS he is supposed to represent all of us. That's not happening, and I am dreading the end result of what he does. America does not need to be "White again" that's the road to destruction.
Just an old white man's opinion....
1
I'll concede that a few Trump voters maybe be dismayed and confused about their various economic plights and perhaps misinformed about what tax cuts for the wealthy actually do. Most of them, though, at least the ones I know or have met, are racist, militantly nationalistic, and isolationist, yearning for a past that never was. I have no more time for or patience with them.
9
I actually think the reason we have Trump is the exact opposite— we don’t have people with the courage to stand up and defend their beliefs, instead keeping it to themselves and seeking refuge in whisper networks. Citizenship demands courage, not safe spaces.
Freedom of speech doesn’t grant you the right to a friendly audience— it demands of you that you speak unpopular opinions regardless of what everyone else thinks. It is not my obligation to creat a safe space for any and all opinions, it is my obligation to speak my opinions whether the rest of the world agrees or not. What we lack is not civility but the courage to speak out regardless of civility.
If we had more of that, perhaps sunlight (the best disinfectant), would Donuts job on closeted bigotry. Perhaps more importantly, we’d have more Senators and White House staffers more willing to do the courageous thing regarding Trump.
We don’t need safer spaces for any opinions, we need more people for whom conscience is more important than getting along.
7
@Alejandro F.
Would someone pass this message on to Sen. Susan Collins. Thanks.
"Whisper networks ought to have no place in the land of the free."
What land of the free is Stephens referring to? The one where its leader attempts to have his vocal opponents investigated, tried and imprisoned?
And if not turned over to the tender mercies of the Justice Dept., viciously characterized in twitters and other pronouncements for their temerity in speaking freely.
In this political climate, "free speech" is quickly becoming best exercised in a whisper, as is customary in countries ruled by an autocrat.
13
I live in a conservative area and it has been made clear to me many times that there will be consequences if I express any liberal viewpoint.
I really wish we could have open discussions with one another.
4
@John Daly
Come to New York. Everyone assumes you're liberal and hate the republican president. It's the same every time a republican is in the White House, by the way. Same old hatred. Same old hubris.
2
I'm liberal, live in MI, and would be happy to talk politics with you. I find trump supporters fascinating.
1
This issue is a good deal more complicated than Mr. Stephens allows for. I am conflicted about how I feel about Trump and his supporters. In principle, within the context of political debate in a democracy, I agree with what Mr. Stephens is saying in this column. The problem is, I'm not sure what the context is now and whether or not this is just a political debate.
I am not sure whether or not Trump and a sizable portion of his base believe in democracy - that liberals and Democrats are entitled to a voice in how they are governed. If, by their actions as well as their words, they would deny me the right to vote, corrupt election results, and use the judicial system to harass or imprison political opponents, this is not a political debate. It's an attempt to overthrow our system of government.
I've lived through a lot of political turmoil - McCarthy and the John Birch Society's red scares, the civil rights movement and race riots, and the Vietnam war. But I have never been so unsure about the viability of our democracy or thought there may be people who are a real threat to our system of government.
I believe the Nazis and white supremacists had the right to march and make their case in Charlottesville. But I don't believe I should respect them, have empathy for them or hear them out. As for Trump and his base, I don't know how to treat them. Is this just a political debate or are Trump and his supporters a real threat to my rights and our system of government.
25
I’m sure there are lots who won’t ever admit that they pulled the lever for Trump, but did so because their social , cultural, business or religious convictions allowed them to look away while, as long as behind the scenes they could ensure judges were conservative, taxes got lowered, business rules got relaxed and so forth.
But if you look at his core base - the ones that go to his rally’s, then how do you counter that? The only mutual sugar high that Trump, and his audience are getting from those rally’s is fueled by unbridled hate.
Show me any of his rally’s - certainly in recent months - where he has proposed even one positive policy about anything, that isn’t largesse.
I’ve come to the opinion that mainstream conservatives need to do some serious soul searching and figure out how they retake their party back from a cultist leader.
In the interim, Bloomberg is probably our best hope of detrumpifying the country, and restarting civil discourse.
Hopefully before we tear ourselves apart.
6
Bret, I respect what you are trying to say to us. But, truly, it is easier said than done, most especially after these past several weeks of mockery wrought upon our Constitution, law, and justice. What we have recently witnessed have been more nails hammered into that coffin in which lies a democratic republic. For over three years, it has been one egregious and even heinous act - or word - after another, usually spewing from Donald Trump himself. Yet his Cabinet, to wit, Barr and Pompeo, his Republican Senate, and his rabid MAGA family have become more relentless and vehement in their support of their president. Now I ask you, how on earth can we treat those above with respect when in my heart and soul I feel they are not worthy of it? I will smile and wear beige, and be civil. But I am unable to empathize or certainly understand that which I can neither fathom nor accept.
322
@Kathy Lollock Bret is advocating treating ordinary voters with respect, not necessarily members of his administration or GOP people in congress. A lot of comments here seem to show misunderstanding of the difference.
23
@Phil: I would say that some ordinary voters did an extraordinarily damaging thing in electing a man they knew to be immoral and corrupt, having seen and heard with their own eyes and ears his behavior on the campaign trail. I would say there is nothing ordinary in this at all. The results of their extraordinary behavior, in many cases against their own interests, will be felt for decades.
38
@Kathy Lollock
I feel as Kathy does - cannot cannot fathom or accept.
It truly bewilders me how some I know and have supposed are decent and reasonably bright people can tolerate, even adore the openly crudest, most ignorant and selfish public figure in our history.
Yes, I get that the conflict of truth and alt-truth has power.
And yes, I know there are those who are naturally drawn to this administration because their big issue is saving foetuses, or hatred of Others (of different faiths or skin color or accent or sex). But there are those who seem drawn to this new far right Via prejudice against, but adoration for the very openness of crudeness, of the new OKness of rudeness, and of hate.
Is this not new in America? Is it a common trait so many kept hidden until Trump made it acceptable - and without daring to copy the behavior, rally round it with pleasure?
Or are many really confused by the conflict of truth in this crude new world?
I really still don’t get it...
28
We can have differing opinions about "call-out culture." Actually, I do share some of your concerns.
But this is not a free speech issue.
Until someone gets arrested for a racist tweet or an off color joke, pleased stop trying to cloak your concerns, valid or not, as a defense of free speech. People have always, ALWAYS, built community standards for behavior and enforced those standards through social sanction. If we want to discuss those standards in an honest way, leave "free speech" out of it.
Seriously, I could just as easily describe your criticisms of call-out culture as a war against someone else's "free speech," and if I did, I'd be just as wrong as you are now.
367
@Revelwoodie
How many times does Bret call out "liberals?"
5
Revelwoodie is exactly right. When we speak of “free speech” we speak of speech free of government interference (or fear of it). The government is not involved in the “cancel culture.” Rather, the cancel culture is is an example of fighting it out in the marketplace of ideas, albeit (and this is where I would agree with Mr. Stephens) in an overzealous, mean-spirited way.
18
@Michael Greenfield What troubles me is that public attacks that cause someone to lose their job and livelihood ought to be subject to the kind of due process that is used in criminal trials. It seems wrong to abandon fundamentals of justice like the accused's right to examine evidence, to offer his or her defense, and have the issue decided by an impartial judge or jury. Surely we don't want an angry mob to indict, try, convict, and punish someone with no guidelines to include fairness and proportionate punishment?
7
Thank you, Brett, for your admonition on how to beat Trump:
"By treating Trump voters with respect.... By acknowledging... that not everyone you disagree with is a bigot. By listening, not denouncing; empathizing, not ridiculing; understanding, not dismissing."
It is always good to be reminded of the Golden Rule. Always. However, I think this is just 1/3 of the winning formula for this election.
The bigger element needed for a Democratic victory, will be turnout.
Not just Democrats voting in high numbers, but Republicans and Independents who realize that, with Trump, we face the abyss.
274
@Mark Keller
Can you imagine even one Trump voter listening, acknowledging and respecting a Democratic voter?
This is how we lose. Republicans play to win at all costs while Democrats haplessly strive to be fair and generous and it almost never works.
Trump voters aren’t children who need to have their hands held and we aren’t their mommies or therapists.
Politics has always been ugly but this is a whole different level. If we want to defeat Trump we have to treat it as such.
141
@Hugh CC
"Can you imagine even one Trump voter listening, acknowledging and respecting a Democratic voter?"
Yes, I've had productive discussions with several. Not all Trump supporters are MAGA-rally fanatics. Some are reasonably well informed (and yes, sometimes ill-informed), rational folks.
Some of these rational people have become increasingly uncomfortable and/or disturbed by Trump's behavior -- political and personal -- over the last 3 years.
With those sorts, helping them find better sources of information that counter lies and misinformation can be productive. Getting them to look often requires taking their concerns seriously.
If they refuse to look/listen then yes, I don't waste further effort.
19
@Hugh CC "Can you imagine even one Trump voter listening, acknowledging and respecting a Democratic voter? "
I cannot... and Republican leaders know how to get that shrinking base to turn out for the vote. In addition, because they know that time is against them, they will continue to cheat and steal as they have for years (gerrymandering, red shift, vote suppressing policies, hacked counting machines, etc...). The way to victory for Democrats is to overwhelm these shady practices through record participation in the coming elections.
26
I’ll say it yet again, the tyranny of the left is just as bad as the tyranny of the right. If the left continues as it has my fear is that President Trump will be guaranteed another term. The extremes are leaving moderates of every stripe without a party.
