The political class is awash in self-serving theories to explain the rise of Donald Trump. Tim Carney blames differences of opinion between cosmopolitan elites and a nationalist base. Charles Murray sees answers in the disintegration of the white working class. Mark Krikorian and other nativists blame popular anger toward immigrants.
While some of these theories can explain portions of Trump’s appeal they are not the whole story. These are age-old grievances. Elites have always been indifferent to the rural poor. The working classes always wallow in self-pity and think they’re falling behind. And Americans claim to be a nation of immigrants, but we tend not to like the new-comers too much.
There are at least three under-explored factors that explain the rise of Trump in 2016 — and none of them are self-serving.
First, he’s a brilliant political entrepreneur. Trump created a political market based on his style much more than he exploited an existing one built on policy grievances. Sure, he tapped into latent populism that has always existed, but he grew it based on his personal brand — the same way he has managed his businesses.
Part of Trump’s brilliance was that he learned from Ross Perot, the last serious populist. Instead of creating a new political party, Trump opted for acquiring an existing one — something he might have learned during his brief attempt to get the Reform Party nomination in 2000.
More
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.