Support Trump and Be Mocked by History 

click to enlarge donald-trump-3.jpg

The other day I spied a high Republican official walking on the street and called out his name. He stopped, hit his smile app, and exclaimed how glad he was to see me.

"What are you going to do about Trump?" I asked. He paused and then uttered the dreaded word: unity. "We have to have unity," he said.

I got his message. He's selling out. In the coming weeks, Republicans everywhere will be seeking unity by embracing their presumptive nominee, Donald Trump. They will be ignoring his utter lack of qualifications for the presidency, his harebrained schemes for controlling migration, his knack for insulting billions people at a time (Muslims, women, the disabled), his gaudy womanizing past, his lying, his exaggerating, his enthusiasm for torture, and his ingenious view of the Constitution as a lease that can be broken.

That paragraph, politically lethal if I were writing about someone else, encapsulates precisely why Trump is so hard to stop. He is, among other things, scandal-proof. At the moment, an army of journalists is scouring the land looking for whatever Trump has done that we might not yet know about. Trouble is, there is little that can be revealed. Call him a womanizer, and he shrugs. Say he lies, and he lies by saying he doesn't. Confront him with the truth, as when he insisted on having seen nonexistant Muslim revelry in New Jersey following the September 11th attacks, and he just perseveres, creating his own "truth." He cannot be shamed.

It's trite to liken Trump to a Kardashian, but I shall do so anyway. What they have in common is the determination to outlast our moral or political revulsion. Kim Kardashian hit the big time with a sex tape. Revolting? Yes. But forgotten? Mostly. What lingers is the name.

It is similar with Trump. The shock of his statements — calling Mexican immigrants "rapists," for instance — has worn off. The same with his insult to Megyn Kelly or his mocking of a disabled New York Times reporter. All that is now "old news," blanched of its repellent ugliness by time: Oh, that's just Trump. He'll say anything. He doesn't mean it.

Bit by bit, Trump will accumulate more endorsements. The motley crew that now surrounds him will be supplemented and upgraded by establishment names. They will use the same reasoning that Senator Lindsey Graham did last month when he endorsed Ted Cruz, whom he hates — a higher purpose. In Graham's case, it was to stop Trump. With others, it will be this thing called party unity or, its functional equivalent, stopping Hillary Clinton.

But what is the point of a party that attempts to unify around a candidate such as Trump? What then does the party stand for? Does the GOP endorse anti-Muslim bigotry? Shall the party have a plank about Mexican rapists or the physical attributes of women? If Trump is its nominee, will the party endorse what are certain to be misogynist and personal attacks on Clinton? (Trump's campaign boasts he has the endorsement of Paula Jones and Juanita Broaddrick, both associated with Bill Clinton's sexual rap sheet. This could get ugly.)

Trump's message, we are incessantly told, is that the GOP has double-crossed its constituency with trade, immigration, and just about anything else you can name. But it will do the Republican Party no good to win back the aggrieved at the cost of everyone else — not to mention what is good for the country. A glance at Trump's endorsees — check his web page — is an effective appetite suppressant.

Imagine a Republican National Convention's dais stocked with some of the people who have already endorsed Trump — not just the feckless Chris Christie or the bizarre Sarah Palin, but such figures as the disgraced football player Richie Incognito, Hulk Hogan, and Teresa Giudice from The Real Housewives of New Jersey, a fresh alumna of the federal prison system. A meeting of Trump supporters might have to be sanctioned by a pro wrestling promoter.

When I spotted that Republican official, I did not say what I initially wanted to. I wanted to say that we are taking names — "we" being the American people. We will remember who endorsed a man who took American politics lower than it has ever been, no doubt extracting promises of good behavior that later will be broken. Party unity will not wash. The GOP is going to lose, the only question is how — with some honor, or being deservedly mocked by history?

Richard Cohen writes for The Washington Post Writers Group.

Comments (30)

Showing 1-25 of 30

Add a comment

Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-25 of 30

Add a comment



Beyond the Arc

Grizzlies trade Troy Daniels to Phoenix

Music Blog

Listen Up: Louise Page

News Blog

Suit Targets 'Destructive' Drivers License Policy

Film/TV/Etc. Blog


News Blog

Supreme Court Steps In on Fayette Church Matter

Intermission Impossible

Muhammad Ali Meets Stepin Fetchit at The Hattiloo Theatre

News Blog

Task Force Considers Medical Cannabis


More by Richard Cohen

Readers also liked…

  • A Letter to the Memphis City Council

    The council gets an “F” for its performance on the Greensward decision.
    • Mar 10, 2016
  • Memphis’ Central Park

    The Memphis Zoo/Overton Park controversy is really about the right of Memphians to craft their environment.
    • Feb 4, 2016
  • Detention Deficit

    Exactly seven years ago this week, I wrote a column decrying a proposal by city engineers to turn the Overton Park Greensward into an 18-foot-deep "detention basin" designed to stop flooding in Midtown. The engineers claimed we'd hardly notice the football-field-sized bowl. "Except," I wrote then, "when it rains hard, at which time, users of Overton Park would probably notice a large, 18-foot-deep lake in the Greensward. Or afterward, a large, muddy, trash-filled depression."

    • Mar 10, 2016
© 1996-2017

Contemporary Media
460 Tennessee Street, 2nd Floor | Memphis, TN 38103
Visit our other sites: Memphis Magazine | Memphis Parent | Inside Memphis Business
Powered by Foundation