9
Stephens: " By listening, not denouncing; empathizing, not ridiculing; understanding, not dismissing." Those are wonderful attributes, and in normal circumstances (with a normal Republican opponent), that would be an honorable way to conduct a campaign. BUT there's nothing normal about the upcoming political campaign. Are Democrats to listen, to empathize and to understand while Trump constantly lies, destroys the reputations of anyone opposed to him and spins conspiracy theories all to the delight of his base. I'm not certain of the best way to beat one of the most amoral persons on the planet, but I am quite certain that if Trump is reelected, he will only double down on efforts to punish anyone who dares speak up in opposition. Free speech may be a thing of the past.
10
I personally know a few people who were "secret" Trump voters. If one of the socialist running becomes the Democratic candidate, I'll likely become one myself. There is no doubt that the progressive left in today's America is intolerant and only interested in free speech when it suits their purpose. The moderates and conservatives majority (yes we are the clear majority despite the spin in the media) need to be strong and stand up to this assault on justice and free speech.
34
@Robert
Lets see what the secret Trump voters are willing say out in public after 2024 if Trump wins this year. Trump is a loose canon and he's been blowing holes in the Constitution.
7
@Robert
There are extremists of every persuasion but the excesses of the left pale in comparison to the vile right-wing conspiracy theories, like Pizzagate and QAnon, that proliferate on the right. It is a favorite technique of Fox and other conservative media to scour the country for isolated leftist idiocies and blow them up into an "assault on justice and free speech." I have spent my entire career in some of the institutional bastions of liberalism, and although I have eclectic views that balance out to "moderate," I have never once had an incident or complaint that inhibited my freedom of expression. Unless you're deliberately trying to insult and provoke people, fears of leftist intolerance are way overblown.
53
@Robert If conservatives are the majority then why do most Americans agree that having guns is bad and that they should be banned. Conservatives pride themselves in having guns. Also, Sanders isn't a socialist. He's a democratic socialist. Secondly, it is disgusting to vote for a person who has raped women and is a racist. Although Sanders isn't perfect he is 100% better than Trump
15
Quite so, Bret. I have serious misgivings about President Trump, but I have nothing but disdain for the righteous scolds that tell me what I can and cannot think, say or do.
As long as I'm deplorable, I'm supporting Trump.
4
@Joe W
Spite, meet face.
2
Righteous scolds telling you what to do?
Sounds like right wing Evangelicals to me.
2
Mr. Stephens asks how many voted for Trump "out of disdain for the army of snickering moralists (at the time including me) telling them that a vote for Trump was unpardonable?" I don't know. What I do know is that voting for a candidate purely out of spite, and for no other reason, is childish, irresponsible, and disgraceful. I will not take Mr. Stephens's advice to treat such voters with "respect."
7
"People who freely share the most intimate details of their sex lives with near-strangers think twice about sharing some of their political views with old friends."
The best sentence i have read in recent months. Completely sums up the madness, that seemingly, in a blink of an eye, we have found ourselves in.
5
My dog and I go on long walks in the park where we meet up with many Trump supporters.
I always try to listen respectfully to people who tell me that Trump is a great man.
They usually hurry quickly away when I tell them that it is not too soon to impeach him again.
6
@A. Stanton my neighbor got her dog a Trump doll chew toy for Xmas! Then the family delighted in watching their dog chew the squeak out of it.
1
There seems to be a confusion here. First, free speech only protects you from government censorship. Second, free speech does not mean consequence-free speech. People are entitled to advocate any views they like, even disgusting ones like white nationalism. However, they’re not entitled to not suffering any social repercussions for their advocacy of said views.
10
Mr. Stephens says "it’s worth asking whether the very fact that a vote for Trump was supposed to be shameful" ... Shameful to whom? Here in rural Ohio a vote for Clinton was supposed by many of my neighbors to be shameful.
Can't Mr. Stephens ever realize that there's variety in this country?
5
There's no question that the puritanical censor in the minds of too many liberals is not only a threat to freedom but also a barrier to enlightened discussion. Nonetheless, holding Donald Trump up as an example of someone unfairly beleaguered and worthy of "inner flashes of sympathy" is a mighty big stretch. When we argue serial liars and those who treat reason and law with contempt are worthy of sympathy, we're far past the line that separates a civil society from Hobbes' "war of all against all." Some of us are worthy of condemnation and undeserving of sympathy. Donald Trump leads the pack.
7
The majorities where Americans live has defined their politics. The talking heads use these handles to absurd ends. The urban vote, the rural vote, the whatever racial vote, the economic vote, the liberal vote, the conservative vote,etc.
It's simpler than that, and chopping up the human universe into sizable pieces pits one against the other. Where you live and how much you earn combined with ill thought out biases leads to whether representative government suits you or not.
It boils down to, based on one inherent human error or another. Is government a necessary evil or not? Being human says it is. Saying it isn't fails logic. The real trick is not dismissing the institution, but, by voting, to ensure it is well administered. That is a work in progress and where the rubber meets the road.
I, for one, would love to see Trump's campaign that America's economy has never been better.
Trump bankrupted 6 companies serially, but not before cash stripping the companies with bonuses and salaries upfront. In criminal law, that is referred to fraudulent conveyance.
I know Trump did not attend the fames Wharton Graduate School of Business, but rather was a two year transfer student to the college. Yet, even that level of education seems sufficient to calculate debt service versus business cash flow if one wasn't a fraud.
The US economy has never been better?
Well, when you count the massive trillion dollar deficits, and the badgered easy money monetary policy stimulus, it sure looks like one of the 6 Trump company bankruptcies built on levergae - only to crash and burn all investors, creditors, vendors, and workers.
Everyone but Trump - who is cash stripping the US Treasury presently.
The trade deficit has reached record levels given Trump's asinine tariff policy. This directly contradicts his predictions, but what else is new?
The man has never told the truth, even if he knew it.
14
"forbidden fruit"? Really?
Try a Trump rally, the endless lies, the attacks.
We all could use a bit of the tree of knowledge. Giving in to one's worst impulses and promoting lies about climate - to take one example - is civilization ending. If people are titillated by the nasty, that's no excuse.
8
I believe there are many voters with silent anger, anger at Democrats who constantly sound morally superior to others, finding fault with those on the other side. Since the word is that you've got to be stupid or a high school dropout to support Trump, these voters keep quiet. Their voice will be heard on Election Day.
3
Back in the days of old, lots of people living under autocratic kings used whisper networks (they didn’t call them that) as a means of survival. One false move, one errant statement, and you could have a thumb or a hand or your head chopped off. Better to maintain a low profile and avoid eye contact with your betters.
Trump would love that kind of environment, would he not? He believes he’s king of the land, correct, and he wants his subjects to bow down in total supplication.Those who oppose him better learn to keep a low profile and confine themselves to whisper networks. If they want to avoid being scorned, or have a thumb chopped, or get caught in Trump’s crosshairs.
1
Wait a second; their guy is president; they control the senate. How is it that when they speak I need to take care and listen attentively, but when I speak I get kicked in the teeth?
18
What would you do with the large subgroup of misinformed Trump supporters, who are susceptible to the dogwhistles, fear mongering and finger pointing, who find that he provides cover for their own prejudices and bigotry while allowing them to absolve themselves and their fellow travellers of the need to think? There are not good people on both sides. They are, in a word, deplorable.
9
The most censorious pols are Trump supporters who echo Stephen Miller’s first pronouncement that his President’s authority shall not be questioned. The open warfare against critics of Trump’s demagoguery find themselves demonized daily by his sycophants and power mongers, and yet again Stephens hones in on Trump’s opposition as if Trump’s re-election depends on their political wiles as opposed to the depressing and destructive corruption of the Trump administration in nearly every aspect of our national life. Advice to the Democrats should be far from Stephens’ mind; instead he should be writing every day of the danger to the Republic of a Trump endgame. I would vote for me ex-wife’s irksome dog rather than Trump; and I would vote for Bret’s silent goldfish rather than Trump. When the corrupt Blankfein who engineered the collapse of the global economy across two decades warns us of Sanders I know we are living in a dark deadly version of a Seinfeld episode. There’s nothing to recommend a second term for Trump or his ongoing Republican Senate other than the evangelical end of days. The Rapture’s seven blasts of the trumpet may not select those the devoted believe will be raised up. Democrats telling the truth about Trump and naked unregulated greed that will kill life on this planet is either reason enough to sweep away Republicans or life as we have lived it is over.
5
Even in 2016 the idea that many Trump voters were "quiet" because of Outrage Culture was untrue. Today it is meritless.
I spoke with many "quiet" Trump voters in 2016. None craved "forbidden fruit". They chose Trump because they feared, or hated, people who were different than them far more than they cared about democracy and our republic. (A similar false Conservative narrative, that these Trump voters were motivated by economic anxiety, was already demolished by a half-dozen major studies showing that bigotry motivated them).
These people voted for Trump because of his white Christian Nationalism. They were quiet because they knew it was objectively wrong and contradicted everything they supposedly believed in.
How do you vote for Trump yet still say you're decent and respect the rule of law? You can't so you don't. You remain silent and pull the lever. In pulling the lever you're knowingly destroying America, yet you do it anyway.
I've written many pieces about how awful Outrage Culture is, but it didn't create "quiet" Trump voters. They'd have voted for Trump even if the left was filled with choir boys, because those choir boys would still be black, brown, Jewish, Muslim, Gay,….
Thanks to Trump and the GOP we're now little different than Hungary; a right-wing authoritarian state masquerading as a democracy. Those who quietly voted for Trump did so because they wanted a right-wing authoritarian state. Antipathy to left-wing Outrage Culture was at best secondary.
16
Excuse me I am having a difficult time understanding any of this and some of my writing is incoherent.
Do blue America and red America share any common goals?
