Will Trump Surprise Us and Act Normal This Time?
I wouldn’t bet on it. But it’s amazing how many pundits keep assuming that’s what he’ll do.
By Gerard Baker
If you thought a little thing like a tsunami would sweep Donald Trump off course and convey him to the threshold of a peaceful retirement, you are in for a disconcerting two years.
If you’ve paid any attention this past decade, you are preparing for renewed, and possibly intensified, turbulence.
It constantly amazes me, 10 years after President Trump broke all the conventions of politics and then spent the next decade making up his own, that so much of the commentary—from politicians themselves as well as so-called experts and pundits—continues to proceed from conventional assumptions of the past.
In the wake of the Republican midterm calamity, we have been treated to all the conventional wisdom: MAGA is over, the end of the Trump era, the GOP’s post-Trump age is beginning.
A familiar landscape is painted: one of lame ducks, intraparty infighting, constitutional constraints, the return of institutional balance.
In this traditional picture, outgoing presidents are animated by equally familiar things: self-awareness, shame, party loyalty, respect for continuity, a desire for a smooth transition to a loyal successor.
Does any of this sound to you like Donald Trump?
A conventional president might have made some conciliatory noises and some new appointments that suggest he understands the import of the comprehensive repudiation voters delivered him last week.
Instead, from this iconoclastic president, we got Stephen Miller, the Dr. Strangelove of modern Republican politics, elevated to White House chief of staff.
This is the man who said last year of the party that has now won the largest share of the popular vote in a midterm election in more than 50 years, “The Democratic Party is not a political party.
It is a domestic extremist organization.”
Say what you will about Mr. Trump, it is a testament of sorts to his success that he retains an ability to shape reality—however harsh and unforgiving—to his own perceptions and inclinations.
There is no reason to think this won’t continue.
For one thing, there is his towering self-assurance.
He may be delusional when he says, as he did last week, that Republicans would have won if he had been on the ballot.
But does anyone think he doesn’t believe it?
Moreover, one thing we have learned about him is that he is at his most potent in the face of extreme adversity: “Access Hollywood,” the 2020 election defeat, the Jan. 6 Capitol Hill riot, his prosecution and conviction, various assassination attempts.
Far from being cowed by the zeal of his enemies, he draws fuel from it.
The multipronged prosecutions in the years after 2021 served only to energize him.
If he really does face a future now of incessant investigation and impeachment, we’d be mad to think that won’t provide further grist for his ambitions.
So what might we expect?
The obvious answer is just about anything.
At home, and despite Mr. Miller’s disobliging views about the Democratic Party, we should consider the possibility that Mr. Trump might be tempted by the lure of some legislative achievements.
What if the Democrats present him with a slew of legislation beloved of progressives: expanding free healthcare coverage, limiting credit-card interest rates, implementing price controls?
Are you sure he’d play Mr. Veto?
These are all things Mr. Trump has advocated.
There has been nothing in his governing approach that suggests a conservative philosophy at odds with some of the more ambitious aims of the left of the Democratic Party.
This may be his true chance at a legacy.
On the world stage, the risks of instability even greater than we have seen the past two years loom large.
Whatever you think of the war with Iran, it’s hard to argue that it has been effectively executed.
If he decides to double down there (or anywhere else), what would give you confidence that a future campaign would be a model of strategic clarity, precision and perseverance that have so far been missing?
Chaos seems more likely.
Might he try to realize some sort of global condominium with his friends Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping and in the process try to deliver the terminal blow to the system of U.S. alliances?
Given the corruption we have gotten used to, how much of our national security might now be hostage to the amount of rent he can extract from governments around the world?
Given all we have seen the past few years, it would be foolish also to dismiss the possibility that Messrs.
Trump and Miller might try to further entrench their aims through the excessive use of executive power.
Who can say what sort of national-security or artificial-intelligence-related states of emergency might arise in the next two years that require extraordinary measures?
Perhaps this is all just a fever dream induced by the sleepless nights of an extraordinary election week.
Maybe Mr. Trump will tire of all the turbulence and spend his last two years just flailing ineffectively at his enemies and pardoning his friends, while real political power moves on and away.
Would you bet on it?
Gerry Baker is Editor at Large of The Wall Street Journal. He writes a weekly column for the editorial page of The Journal each Tuesday on politics, economics and culture. Mr. Baker also writes a weekly column on US and global affairs for The Times of London every Friday.
0 comments:
Publicar un comentario