Reality show politics
This week in Israel, President Trump told Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and a roomful of Israelis that, “As you know, Rex, the Secretary of State, has done an incredible job, we just got back from the Middle East …” Most of the room was too tactful to express their surprise at the statement, but in a moment of exasperation, Israel’s ambassador to the United States covered his face with his right hand. For Trump watchers this kind of gaffe has become commonplace: first-name references to senior officials, the childish adjective, the near-total ignorance of geography, or politics, or history. A former White House speechwriter has quipped that the President is essentially a low-information voter who has won the White House. It is painful enough to watch him “discover” the details of governance after months of boasting about his grasp of the issues – “who knew healthcare was so complicated?” – but when he ventures abroad to flaunt his know-nothing indifference, the damage to America’s reputation is irreparable.
What makes the Trump Show terrifying is also what makes it such compelling television.
the show that made Trump into a household name, was conceived as a boardroom version of the breakout reality show
In the original, the last person on the island was invariably the most cynical, Machiavellian, least embarrassable, or the one immune to doubt or introspection. Trump showed that similar narcissism could prevail in business, and when his show became a multiseason hit, he arguably learned more about the dynamics of television than any politician of his generation. When assessing the lacklustre candidates for the 2016 GOP nomination, he knew instinctively that he could outsell them all in the giant infomercial that America’s elections have essentially become. What he did not know, and thus far has apparently failed to learn, is how to govern after the sale had been made.
journalist Matt Taibbi, describes US broadcast media as “two different strategies of the same kind of nihilistic lizardbrained sensationalism” and adds: “When you make the news into this kind of consumer business, pretty soon audiences lose the ability to distinguish between what they think they’re doing, informing themselves, and what they’re actually doing, shopping.” Trump’s most useful insight into this reality was that viewers would forgive a salesman anything if he was peddling a truly seductive dream. His sure-footedness in the new landscape was evident from his capacity to outlast controversies that would have ended any previous candidacy. He disparaged Mexicans, questioned the patriotism of Senator John McCain, mocked a Gold Star family, spoke about groping women, lied repeatedly and then denied that he had done so, brazenly, to the
increasing consternation of the mainstream media. In the end it turned out that they needed him – for audience figures and ad revenue – more than he needed them. But despite turning this insight into a stunning victory in the general elections, he has yet to move beyond the blustering, unapologetically illinformed and improvisational style that characterized his campaign.
Fortunately, the first four months of his chaotic, scandal-ridden and surreal presidency have shown that American politics remains constitutionally resistant to autocracy. Despite Trump’s best efforts – appointing family members to positions for which they are completely unqualified, ignoring the advice of better-informed people, asserting and contradicting his own policies with equal confidence – he has largely failed to impose his will on the American people. With growing frustration he has found out that governance by executive order is impractical and key departments in his administration remain woefully understaffed. Temporary victories such as the rollback of Obamacare have also been undercut by the realization that the new president lacks the skills needed to make the complex arguments or build the coalitions necessary for transformative legislation.
Somewhat surprisingly, his communications strategy has been a disaster.
On the other hand, the institutional power of the presidency has permitted Trump to ignore the restrictions in the emoluments clause, to outrun mounting suspicions about possible collusion between his campaign and Russia, to freely admit to obstructing justice, leaking top-secret information, and half a dozen other unprecedented and barely credible missteps. He has survived these embarrassments without a consequential rebuke from his party, much less a credible threat of impeachment. This may change, but if his record has shown anything it is that Trump can get through scrapes that would end most other careers. In the meantime, the rest of the world must learn how to watch his dark reality show presidency with a poker face, lest Washington mistake our collective incredulity for contempt.