I know what free speech is, we have free speech in Quebec. There is not free speech in America from the first time we visited my wife's childhood home I was told to keep my mouth shut. Democrats were called socialists 80 years ago and they're still called socialists. Here in Quebec we are passing our Freedom From Religion laws which draws passionate ire from both America's left and right. We don't want our children exposed to superstitious nonsense regardless of how long its been common practice and since we are a humanist society we are all our children.
Free speech works for us because we are not afraid to hear new and different ideas but our ideas are human ideas not ideas ordained by the gods.
Somebody forgot about separation of church and state and that is why free speech is a meaningless discussion.
4
Anyone trying to figure out why voters vote as they do has never talked to voters about their preferences and why.
1
Not everyone who supports the Trump presidency is a bigot? There are too many clear identifiers that suggests otherwise; one big one being that there's virtually nothing positive that has resulted during his presidency that wasn't kick started and already underway during the last. Of course, there is the argument that Trump's support of traditional Republican policies with judges and taxes have been a success; but a convincing argument can be made that these policies, which promote a particular white male economic and cultural dominance, is itself based on bigotry. Bigotry is so deeply baked into the American psyche that it's often hard for us to acknowledge it in ourselves.
2
Right.
Whisper voters favoured Trump over Clinton "two-to-one". That's why he lost the popular vote...and that's why his electoral win was less than the third-party votes for Jill Stein or the Bernie supporters who stayed home. Trump didn't win the election, Clinton lost it.
If he wins again in 2020 with sympathetic "whisper" support, after his incompetent and vindictive actions have been on display for three years, I'm afraid America will get what it deserves. Buckle up.
3
I would like to whisper something to Trump's whisper network.
Trump lost the popular vote in 2016 by 3,000,000.
He "won" the Electoral College because his jailed campaign manager Manafort shared internal polling data with Putin and the GRU.
They used Russian statecraft and stolen Cambridge Analytica data from Facebook to target just enough voters in 4 purple states - 72,000 - to claim an Electoral College victory.
Forewarned is forearmed. Democrats can legally use domestic artificial intelligence to ensure the Electoral College looks like the popular vote. Neural network clustering, machine leaning and other artificial intelligence techniques defending the Electoral College relative to the popular vote is critical.
This will demonstrate no party has an advantage from the Electoral College, it is the Achilles heel of democracy, and is a relic of a bygone era.
Tactics are essential to save the Republic from a Russian asset installed to destroy the rule of law, freedom, democracy, NATO and the Constitution in America.
Trump must be defeated with every resource available - every tactic at hand.
Speaker Pelosi demonstrated persuasively that The Republican led Senate is no check to Trump, the Judiciary is no check to Trump, and America is on the edge of a Russian style kleptocacy where life and wealth depends on fealty to Trump.
This is war. The Russian attack on our sovereign elections was the opening salvo. The resolution will require steely resolve.
9
Humiliation is the gift that keeps on giving.
The Hatfields and McCoys feuded murderously for generations about some half-forgotten insult.
Many beliefs are deplorable, but labeling people as "deplorables" demonstrated contempt for people who have gradually fused their identities to Trump's. He's become an avatar for many. Every attempt at humiliating him feels to many of his followers as disrespect for them.
4
Shush please!
The Trump whisperers don't need to talk out loud, the Trump rally goers more than compensate for their meekness.
Trump is their Springsteen; they get so worked up over god knows what, I'd not go within miles of their mash-pit. I've often wondered if there's data showing a spike in 'road-rage' incidents post-Trump rallies.
What do they do to calm down; go to a Def Leppard concert?
1
One hopes (and I believe) that secret voters are in all camps. There should be a fair contingent of voters who are telling their family, friends and colleagues that Trump is a great, can-do, America-first president and who will vote to get rid of a blustering proto-tyrant.
Let's focus on the biggest conservative lie stated by Stephens in this column:
"I would also guess that the number has only grown as the censorious left has become more aggressive and promiscuous in its condemnations. No wonder the administration has taken up the banner of free speech."
Please provide evidence that "free speech" is under attack by the censorious left. As another commentator points out, who has been sent to jail recently, after exercising his/her for expressing something offensive, or racist or threatening? Since when has Cadet Bone-spur (or any other conservative) been censured or arrested for blasting out bigoted or inappropriate language? Not even someone like Alex Jones has been condemned by people who should know better. My bet is, he's supported firmly by those on the "right."
In fact, if you do a little research you'll find that hate crimes have increased since the election of Cadet Bone-spur and in those places where he conducts his rallies, the FBI has reported a significant rise in hate crimes.
I could make a case that the huge right-wing media Fox, Limbaugh, etc. spends very little time allowing liberals equal time to speak their mind. Who, for example, is a foil for propagandists such as Hannity? The kind of speech used by conservative celebrities such as Coulteris more like a brand rather than an expression of genuine ideas. Why should we try to understand and have compassion for the things we liberals find, simply put, unacceptable?
7
If there is anything that we have discovered over the past three abysmal years of the Trump presidency, it’s that, as in all “cults,” you are all in or all out. Has there sometimes been nasty over-reaction in the “purity circles” on the anti-Trump side? Certainly, but there has also been plenty of push back from within that same side.
Where is the push back within the other side when Trump clearly crosses a line in telling demonstrable lies, taunting his opponents with puerile insults and flouting the most basic tenets of our Constitution? There is none. Republicans politicians either deny wrongdoing or, like Susan Collins, offer mealy-mouthed excuses.
The zealots at Trump rallies always cheer the loudest the cruder his rhetoric, and the more appeal he makes to bigotry, xenophobia, misogyny - but hey, at least they don’t whisper!
3
This freedom of speech stuff is rich coming from a guy who tried to get a professor fired for using his right to free speech. How about writing about Mitch Romney, who was threatened with physical violence if he spoke at a conservative meeting?
The fact is there isn't a broad middle swatch of neutral voters in the Presidential race. Each side has morphed into basically zealotry. You either against Trump or for him. You can't persuade Trump voters. You can't reason with them. As your fellow columnist Thomas Edsell has written, the Trump voter inhabits an alternate false reality of facts, which are provided by
Fox News. He, the Trump voter, feels it's perfectly fine to lie for the cause. The only way to beat Trump is to vote him out with more votes than the other side. That is it.
3
“ Whisper networks ought to have no place in the land of the free “. Bret, I agree with you more than any of the other
Conservative Writers here. A whisper network carries a strong stench of “ gossiping women “. Intentionally or not, that is hurtful to me. Sometimes, the whisper network is a strong tool for we Women to share, learn, provide support and especially problem solve. Maybe you’ve had a bad week, or this was a rush Job. I don’t know, but I’m disappointed.
Please do Better.
I know a LOT of people who didn't vote for Trump but didn't vote for Hillary. This time around, they'll be voting for the Democrat. Hillary just had a ton of negatives. Of course, another Hurriance Sandy the week before election wouldn't hurt.
This economy will soon collapse.
My head hurts. We are veering into fascism because Democrats aren’t nice enough? The party of self-doubt and self-censure is hereby urged to tamp down all the stuff about democracy and fairness because it might offend authoritarians!
America’s political history is rife with violence, not to mention corruption and raw bigotry. Oh, and in the 1860’s, slaughter. But now, Bret Stephens warns us, we had best shut up or risk a political disagreement with people who want to burn it all down. The latter triumphed in 1930’s Germany because the majority were afraid of them — and, in what was believed to be reason and politeness, kept quiet.
6
@phillygirl Spot on. Thanks.
I'll take a shot at free speech. The Democrats spend too much time on TV talking about race and gender. There. Now, I still will vote blue if it can breath.
The supposed "censorius left" is tiny and mild compared to the violent and hate-filled right. Trumpworld is not whispering. They are yelling and taking control. Hate crimes are way up.
The "left" doesn't have the Koch network and Bill Barr. Rush Limbaugh has a Presidential Medal of Freedom. Trump fires anyone who crosses him. "Having suffered no consequences for such acts, leaders move on to bigger and more audacious targets. .... In his post-impeachment rage, Trump wanted vengeance, and he wanted us to know it. There was no one inside his Administration to stop him."
The NRA is not "whispering" to promote ready access to high-powered, military-grade killing machines as simple self defense. Every time it is suggested that being able to kill and maim people with ease should not be an absolute sacred right without any intelligent care the right goes ballistic.
How about abortion? Fetuses need families, mothers, communities, health care, financial support, and love once they are born. But apparently life stops at birth.
In religion, spirituality and community care have been replaced by blame, greed, and exclusion. Religious leaders who ask for compassion are given short shrift.
Bret Stephens take note of the overt nastiness of TrumpWorld, maybe attend a Trump rally, before he claims the left is repressing freedom of speech.
Voter suppression, intimidation, and cheating are just fine, as long as they are winning.
10
Bret's column illustrates why freedom of speech, and the democratic system which cannot survive without it, are so difficult to sustain over a long period of time. Differences of opinion foster the open-mindedness which makes a free society so attractive but at the same time highly volatile. Inevitable clashes over ideas can remain a positive force only when restrained by shared values with respect to the dignity of each individual and the principle of equal rights for all.
Political discourse in this country has become so destructive because a minority of Americans at each end of the ideological spectrum have violated these values. Racism and homophobia, which the Trump camp has promoted without much subtlety, can hardly be expected to elicit a calm, respectful response from people whose worth the president dismisses. If the #MeToo movement, moreover, might have failed to distinguish between different forms of male misbehavior, the reason might lie in the difficulty in combating a culture saturated with sexism.
