Trump is a brilliant communicator to a certain audience

Trump is a brilliant communicator to a certain audience. By Emile Doak.

Donald Trump will end the war in Ukraine in 24 hours. That alone is reason to support his candidacy.

Trump’s plan for doing so is, admittedly, light on details. In an interview with Fox News’s Maria Bartiromo, Trump claimed his “very good” relationships with Zelensky and Putin would put him in position for a swift negotiation. “I would tell Zelensky ‘no more, you gotta make a deal’,” the former president said, “I would tell Putin ‘if you don’t make a deal, we’re gonna give ‘em a lot’.”

The Washington Post called it “a remarkably simplistic — even nonsensical — plan to end the conflict,” and labeled the boast that he would end the war within 24 hours “basically his new ‘build the wall and make Mexico pay for it’.”

It’s an apt comparison — but perhaps not in the way the Post meant it.

For the past eight years, the standard response of Trump’s critics to his bombastic rhetoric has been incredulity, frantic fact-checking, and ridicule.

A 2018 analysis showing that Trump communicates at around a fourth-grade level frequently comes up in response to his more grandiose and straightforward claims. But while the elites of both parties may snicker at those who want to win “bigly,” Trump’s rhetoric is rewriting the political map.

Whether one is convinced by his plan to end the war (or to build the wall, or stop the steal, or any other Trumpian turn of phrase) is beside the point.

Electoral politics is no longer about policy proposals. The issues we now debate in the political arena don’t really belong there; they are pre-political, stemming from fundamental disagreements about the nature of the country, of the good, of man himself.

Trump is the change-course (or up-yours) candidate:

As a result, the GOP-primary and unaffiliated voters that make up “the base” want their candidate to paint a clear vision for the country. They want a vision that stands in stark contrast to the onslaught of contempt for them and their way of life, and that is capable of stirring aspirations of what once was—and could be again.

Trump’s clear goals, not plans, stand in stark contrast to focus-group tested soundbites that dominate the rest of the political conversation. On substance and rhetoric, Trump consistently challenges the failed vision for America upheld by the bipartisan ruling class. And that is what people want to hear.

“China is ripping us off.” “Total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the U.S.” “Greatest jobs president that God ever created.” “Very fine people on both sides.” The “China virus” and “Kung flu.” “Impeachment Hoax 1” and “Impeachment Hoax 2.”

At its best, there is a self-assuredness about Trump’s speech that evokes an America that can’t be bullied by the commissars of diversity, equity, and inclusion. His rhetoric baits the gatekeepers of our discourse to denounce it, and him. This is all to the good for the vast swaths of this country left behind by the march of Progress. …

The others just don’t have it (except perhaps Vivek Ramaswamy, in a different sort of way). The other political figure who cuts through by asking honest questions in direct language is Tucker Carlson:

Tucker and Trump’s propensity to cut through Beltway jargon and speak to a coherent and aspirational vision of this country is why the two are the most powerful figures in Republican politics.

The fact is, for better or for worse, Trump’s straightforward rhetoric is the key to his continued sway over the Republican Party. It may be light on the details, but doubling down on “End the war in 24 hours” will do more to bring pressure to bear for the cause of peace than any fifteen point plan for diplomacy

And doesn’t Big Narrative hate Tucker and Trump?