Conversations about Trump?
I've never approved of Trump as president. I was raised in middle America, where Trump got lots of support; however, as a moderate liberal, I've lived for decades in New York City. I am unlike many of the folks who live in this huge liberal bubble because I still have Republican friends and relatives, most of whom not only voted for Trump, but still believe pretty much whatever comes out of his mouth.
The most recent controversy is Trump and Giuliani's contention that Trump won the election by a landslide which was then stolen by huge conspiracy. I have several friends and relatives who buy into that assertion. The issue for me whether and how to respond when that topic comes up for discussion.
One approach is simply to ask some basic questions about accepting Trump's fraud assertions – at the least, you can find out if they ever look outside the Trump bubble for other information and analysis. Here are some of fraud-related questions to which you might get interesting replies from a Trump believer:
Why would such a huge conspiracy only elect Biden but allow Republicans to retain control of the senate and even reduce the Democratic majority in the house?
Since long before the election Trump was saying it would be rigged, why did the Department of Homeland Security investigations before the election result in calling the election “the most secure in American history”? Does that mean Trump's own appointee was part of the conspiracy?
Since the election results are consistent with virtually all the polls preceding the election, does that mean the many polling companies were also part of the conspiracy?
State GOP lawmakers in Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin have all said they would not intervene in the selection of electors, who ultimately cast the votes that secure a candidate’s victory. Are they also participating in the conspiracy?
Since Trump asserted that he was the victim of election fraud even in the 2016 election that he won, why didn't he have that fraud investigated by the FBI and the Homeland Department of Security? Couldn't such an investigation have prevented the 2020 fraud?
Finally, if one wants to get into great detail about typical voting issues are now being cited as conspiracy proof, the Wikipedia page Lawsuits related to the 2020 United States presidential election addresses most all of the conspiracy 'evidence' that has already dismissed in courts around the country. Maybe all the state courts are part of the conspiracy too?
The point of these questions is not to try to change your friend's mind. It is to engage in a civilized conversation in which you learn more about the nature and depth of your friend's belief in Trump.
Trump allegiance — for a significant number of folks — functions as a religion, similar to the way that critical race theory serves as a “theology” for many leftist activists, especially in academia. A prior post, Gusher of white privilege, is an example of how I encountered that in one of my own relatives.
Many anti-Trump folks would find Carl Hoffman's Liar's Circus very helpful. The title is likely offensive to Trump supporters — but for me, it delineated the difference between Trump and his supporters. Several of the folks that attended multiple Trump rallies with the author became good friends to him. It didn't matter to them that he was not a supporter himself. By the end, the author had learned that Trump's rallies were not really just political events. Instead, Trump's rallies actually function as modern versions of America's 19th century evangelical rallies. (The Wikipedia page on “Second Great Awakening” provides a good overview.)
All this might help anti-Trump folks get a better grasp of how to deal with pro-Trump folks. Sadly though, I live in a liberal bubble where most people simply refuse to have any relationship with conservatives, especially pro-Trump supporters.
That is why I was so pleased when I encountered the BraverAngels.org. Braver Angels has the goal of bridging the widening gap in America – promoting civil debates and conversations between the right and the left, Republicans and Democrats, and most relevant now, pro- and anti-Trump folks.
Viewing Trump support as the functional equivalent of a religion is not meant as a disparaging characterization. Instead, it allows one to think about how to engage in civil conversations. For example, I would not try to refute a Christian friend's belief that there will be a Second Coming, something that I don't believe at all. I would, however, be at least somewhat interested in hearing what that friend says about what that meant for his life, for all our lives, for the world we live in, etc. That can lead to an interesting conversation without attacking or disparaging that Christian for his very fundamentalist belief.
So, if there is to be a bridge, it will be like the folks listed in The Red/Blue Pairs of Braver Angels.
#100daystooffload Day 18.