Trump supporters, for their part, suffer by association with a man devoid of integrity and moral principles. The president's critics stereotype them partially because their public face consists of the crowds at Trump rallies shouting inane insults in unison. Nevertheless, the notion than nearly half the American electorate shares Trump's vicious outlook defies common sense and poses a real threat to democracy.
187
@James Lee -Some of Trump's voters do scare the life out of me. I know some of them personally. They have voted Republican their entire lives and will not change. One or two call the newspapers "the enemy". Two, at least, did not vote for Obama. I believe they had a racist problem. One says his vote depends on the economy. I would not call these people dumb. I might call them lazy for not finding out the facts about Trump. They make me very sad.
21
I have a close friend who is very bright, kind, ethical and moral to a fault. He and is wife are raising four great kids. They all do a lot of charitable work in the community and I would trust him with my life and my money.
He supports Trump, while I am a moderate Democrat who absolutely hates Trump. We've had a number of very civil conversations about it. My friend is tired of the Way Left shaming culture; their self-righteous moralizing; their demands for "safe spaces"; and their dismissal and demonization of anyone who holds views on sensitive topics that don't fully align with theirs ("cancellation culture"). The thing he likes about Trump is that he punches these people in the nose, because my friend thinks they are ruining the country.
Sure, I tell him the Republicans have been doing the same thing, if not worse, and provide examples. But increasingly, even as a Democrat, I find some merit in his argument. Case in point: the uproar over the "Drag Queen Story Hour." Frankly, I wouldn't want to have to explain that issue to my five year old. As a parent, I would feel like it is being shoved down my throat at my local library. But if I express that opinion, I will be shamed and insulted as an anti-LGBTQ bigot.
Just like there will likely be some comments insulting and shaming me for partially agreeing with Bret Stephens.
180
@Jack Sonville
The thing is, anybody largely concerned over the Drag Queen Story Hour is fixating too much on such things, when there are far greater issues at stake. For instance, the President turning the Department of Justice into a weapon that can be used against any of us. These folks are warring against cultural shifts, which is like fighting the tide and not susceptible to political fixes. Meanwhile, our democracy hangs in the balance.
123
So you are outraged about the fact that people might consider you to be anti-LGBTQ for wanting to ban events organized by LGBTQ people at local libraries?
Imagine that...
Would you view it as similarly offensive to "freedom of speech" if someone was called anti-semitic for demanding an event where Jewish people tell stories at the local library? Would you call that "the Jewish agenda being pushed down our throats"?
It is easy to dismiss people who are critical of the opinions we hold as "zealots", "extremists" or "moralists". It would be much more useful to engage with their viewpoints and maybe consider if they might have point. Self-examination and reevaluation of ideas can surely only lead to improvement.
We may also want to examine the irony of calling criticism of ideas/opinions "toxic" and "dangerous for freedom of speech". Isn't criticism of an opinion just as much of an opinion that deserves protection? Isn't it more of a danger to the exchange of ideas when all criticism of certain ideas and opinions is dismissed out of hand?
41
@Jack Sonville
Standing up to the "identity police" is a trait admired by both democrats and republicans. Joe Biden, who has always been a likable but mediocre presidential candidate, surged early in part, I believe, because he didn't allow himself to get derailed by critics who immediately attacked him for identity infractions.
I like least how Trump punches everyone back. I do like that he very actively challenges the usual litany of specious allegations, to which all republicans are subjected (ex., "racism", etc.).
11
I once thought that my peers, reasonably well educated middle class folk shared *my* beliefs. Basic beliefs such as: climate change is real, the earth is more than 6000 years old, black lives actually *do* matter, "of course" women deserve equal rights...I could go on.
My belief was probably always nothing more than a delusion, but over the past three years I have been regularly surprised by friends, co-workers and clients who casually announce their love and support for this president. It's so disconcerting! In Trump I see a narcissistic bully rampaging through mores, tradition, common decency, laws and the constitution. They see...well, honestly, I have no idea what they see in that man.
In Washington D.C., or whatever liberal enclave Bret Stephens lives in, Trumps supporters may whisper, but in my little red state Trump supporters are loud and proud...and I'm the one who whispers.
706
@GarthM I know what you mean. I live in a red state and I just keep silent about my concerns for my country--I wouldn't change any minds. So this works both ways.
39
@GarthM yes, I, too, see a narcissistic bully trying to pull down our democracy. But go ahead and watch Fox News for a while, go to a town in a Republican area and read the newspaper for a while. It’s surprising. It’s a whole different story. I do see how people can be misled.
57
@GarthM Your state is not all that little and far from red. It is not Indiana for example. It has more Democratic Members of Congress than Republicans and after the next election whether Trump can hold on or not will have two US Senators. The governor is more and more careful to sound like a moderate. If not this election then in 2024 Arizona will be a blue state. The problem you encounter is first many many outspoken Trump supporters are not even residents of the state but snowbird conservatives and two actual conservative residents are blowhard Trump supporters who believe every white person in the state outside of main university campuses agree with them. They drive their big trucks and pack their guns but are a dying breed. But given those egos and guns I don’t argue with them.
56
I have no problem with different opinion of relatives that voted for Trump.
On abortion, on guns, on homosexuality, on immigrants, on the Trump's character (or lack of it in my view), and the list goes on asymptotically to infinity. It is their opinion based on different models of reality. They think what America needs is a strongman. Democracy is weakness.
However, I do not tolerate ignorance of scientific facts. No coal is not pure carbon. It is laced with toxic metals that when released in the atmosphere harms kids. No one can pretend to love their kids when supporting a coal lover.
I yet have to meet a single Trump supporter who knows that coal is not pure carbon. I go for the jugular on the fact one can not have it both ways unless on attempts willful ignorance. No one hates their own kids and their realization of coal burning harm to their children, has led to severe uncomfortable feelings. Like extracting a rotten tooth can be painful, it is painful to shed a model of reality rooted in fear, loathing, and hate.
But not removing a rotten tooth can quickly poison you and kill you with sepsis. We all have an obligation to take action against severe ignorance. The life of our nation is threatened with moral sepsis if the anti-science crowd has their way. The so called "religious" right to be stopped from peddling ignorance and hate poisoning public discourse.
11
Mr. Stephens wants us to treat Trump voters with respect. Do I respect the fact that Donald Trump has turned lying into an art for? Yes I do. Do I respect the fact that Trump voters respond to Trump's outright lies (STILL WAITING for Mexico and not the Pentagon to pay for Trump's Wall) by saying that ALL Politicians lie? Yes I do. Do I respect the fact that Trump supporters ignore the fact that Barack Obama inherited an unemployment rate of 7.6% and left Office with an unemployment rate of 4.8% which is a reduction of 2.8% but give Donald Trump 100% of the credit for "saving" our economy by reducing the unemployment rate by an additional 1.2%? Yes I do. How's that for respect??
3
I find it hard to believe that people quietly voted for a clearly amoral candidate to "get even" with their moralistic neighbors.
However, I do believe that a certain segment of wealthy people quietly voted for him because they knew he'd provide them with fabulous tax breaks and will do so again in 2020.
16
@JF
The problem is not just the tax breaks. Wealthy people have inordinate influence because they fund think tanks, pay for research, buy the books of politicians they support, hire effective public relations to manipulate opinion and, of course, contribute enormous sums to political campaigns. Enough of that went on in 2016 to determine the results of that election.
Add in Russian meddling and the deterioration of news to entertainment and Trump won by accident as much as anything else.
It is true that resentments fester. I hear enough from my Trump supporting neighbors to know that it plays a role in their politics. They love how Trump makes those liberal heads explode, but they also think that he's done a lot of good things.
Well Mr. Stephens, you may be on to something here. The top recommended commenters for this article are ready to lash out at Trump whisperers if they speak out.
And of course, chastising you for even bringing up the subject. Not much civility left here in the country of free speech.
7
You lost me completely at "Even a president who called the media the 'enemy of the people' has a case to make that his opponents are more hostile to the letter and spirit of the First Amendment than he is."
Yes, there are people who take political correctness too far. Every pendulum swings past the center on its way back to it. To lump all of "his opponents" together and accuse us of hostility to the First Amendment is reductive, inaccurate, divisive, and insulting.
6
Freedom of speech is a right to speak without consequence against the GOVERNMENT. Not in society. That right has never existed and never will, like it or not. To equate the two, to lazily (or disingenuously) blur that stark distinction is to play into the hands of those who (1) do not want free speech against the government (Trump administration and supporters, and if you doubt this you are smoking something powerful) and (2) those who would police society from above, forcing the government to decide how and why people are censored in society.
While I don't like the call out culture, I would very much less like the government taking control of it.
Freedom of speech is about politics and repercussions vis a vis a powerful government and vulnerable individuals.
9
Treating people with respect. Listening first to understand. Speaking with conviction not rancor. Responding to differences of viewpoints and ideas not with ad hominem attacks, but commentary on ideas. Being willing to consider truth the objective not domination. Recognizing that anger and bitterness withers the soul of individuals and of a nation collectively. Some principles to practice in lieu of whisper networks.
16
This is a relevant topic, but I'm wondering just how many of us liberals have been outwardly hostile to friends and relatives who are died-in-the-wool Trump supporters. Not me. Its related to all the commentary on how to deal with "opposition" relatives at Thanksgiving. I think the strength of the debate is exacerbated only by one's profession, educational level, time spent on the social networks and whatnot. Fear of engagement is a genuine fact, but who has the time and energy to evangelize? And who is turned off by it? Not speaking up against injustice and cruelty is the first step to allowing even more horrible things to happen.
13
I honestly can't make any sense out of what Mr Stephens is saying. It seems that once again, Trump and his Republican backers are never responsible for anything they do or say. It's the fault of the "censorious left".
Most people I know don't inhabit the alternative twitter universe of "cancel culture". So whatever goes on there does not impact their lives or how they vote.
151
@Expat London
I think the message here is that Republicans can't help themselves, they are who they are, and that Democrats must be the adults in the room. You know, 'When they go low, we go high.' How has that been working so far?
4
It is near impossible to listen with respect to those who use their voices to spew hate and advocate for systemic oppression of one's identity. How often do you have to do what you are asking of others, Mr. Stephens? Infrequently I presume.
38
" For every voter who pulled the lever for Trump out of sympathy for his views, how many others did so out of disdain for the army of snickering moralists (at the time including me) telling them that a vote for Trump was unpardonable?". numbers aside, the 'snickering moralists' turned out to be correct in predicting the assault on fundamental American liberties and values being made by Trump (and his Republican cohorts led by Barr and McConnell) as President.
82
@Richard Gaylord -- You wrote,
"[N]umbers aside, the 'snickering moralists' turned out to be correct in predicting the assault on fundamental American liberties....}
Yeah, but the snickering is Brent Stephens' point. It adds fuel to the Trump supporters' fire.
@Richard Gaylord
Bret is right that the "snickering moralists" are a significant contributor to Trump's victory and his current political strength.
How do you reinforce tribal identity and make a tribe more militant? By having outsiders (from another tribe) denounce and demean your tribe.
This is exactly what Dem politicians, academic and cultural elites and the mainstream media do every day to Trump supporters.
Don't you and they know that by your every disdainful comment, what you achieve is to strengthen Trump's tribe?
If you/they do know, why do you do it? Sort of self-defeating?
It seems to me that the greatest danger lies in the votes witheld. I have spoken to many people who did not vote in the last elections because they felt that they could not, in conscience, vote for Trump because of what he was, or for Hillary because of what the Russians via social media said she was. It is one thing to perform an act, another one to refrain from performing an act.
Although I do not doubt that it happens -- this so-called "Bradley Effect"-- it is hard for me to imagine a liberal person voting for Trump. I can easily see a much greater number of people refraining all together from voting because both canditates have insulted their intelligence. For those without political conviction one way or the other, the promise of an imprudent tax break might break the tie. It's called a bribe.
17
Sure, it was just the Russians who bad mouthed Hillary. Everyone else thought she was right as rain.
Before writing to say that your opinion piece should be read again and again, and included in curricula and essay anthologies, I read the other comments to make sure I wasn’t just repeating what twenty others had said. To my surprise, I found that most of the responses took issue with your piece in one way or another. Here’s why I do not. Sure, one can nitpick, but your underlying point—that, for the sake of democracy, we should refrain from knee-jerk dismissal and disparagement of those who disagree with us—needs to be heard, thought over, and enacted. It should be a fundamental principle of educational institutions and the press. Without it, personal attack and snubbing become the norm, not only in politics but in every area of life. Your argument is not only eloquent but urgent. Thank you.
50
@Diana Senechal from Hungary I can understand your opinion because you don't understand the deep racism, xenophobia and fear-mongering that the political right has been harboring and nurturing for many years in the U.S. Please take a more careful look at where the personal attacks and snubbing are coming from and it's coming not from liberals but from the institutionalized propaganda machines of FOX News and Rush Limbaugh. It comes from the president almost every day in the form of some petty attack or comment many of us find, simply put, vulgar. Why should I tolerate it? What's there to "understand?"
18
@Diana Senechal I am sad to say that when I speak to my Trump supporting friends about our differences of opinion and try to make fact based arguments I am stunned to learn that they are in many cases totally ignorant of facts on what Trump and his gang are doing to the environment, among other things. They are living in a bubble of misinformation - and these are highly educated and well off people. Their choice is to stay ignorant to support their beliefs, that Trump is standing up for their societal goals. Even when I point to sources of information that confirm my arguments they deflect, or call the source biased. It's just appalling to me. And I do respect them, but not in this matter
12
@mrfreeze6 I was born in the U.S. and have lived all my life there except for nine months in Brazil in infancy, a year in the Netherlands at age 10, a year in the Soviet Union at age 14, the past two years in Hungary, and visits to a few other countries. I acknowledge that some political arguments go nowhere. No one can afford to listen to everything endlessly. I think Bret Stephens was arguing that people should hold back from making sweeping assumptions about each other—that we should keep in mind that our personal judgments of others are incomplete and fallible.
1
Can we get a pertinent fact or two out of the way, to save us all some trouble? In 2016 the Trump voters had per capita annual incomes that were $10,000 higher than the per capita annual incomes of Clinton voters. (The Sanders number was virtually the same as the Clinton one.) In light of that, the average Trump voter was less working class than the average Clinton voter, and economically better off. Moreover, as the credible studies all tell us, the average 2016 Trump voter was more strongly motivated by racial resentment than by, for instance, economic concerns or by free speech or by the disrespect of the Democrats. (Given all of that I myself am inclined to disagree with Bret's characterization here. What's his name gave his base lies, bigotry and fear. They liked it. We called it out. They would have voted for it whether or not we called it what it was, whether or not they were compelled by shame to do it in secret.)
82
@Robert t
The higher per capita income of the Trump voters is very interesting, given that the assumption has been that poor whites are the segment of the population that put him into office. Do you know how this number was calculated? Is it by averaging a large number of billionaires' incomes in with those poor whites who supplied the necessary votes? If a comparable method was applied to Democrats, even if the number of billionaires was the same, the fact that nearly 3 million more voters would further dilute the per capita number would have to be accounted for in some way for this number to be meaningful.
To your point, however, I suspect that the Trump voters' per capita income might be even higher than this number suggests due to the topic of this article. The Crypto-Trumpers with the greatest interest in concealing their vote would be "Elitists" with higher incomes who would benefit greatly from tax breaks, even as they would have a greater need to protect their "Enlightened" reputations.
20
@Christopher
According to 538 the numbers were derived from exit polling in 23 states.
3
I heard many Trump supporters say that in spite of what they had heard and seen, now that Trump had been elected President he'd moderate his behavior. Act "Presidential." The hostile rhetoric was campaign mode. Trump, the once Democrta moderate pro life businessman from New York City would rise to the occasion and endevor to unite the country.
I hoped so too.
After three years it's apparent that that was a pipe dream. If anything his election has embolded him. And his behavior, abetted by a compliant GOP has only worsened.
How many voters who took a chance on Trump last time will vote for him again?
How many will reexamine their choice, and decide Trump doesn't represent American values?
How many who hoped like Susan Collins he'd learn lessons, but doesn't.
We'll see in November;
24
Stephens has a hunch “the censorious left” was “probably enough to make the difference in the states that made the difference” in Trump’s victory.
My contrary hunch is that the GOP won largely because
1. Primary voters for Sanders in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin shifted to Trump in November by margins that may well have determined the outcome (“Here’s How Many Bernie Sanders Supporters Ultimately Voted for Trump,” Danielle Kurtzleben, NPR, 8/24/17).
2. A sizable number of men AND women would NOT vote for any woman for president.
3. Blue-collar workers welcomed Trump’s attacks on job-killing trade agreements.
4. Many were tired of waiting for comprehensive immigration reform legislation, mainly with regard to our southern border.
5. Clinton failed to campaign adequately in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
6. People skipped voting because Hillary was a shoo-in.
and my personal favorite
7. A minuscule segment of voters (but who knows how decisive, nudge, nudge) couldn’t bear the thought of Slick Willy reentering the White House.
17
@Lee E. You omit two other major factors: the release and repetition ad nauseam of emails the Russians stole from the DNC. FBI Director Comey's last minute announcement of an apparent re-opening of the Clinton email investigation.
5
Trying to come up with “the reason” that a very close election came out the way it did is impossible.
Six states were too close to call the day before the election. Trump won five, a less than ten percent chance. Sometimes the longshot wins. PERIOD.
4
The secrecy of the Trump vote is profoundly affected by those Democrats who insist that working class Americans don't know their own best interests. When you tell voters that they're voting wrong lots of them will keep their true sentiments to themselves. And what is more arrogant than telling a voter that he or she has no idea what is best for himself or herself?
10
@michjas Just because something is arrogant doesn't mean it's not true. But yes it's at least tone deaf if not down right stupid to make public statements about millions of voters that appear arrogant and condescending.
1
You are a Jewish person, so what would you say to those who were chanting "Jews will not replace us" in Charlottesville, VA?
Notwithstanding the above scenario, I agree with you. We should treat all humans with dignity and respect but at the same time there's this cult-like behaviour that is occurring that makes such treatment difficult. Furthermore, the media is amplifying those voices.
You're right - a lot of people don't openly support Trump because of the context they're in but they should be asking themselves, "why not?" I have no problems stating I used to be a lot like Trump when I was younger (not I liked Trump as someone recently misunderstood), a creature of ego. I have tried to not be that person anymore but anyways, there's no view of mine I'm so ashamed of holding that I don't mind broadcasting to everyone. Are people really that afraid of being called a bigot or being dismissed?
But anyways, you're advocating a "go high when they go low strategy." That is what has been tried so far. I don't think we should change because the results have been poor but I will point out that all this has done is embolden Trump. But we need to keep turning the other cheek.
PS: In addition to breaking up the system, I think people don't want their country, what they are familiar with, to change. Trump is promising that won't happen even though he's a hypocrite of the first order. Democrats need those who believe in government to turn out at high numbers.
3
@RamS It's one thing to treat trump voters with respect; that I agree with. But it's quite something else to treat trump with respect. That's something else and in my opinion a mistake. He doesn't deserve respect, certainly not just because he holds the office. I think he deserves contempt. Consequently i never refer to him as the president or president trump. It looks to me that Bloomberg, another New Yorker, has decided to ignore Michelle Obama's advice and really go at trump. I wish him, and our country luck.
17
It seems to me that this paragraph from the column not only argues, in effect, for candidate Buttigieg, but explains what might be the most important ingredient in his still not generally understood persuasive magic:
“How to pull it off this time? By treating Trump voters with respect. By asking why so many of them wound up in his tent to begin with. By acknowledging that not everything that’s said in a hush is shameful, and that not everyone you disagree with is a bigot. By listening, not denouncing; empathizing, not ridiculing; understanding, not dismissing.”
6
The banner of free speech, yaken up by Trump? You are kidding, right? All along, the current mafia installed in government has yaken the license, not freedom, to assault the truth. And further, to castigate those with the courage and patriotic impulse to defend the rule of law. And there is no equivalency between a complicit republican party (with Trump's criminality)...and the democratic party, the latter seeking justice and restoration of a badly damaged democracy. No whispers, however 'loud', may replace honesty...and the urgent need to restore trust in our democratic institutions. Moral corruption, however sneaky, must not be normalized.
9
The common whisper network topics that are coming up are:
1. Trump stands up for the USA while Democrats want to take care of illegal aliens.
2. Trump's tax cuts are driving the economy. The Democrats will kill all that with onerous taxes and free stuff.
3. Trump's agenda is all about the USA. Democrats think along the lines of gender, race, and class and they divide the country.
4. If Democrats nominate Bernie or Warren, I will vote for Trump. I cannot vote for a socialist.
These come up mostly from otherwise Democratic-leaning folks who are secretly on the fence while they publicly profess disdain for Mr. Trump and wish things were different.
12
The nature of the human animal is tribal. However, tribal behavior tends to be not inclusive, understanding, or accepting of any differences, or often not wanting any of the truth on any issue that they disagree with, or only a little of the truth. The fact remains, that to truly be a truth teller, you have to be intelligent enough to not be part of any tribal group, whether owning one race, one religion, one gender, one political party, etc. as you will likely offend a few, a lot, or everyone. The whole truth about the issues of academic achievement, aids, abortion, birth control, criminal behavior, debt, entertainment, healthcare, honesty, immigration, intelligence, obesity, pollution, population density, rape, sexually transmitted diseases, Social Security, sports, tariffs, taxes, the afterlife, and most everything is a landmine for too many. That is why we have the comment section of the major newspapers, that truly is a place to educate the masses with the whole truth about all the issues. I love it, whether the Times here, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, the L.A. Times, the Star Tribune, the Arizona Republic, the Great Falls Tribune, the Guardian, etc. that I read every day. I believe that the readers of all these newspapers above, and elsewhere, are paying attention, and for the most part can see the whole truth about most every issue, accept that truth, and hopefully want to act on it in real time with voting for the most common sense politicians.
3
"Even a president who called the media the “enemy of the people” has a case to make that his opponents are more hostile to the letter and spirit of the First Amendment than he is."
Duly noted...calling the media the enemy of the people and much worse, threatening to "lock them up", encouraging violence against members of the press; all this on a daily basis--not that bad. Forget all that--look over here--look what the left is doing. Nice try.
As for respect, here's the deal. I do not respect the intelligence, or the humanity, of voters who saw a man who has been strong-arming and cheating people his whole life, a man who swindled thousands in the Trump "University" racket and said: "yeah that's my guy, they're all crooks anyway so let's put a real crook in the White House". If lack of respect for such folk is a flaw, it is one I eagerly accept.
65
I agree the assumption of bad faith, bad epistemic states, and bad character breeds polemic arguments and polemic responses instead of bridging divides.
The problem is, however, there are a lot of people with bad character, bad information willfully sought, and bad faith in discussion. Approaching such people even in good faith and with good information excites talk of the "censorious left." And that is left out in your piece.
The political dialogue about "PC" is not just latching onto a reality of purge-happy liberals, it is also latching onto a reality of misinformation dealing, bigoted conservative trolls. The very thing you're suggesting the left should not see.
And the thing is, personally, I just suggest people engage those with whom they can extend good faith and to simply stop engaging when they no longer feel they can do that but as a society you can't just ignore the powerful complex propping up Trump. It is actively poisoning our national conversation.
I don't how you finesse that. But it is not as simple as being completely generous and putting it completely on left to be generous without pointing out the grave problems on the other side of this conversation provides a very warped perspective on it all.
7
Many Trump supporters are open and proud about their allegiances. And even more so, they know their support of Trump provokes a certain kind and they enjoy the provocation. Seemingly, they revel in the fact that "respectable" upscale Democrats are outraged by Trump and his supporters. For these folks, part of the joy of supporting Trump is snubbing those who consider Trump to be beneath them.
Mr. Stephens is speaking of a different crowd -- those intimidated by "respectable" Democrats, who hide their true political selves. But these folks are not unlike those who revel in provocation. Either way, the lesson is that a vote for Trump is frequently a hostile statement toward upscale Democrats. And this shouldn't be surprising. Upscale Democrats --lawyers, doctors, journalists, and other well off professionals -- are among the most self-righteous folks out there and plenty wealthy too-- a formula that regular working class and middle class folks often reduce to an intolerable and obnoxious crowd that they deeply resent.
5
"For every voter who pulled the lever for Trump out of sympathy for his views, how many others did so out of disdain for the army of snickering moralists (at the time including me) telling them that a vote for Trump was unpardonable?
My hunch: probably enough to make the difference in the states that made the difference."
Bret, you have this completely wrong. So wrong that it is an insult to the voters who may or may not have pulled the lever for Trump or just sat on their couches and watched TV.
The Democrat leadership did not believe that the working classes would let them down. Why they believed this is beyond me but the arrogance of politicians are well known.
At some stage, when you don't even attempt to solve the problems of working people they quit supporting you and go for the opposition. The egregious racist Trump was the beneficiary the last time. I hope the Democratic leadership is not so disconnected with regular people they repeat their 2016 mistake.
I am not confident they have learned the lesson, they keep wanting to kneecap candidates who are listening to people's problems and want to help them.
2
I would venture a guess that the complete opposite of what Mr. Stephens proposes is actually true. I believe today there are far more people who claim they are Trump supporters publicly than actually are. Why would they do that? For fear of the man himself and his openly hostile followers and their propensity to shame, hate and otherwise abuse anyone who does not support their dear leader. There will be far more pulling the lever for anyone with a "D" next to his or her name this fall than Trump.
5
In general, I thought calling Trump voters "Basket of deplorables" was a poor strategy. Treating Trump voters with respect is clearly a better strategy, although one cannot imagine that for one second, the Trump side is going to treat us with respect.
That is because the Trump side is at least half deplorable people (ie, Hillary got it right). Trumps most ardent supporters are racist and more interested in their 401K plans than the future of democracy.
I apologize for ignoring the main message to this piece. Yes, the left is not thrilled with the first amendment. But the real threat to our liberty is not from the left, it is from the Republican party.
14
In general, I thought calling Trump voters "Basket of deplorables" was a poor strategy. Treating Trump voters with respect is clearly a better strategy, although one cannot imagine that for one second, the Trump side is going to treat us with respect.
That is because the Trump side is at least half deplorable people (ie, Hillary got it right). Trumps most ardent supporters are racist and more interested in their 401K plans than the future of democracy.
I apologize for ignoring the main message to this piece. Yes, the left is not thrilled with the first amendment. But the real threat to our liberty is not from the left, it is from the Republican party.
1
Bret, you're right as far as it goes. The election will not be won by disparaging Trump voters. But you don't go far enough, because Trump is so destructive to democracy that it is nothing short of alarming that more people don't see this. A lot of people didn't see this in the thirties, and it did not end well. It's one thing to win an election, entirely another to witness democracy going down the drain with a sizable minority cheering Trump on.
21
We are a secular humanist society in Quebec. We have escaped centuries of conservative religion , politics and finance. We are currently under attack for our Freedom From Religion laws. We do not believe much in marriage it is no more than a civil contract between consenting adults, we how made little accommodation for the nuclear family and we have banned certain outward displays of religious beliefs in many of our public places like schools, hospitals and government offices.
Our society is dedicated to the welfare and future welfare of our people. We just started our Enlightenment a little over 50 years ago but human rather theistic values run across our political spectrum.
I do not see the American divide as anything political it is cultural and sociological. It is not a nation of similar ethics and values looking at different ways to get to the promised land.
It is not about the meaning of free speech when the local diner has different hours and days for Democrats and Republicans. It is certainly not about left and right I knew Vermont when Bernie arrived arrived at and Democratic Socialist was probably the nicest name he was called.
There is no free speech in America because no one is allowed to say; America is broken and maybe it can't be fixed. Maybe it is time to stop worrying about America and start worrying about tomorrow. Maybe trying to keep it together is your biggest problem.
16
It's the height of irony that Stephens preaches to liberals that they should treat Trump supporters with respect. Trumpism is a movement that is founded on disrespect-- for immigrants, for the poor, for science, for norms of civility, for democratic institutions, and most especially, for liberals. Has Stephens gone out and preached respect for liberals and their values in his old conservative haunts? Or is he content to preach his brand of tolerance and understanding from his safe space at the liberal New York Times? Why does he have nothing to say to or about Trump supporters, other than to assure the rest of us that they're really deserving of our respect?
225
Good advice. Speech is silver, but silence is gold, especially for those fo us who abhor Trump and the Republican party. Let us work and donate and vote for and to Democrats in utter silence.
17
“How to pull it off this time? By treating Trump voters with respect...By listening, not denouncing; empathizing, not ridiculing; understanding, not dismissing.”
The civil tone espoused here is the best one, not just for a political end, but because that is who we are and the conduct we want to bring our nation back to.
At the same time, though, it’s hard to believe that supporters of a president who is disrespectful, who doesn’t listen, empathize or understand, can really find proper conduct to be important.
22
@NM
Pigs will fly before we get an op-ed imploring Trump voters to understand and respect liberals.
1
In the age of internet almost everything we say is public, there are almost no private thoughts or communications anymore. Was it Chesterfield who said, "A wise man thinks much, says little, writes nothing"? No wonder polls are so inaccurate, we scarcely dare to reveal ourselves anymore to anyone--but in the voting booth we can be ourselves and vote our true thoughts. And, what are a lot of people thinking that they won't usually tell others? Maybe that America belongs to 'us' and not 'them'. Could that be Mr. Trump's real message, his most secret whisper, his genuine appeal?
1
I suspect the phenomenon is also true in red states. People are afraid to publicly say anything bad about Trump and risk the wrath of his rabid supporters. Case in point, Republicans in the House and Senate. I’m hoping they find their backbones in an anonymous polling both. Honesty and decency need to be brought back to the Republican Party and I believe that many Republicans long for that. To slightly edit the 1964 Barry Goldwater campaign slogan: In their hearts they know what’s right.
20
Freedom of Speech doesn't mean Freedom from consequences. The 1st Amendment gives you the right to freely and openly tell your boss that he's a tool. But that amendment doesn't protect you when he fires you. In the public domain, everyone is free to say whatever they want. So long as it's not yelling fire in a crowded theater, a person's freedom of speech doesn't end where another person's feeling state begin. Say it if you must in the public domain. If folks would do this more often, and stop feeling so stifled by political correctness culture, they wouldn't feel the anxious need to find an iconoclastic leader like Trump.
12
Mr. Stephens makes some very good points. I remember thinking that when they got into the voting booth in 2016, people would come to their senses and cast a vote against Trump. Now we see that the opposite was true and my prediction was naive. Trump was enough of a pariah by then that many people didn't want to publicly embrace him but had decided to vote for him.
This phenomenon may be even more at in play now in respect to moderates and independents who see a strong economy and stock market and no new military entanglements but who would be embarrassed to own up to supporting Trump to their liberal friends.
This is the scenario that frightens me.
21
I can't say I agree with Mr. Stephens here; if Trump voters ever did care about what the "elite" thought of their political sympathies I can't imagine that they continue to do so. These days they seem to be going out of their way to cheer on The Donald's oafish assertions and to call out the "snowflakes" on Twitter and elsewhere. It's hard to believe that any of them are still shy about publicizing their ignorance and/or bigotry.
159
A well written and insightful column.
I know in my heart that most Democrats and progressives are thoughtful and decent people. Most are even kind.
Yet then I read many of the comments contained in these (electronic) pages, and I can see the vile hatred of cancel culture spewing forth. And even just one snarling partisan, blind to reason in his rage, more than offsets ten of his more sensible fellow travelers. And many moderates, like me, find them frightening.
If you live and work in an academic environment, where wariness with respect to the thought police is a requirement for survival, whisper networks offer both relief and release—a glimpse of freedom.
31
@Alberto "In your heart" you probably also know that it isn't Pelosi who's telling "Second Amendment people" to solve her problems if she doesn't get her way. It's your guy doing that, Alberto. Your fear of being snarled at is nothing compared to the open threat of getting blown away by red-hats slinging AR-15's.
5
So, you find a snarling partisan frightening but have nothing to say about people who take automatic weapons into a Wal-Mart to mow down "invaders".
5
@Alberto I don't see vile hatred from these postings. If you want to see uncivil behavior shoot right over to the WSJ and see the vitriol about any Democrat being posted. This paper is not even close to the ugliness there.
5
The point of this article is quite valid.
Most likely, there are people who disagree with trump overall (on most issues) yet agree with him on one issue critical to them. Their agreement on that one important critical issue would make them support him and vote for him.
Evangelists are one such group. They should (perhaps do) find everything about trump disdainful, however they adore his attempts to change the legal landscape on "Right To Life" issues. They hold their noses.
These people coveting trump within their hearts, will be ashamed and embarrassed to publicly disclose their feelings for trump. In polls, they may be untruthful, laying a false claim that they do not support him (will not vote for him) when in truth they do support him and will vote for him.
This is a major flaw with polls, because they assume that polled people answer poll questions honestly. In 2016 this turned out to be a real issue, and this is likely again distorting poll numbers today.
Democrats must see this and other advantages for trump. There is greater chance that he will win re-election.
We need to attack trumpism another way, by having a backup plan in case trump is re-elected.
We must ensure we WIN CONTROL OF CONGRESS on Nov 3, 2020 - such that democratic control of the House AND SENATE will allow us to Re-Impeach trump and this time also remove trump if he is re-elected.
We MUST defeat enough republican senators!
Please Donate to Democrats opposing republican senators!
68
@Incredulous of 45
I absolutely agree we must put McConnell out to pasture but a Senate majority of 67 to 33, which is what is required to remove a president, is about as likely as flying pigs.
3
The author's characterization tonight on television that Sen. Amy Klobuchar is the best candidate the Dems could nominate is spot on. She's smart as anything, but also grounded in a likable Midwestern way. On the other hand, the infatuation the progressives have for mouthy, intolerant cancel culture is a sure way to lose.
22
Thank you, Mr. Stephens, for this essay on conventional wisdom during and about this year's election where some American voters are planning to give Trump supporters a hard time.
For the record, this reader always listens to the recording on both sides, keeps a respectful distance from persons wearing invisible M.A.G.A. hats and waves to them like the Queen.
Appeals from conservative-minded friends of decades to become enlightened by listening to a series of celebrity and religious talk-show hosts are always acknowledged, while the radio and television remain mute during this era of transition.
Now that you mention it, our respective voices seem to be dwindling into 'whisper-mode', and there will always be the lonely man sitting on the park bench, surrounded by pigeons, appreciative of your company, while you gently prepare to take off, recognizing that he is currently occupying The White House.
4
Miss Ley, I would love to see you waving like the Queen. I would actually pay for the pleasure.
Cheers.
3
@mancuroc
Great comment and I agree with nearly everything...
But I will NOT give any credit to Trump for the economy! No way! President Obama created this economy. He turned what was about to be an economic collapse or another Great Depression into a Great Recession. He created more jobs than Trump and the stock market went up much more under Obama! And President Obama, facing opposition from ALL R's, saved the US auto industry. The current economy would not be as robust without a US auto industry!
Trump, rather than improving it, threw gasoline on a fire with tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations, and ran up the deficits (now $1 Trillion a year) and the national debt, and pressured the fed to inappropriately lower interest rates.
Lowing interest rates when there is no recession leads to (and has led to) irresponsible borrowing by businesses. What that means is that when there's another, inevitable downturn it will be MUCH worse than it otherwise would have been. Plus the fed has nowhere to go since rates are already near zero.
Trump took the good, stable Obama economy and JUICED it irresponsibly which will lead to significant financial crisis... but as Trump planned it will be after Nov. 2020. After that, we'll see what the Trump economy really is.
119
Whatever the reason if it is wrong , will always be wrong?
Trump was, is and will be always on wrong side of the history.
Watch American factory.
18
Although you are right about the free-speech part, you're on thin ice about converting and re-converting Trump supporters.
And as to whether they voted for Trump because he represented "forbidden fruit": do you have any evidence of that? If instead, someone suggested that what motivated Trump voters was 99% misogyny, racism, resentment, and intolerance, could you refute that?
As to the fantasy of persuading Trump voters to see the light: this seems not only futile, but perhaps counterproductive. The New York Times has reported now and again about how "liberal" and "conservative" (a euphemism, in this case, for resentful, bigoted misogyny) voters live in different (mis) information spheres these days. They are not taking in the same (mis)information, much less agreeing on its significance. Little persuasion of red voters can occur.
The challenge for the Democrats is to nominate someone who can inspire and motivate those who failed to vote last time, who voted for third parties, and who are eligible to vote for the first time (7 million of them!) A nominee with fire in her belly, who won't alienate moderates (moderates--not reactionaries), will be a great challenge.
That is not to say that the answer is to nominate Bernie Sanders. That also could lead to disaster.
However, if the nominee, instead, tries too hard to appease Trumpistas, former, current, and/or future, she risks losing more votes (especially among Sanders supporters) than she gains.
29
@Just Ben
"If instead, someone suggested that what motivated Trump voters was 99% misogyny, racism, resentment, and intolerance, could you refute that?"
Yes, actually. While there are many Trump supporters who fit this description, there are not enough to elect him. This is what the left can't seem to wrap their head around (me included)
To have this view of all Trump supporters is to be part of the problem, not part of the solution. It's not helpful. It's a cop out. It dismisses half the population without making any effort to understand them. It will only lead to defeat again.
2
@Will Rothfuss What you've said is very thought-provoking. Let's meet partway. It's true that the loss of good jobs for less-educated people is a big part of the problem. Nicholas Kristof showed that in some recent columns about his hometown in Oregon. Point taken. However ignorance. prejudice, reaction are important factors as well. Trump clearly brings out the worst in people. Doesn't mean that that's all there is to them. No simple answer is available. But a much stronger national commitment to good public schools is a good place to start.
1
Empathy and compassion? Absolutely. Respect? No. That is earned. For my part, I'll be doing what I can to discourage these people from voting at all. And you bet those of us opposed to Trump and ALL he stands for, are focused on these voters as well. Good luck everybody.
72
It's all the fault of the censoriousness left? Are you serious, Mr. Stephens? There used to be plenty of mutual respect across politcal divides, because opponents were not perceived as enemies. There were exceptions, of course, as in the McCarthy era and with Nixon's enemies list; but those of us who remember those times also remember that the American body politic regained its balance.
That balance became decidedly unsteady with President Obama's election and the rise of the Tea Party. And now with trump's campaign and presidency the balance has been lost. And you can't blame the left. Ironical, 3 years of trump should have united left right and center in condemnation of his constitutional abuses, barbecue they should not be a partisan matter; but the Republican Party has, save for a few outliers, abdicated its constitutional duty.
I can somewhat respect what led many to vote for trump, despite knowing his many personal flaws and failures. But respect has to be deserved, and I refuse to respect anyone who votes for him a second time.
However much you love the economy and conservative judicial appointments, consider the price. To understand where I'm going with this, read Timothy Snyder's "On Tyranny - Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century". The overall takeaway is that early allowances and excuses for authoritarianism only invite more of the same. This time, his potential voters have no excuses and have forfeited all respect.
22:30 EST, 2/14
282
@mancuroc
I love Snyder's book and encourage everyone to read it because his lessons matter today. He purposely made it small enough to carry around, and it's only $10.
9
I don't believe the left has ceded the free speech high ground. But see my previous post: do actions (speech) have consequences or not?
Again, I agree with you on taking the high ground even if it means Democrats losing the 2020 election. I'm confident we'll have a repeat of 2007 with Trump drunk on power and we'll be woefully unprepared. But hey, the electorate representing the electoral college chose him. Anyways, after such a fiasco when China has recovered from the coronavirus and the US has been severely diminished, people will be ready for another blue wave like 2008. This time perhaps they'll remember what Republicans did.
That's scenario 1. Scenario 2, a Democratic candidate wins and we try to fix the country which may be too late anyway. So 2024 may well end up being the real election unless there's a MASSIVE turnout and a complete blue wave in 2020.
Whoever said history doesn't repeat but it rhymes sure had it right. We've been going through this back and forth for decades now.
7
Remember - Trump lost by three million legally cast votes. Unfortunately our electoral system is, in fact, rigged - for the Republicans.
Though many may have voted for him out of sheer spite, the majority of white, working class voters did so out of frustration. After six years of Mitch McConnell shutting down any progressive programs that might have truly helped them - more stimulus, infrastructure spending, etc. - our government really wasn't working for them. It still isn't, despite the DOW being at all time highs. It will be interesting to see how this manifests itself in November. And a lot will depend on who the Democratic nominee is.
26
@Ladybug That is the very first time I have read “a lot depends on who they nominate in November”. I say that to myself every time I see the comment “vote”
1
Absolutely, Mr. Stephens.
However, don’t you think something should be done about lying?
As The Guardian relentlessly points out, opinions are free, but facts are sacred.
I am no genius, I have no idea of what kind of regulations can be effective against lying. I am well aware that, given the bewildering mass of news from primary sources made available by the Internet, truth can easily be considered to exist, like beauty, in the eyes of the beholder...
I suppose ways will eventually be found. Let’s just hope it won’t be too late.
29
"Republicans will organize their campaign around the country’s material prosperity under Trump; Democrats around its moral deterioration."
Actually Democrats can organize their campaigns against the loss of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. While (swing) voters are liberal on many issues, they are conservative with things they like, and the social safety net tops the list.
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." That can be the winning slogan for Democrats this year. It demonstrates listening, empathizing and understanding: the path to victory. And it just may save our democracy, too.
42
And you don't have to take my word for it. Just listen to Paul Krugman being interviewed by Stephen Sackur on BBC HardTalk from the other day. Particularly the last five minutes.
4
"Republicans will organize their campaign around the country’s material prosperity under Trump; Democrats around its moral deterioration. The latter is the trickier argument to make, but it’s been done before, most recently when George W. Bush promised to restore honor and integrity to the White House after eight years of Bill Clinton."
And promptly lied the US into a disastrous war of choice against Iraq and began the Forever War in Afghanistan.
99
@Steve Paradis Touche, Brett. And why can't Dems argue, have your rent hikes in the last four years been higher than you pay increases?
6
@Steve Paradis Have you noticed how this week the Administration is rushing to make peace with the Taliban in Afghanistan? Another ally (the Afghanis) down the tubes for the sake of expediency and re-election (the first being the Syrian Opposition.)
Trump wants desperately to use these troops brought home in advance of the election to “prove”his election promises are being kept. The other, of course, is The Great Wall against immigrants paid for, not by Mexico but, by sucking money from our own military ($3.8 million in fact.). His supporters love it and the first law of business is that money is fungible.
2
Mr. Stephens' article is an exercise in false equivalency. Let's examine some of the complaints that Mr. Trump's supporters claim he is addressing.
- If you seek authenticity in a politician, the antidote is not a man who has told 14,000 documented lies during his three years in office.
- If you want to stop the endless wars, the antidote is not alienating our allies and sending more troops to the Middle East.
- If you are concerned about the loss of well-paying middle class jobs, the antidote is not to give tax cuts to the corporations and owners of companies that have eliminated these jobs through automation, outsourcing, and opposing labor unions.
- If political correctness has gone too far, the antidote is not prejudice and bigotry.
493
@MidtownATL Your comment is both correct and beside the point. What man of the readers trilled by ou comment refuse to see is that unless we can sacrifice our uderstandable impusle to keep screaming We're Right You're Wrong, but intead focus on all the reasons, reagardless of our many, many politial disareements, Americans should vote Democratic this election, things we disagree about, that enraging menace to our entire political tradition may well win another term. It's terrifing how right people can be and how mindboggling blind they can be at very same time.
Bloomberg or Bernie--the choice between them is meaningless COMPARED to Trump or No Trump!
32
Will you please run for Congress?
2
agree. add creating new super fund sites our children will have to pay for by his elimination of regulations.
9
Oh yes, Mr. Stephens, let's just always be polite and never confront Mr. Trump and his supporters no matter what say or do. That was certainly the dignified way in the 1930s in Germany. How did that work out? And how did it work out for Hilary and the dozen or so Republican contenders Trump trampled in 2016?
Then there's Republican Senator Susan Collins who suggests we just shut our eyes and ears and brains and be "aspirational" about Mr. Trump's behavior. Hmm, how's that working for ya?
But you are right on one count, Mr. Stephens, it will come down to 300,000 voters in 5 or 6 states. And there will be nothing quiet, or dignified, or aspirational, about it. Nor should there be!
402
@Ok Joe
The recent tweet exchange between Trump and Bloomberg shows that Bloomberg has Trump's number. He knows how to get down in the dirt and fight Trump on a level playing field -- how to really get under Trump's skin. That is key. None of the other presidential candidates have figured it out yet, and they won't before November, because none of them know Trump the way Bloomberg does. Bloomberg is the one who can win over these 300,000 voters. And he won't have to whisper to do it.
61
@Blue Moon Standing up to a bully may be the best thing to do. I think attacking Trump's behavior is the right way to go. Even attacking him, like Bloomberg did if you are personally attacked. The Golden Rule may apply: If you were a liar and worse, that would mean having someone stop you. For your own good and the good of others.
His voters are another matter. Perhaps listening with curiosity about their choices would help one gain insight. This is not a strategy to convert them. But it could help them think it through and come to a different conclusion. Not to vote at all because they deep down don't like him would be one such conclusion.
I don't mean his rageful base, since they will just harangue you, or at best, proselytize. When confronted with one of these people, I talk assertively about sports or something neutral.
Finally, about shutting people down who simply want to talk about ideas that are "forbidden." It is a mistake to shut down legitimate dialogue of "dangerous ideas".
Ideas that are seen in the light of day non-judgmentally allow the person to change, bring more people into the circle and may correct extremes. The Harper's article mention #MeToo and Al Franken leaving politics, but without much investigation. I had the feeling there were missing pieces that no one talked about.
One reason for the proliferation of conspiracy theories is because so many things seem to be off limits for dialogue.
17
@Blue Moon
I couldn't agree more!
5
"noted that so-called secret voters"
Imagine, voters keeping their preferences secret. The next thing you know, they'll demand a secret ballot.
15
Well yeah. But THOSE "secret" voters do well to keep it that way. Adhering to our enemies, giving them aid and comfort, also counts after all.
2
@SR :"Adhering to our enemies, giving them aid and comfort,"
What "enemies" are you talking about?
Aid and comfort? Any notion of that ended with Jane Fonda sitting in a N. Vietnamese anti-aircraft gun placement. But then again, she bucking the mean nasty Federal Government. A lot of folks have done that in our history. Can you think of some examples?
It's true. And the number of secret and not so secret whisperers has grown. An employee in my office just this week unexpectedly held forth about his new found sympathy for the President. It always helps to have the right enemies even if people wouldn't give you the time of day otherwise.
11
Good luck on this. It's all tribal now, and no good deed will go unpunished.
19
We have to recognize that those who disagree with us are not necessarily "evil". I choose to believe that most people are doing what they believe is right.
21
@TH
Hear no evil, see no evil and speak no evil from Trump. Hmmm, the perfect Trump voter.
3
@TH
There's no question that most of us are very good at rationalizing what we do and considering it to be the right thing. That was also true of the SS guards who butchered Jews in the Nazi death camps. Does that mean they were not evil?
1
@TH there is a difference between right and wrong. Most things are either right or wrong. There are gray areas however this is in hyperspecific situations. Never is it okay to vote for a racist and a rapist.
4
“... he claims as a direct result”
Well did Brett - who let’s remind ourselves is paid a lot to write 1000 words or so per week - check if this claim is true? Given it would make quite a lot of difference if it didn’t?
17