Relatable to the average working-class American
Yesterday on Fresh Air Terry Gross talked to J. D. Vance, who wrote a memoir about growing up in rust-belt Ohio and hill country Kentucky, and being that kind of white working class. It’s an interesting interview, but in the last segment they talk about Trump and how he appeals to Vance’s family and friends – and his answers make no sense to me.
GROSS: I think a lot of people are mystified that working-class people would find anything to relate to in somebody whose accent might sound working class but was born into wealth and has, you know, is a billionaire if you, you know, listen to what he says about his net worth and who has, you know, like, you know, gold all over his many properties. I mean, there’s – he’s – it’s such an extravagantly flaunting it rich lifestyle that he leads. Like, it’s always a little hard to understand why somebody who so strongly identifies as working class would think that somehow he’d be able to best represent their interests.
Well, exactly – plus the fact that the way Trump made his money is building and selling massively expensive condos to massively rich people. He’s all about the big bucks and the people who have them. He calls people who aren’t like him “losers.” He doesn’t have a humane or egalitarian thought in his head.
I’m afraid I think Vance’s reply is unadulterated bullshit.
VANCE: I certainly understand why a lot of folks are surprised. I think a big part of it is just the way that Donald Trump conducts himself. A lot of people feel that you can’t trust anything Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama say, not because they necessarily lied a lot but because they sound so filtered and they sound so rehearsed. Donald Trump, if nothing else, is relatable to the average working-class American because he speaks off the cuff. He’s clearly unfiltered and unrehearsed.
Oh come on. That’s just childish.
And there is something relatable about that, even if, you know, half of the things that he says don’t make any sense or a quarter of the things that he says are offensive. There’s something to be said about relatability. And it’s not, you know – there’s been a lot written about how elite political conversation is not emotionally relatable to big chunks of the country. I think that in a lot of ways, Trump is just the first person to tap into that sense of disconnect in the way that he conducts himself with politics.
Ugh. He may be right about the facts, I don’t know, but the way he frames it is infuriating – as if Clinton and Obama are doing something wrong by being knowledgeable and polite, and it’s better and more “relatable” to be ignorant, rude, and belligerent.
A bit later Gross presses him on that point:
GROSS: I’m just curious, though, in terms of the cultural difference you see between your life and the Clintons’ – like, Hillary Clinton’s mother was, I think, poor. Bill Clinton had a single mother who was somewhere between poor and working class. They have a lot of money now. You have a lot of money now.
VANCE: Yeah. So I think that there are obviously a lot of things that are relatable about Hillary and Bill Clinton. But fundamentally, they’ve surrounded themselves by very elite people who went to very elite universities. And because of that, both in the way they conduct themselves and the things they seem to care about – they just seem very different from the people that I grew up around. And that makes it very hard for me to feel that Clinton – Hillary or Bill Clinton are very relatable.
But campaigns for president aren’t about being everyone’s best friend. Being “relatable” in the sense of not seeming educated should not be a criterion. I get it that everybody’s touchy and on the defensive about people who are more educated than they are, but all the same, you’d think people would also manage to accept that more and better education has its uses for government jobs.
As an Israeli, this sounds just like the whole ‘Peres is unreliable’ line all over again. Not sure where this idea came from, but any lie stuck to him, including implausible things like ‘his mother was an Arab’. Because he is an intelligent man who speaks like one. (And doesn’t blink enough, apparently).
Ummm…Trump has made a big deal about how he went to Wharton. That’s a pretty elite pedigree…very elite people who go to very elite universities?
By the way, when did intelligence and education become disqualifiers for the job of President? I remember during Dubya’s campaigns, I heard people say “I don’t want a president who’s smarter than me.” WTF? The one thing I can guarantee is that I DO want a president who is smarter than me…or at least as smart, and maybe smart in a different area, since I’m not sure how much good the education I have in Biology and Playwriting would do in determining foreign or domestic policy.
It’s the fucking “who would you like to drink a beer with?” bullshit all over again.
Forgive me if I’ve made this point here before, but: the reason Trump appeals to some economically disadvantaged people is that Trump acts the way many of them fantasize they would act if they were rich. Gold watches, gold chairs, gold toilets. Your name on everything: your buildings, your planes, your casinos. Dating and marrying models. Playing golf with celebrities. But still eating fast food, because you’re a real person at heart, not some fancy-schmancy pretentious guy. Not taking any shit from anyone, especially not anyone who isn’t as rich as you.
Still, I wouldn’t overdo this aspect of things. As many people have pointed out recently, any explanation of Trump’s appeal to the working class needs to explain the fact that black and Hispanic working class voters seem immune to his “charms,” and working class women have a pretty solid resistance factor, too. The people who are screaming “build that wall” are not disaffected folks who are just concerned about the economic implications of international trade. They’re people who yearn for the unspecified past (the 80s? the 50s? the 19th century?) when America was last “great,” and there’s a large dose of white male outrage fueling that.
It seems many of working class are inclined to vote for Trump because they feel their concerns and perspectives have been dismissed by the mainstream. So let’s keep dismissing their concerns and perspectives. That’ll fix it.
Sea Monster, are the concerns of working class members of racial minorities or working class women being addressed better?
Their concerns and perspectives essentially boil down to “my life sucks and its those brown/homo/womens’ fault”, so yeah, dismissing them as garbage is appropriate.
By the way, I am working class and pretty damn poor yet I don’t see the appeal to decent human beings. There’s only one conclusion you can come to based on that.
Sea Monster, I agree that the concerns of the working class are regularly and systematically dismissed by the mainstream media and by political people, at least in their rhetoric. But what I don’t see is how Trump addresses that, or will do anything about it, much less how he will make life any better for the working class.
On the contrary I think it’s quite shockingly condescending to talk as if just being noisy and “politically incorrect” is all it takes – to talk as if the working class is interested in style but not at all in, for instance, unions.
Is Trump a big fan of unions?
[…] he’s “relatable.” That’s what counts, […]
The stuff of charisma, appeal, whatever the hell that is, I gotta admit, it’s all a bit opaque to me. I mean, it’s no great embarrassment to confess it here or nothing, I figure, but: I _really_ don’t like the guy. Like fingernails on a blackboard Do Not Want, every time his ugly mug or voice intrudes upon my space. Gives me hives. He’s not the first. Nor I figure likely to be the last. There’s this poisonous falsity, this smarm about him. Always has been. Long before he took it into his head he should run for president.
It’s kinda a distinctive category for me. I mean: there’s people I could imagine I might get along with on a personal level, but I don’t want to see in office because I think they lack judgement or experience. then there’s others I figure I might also bump along with well enough if pressed and who might have both those, well enough, but who I still I don’t want to see in office because I think their policies will on balance do no great good to anyone…
And then there’s people I just don’t want to have to see or read or hear. At all. Ever. Under any circumstances. Because they’re just really icky. And everything about them screams to me ‘sleazy, manipulative shit’. People whose ‘reality TV’ I would not inflict upon myself any more than I’d drink lye (And maybe it’s obvious, but: I think it’s fair to say: anyone in this last group, yeah, don’t want them in office, either.)
So, yeah, it’s a bit opaque to me, this ‘charisma’ people talk of, this apparently folksy appeal. A millionaire on the radio singing ‘new country’ with an affected twang he probably learned from a vocal coach and making bucks on his ‘authenticity’ has some of the same plastic, ostentatious ugliness, this faux rustic thing, speaking of. People get their back up seeing snottiness, snobbiness, but I’ll take someone with a straight-up Oxford accent and more than a bit of hauteur and sipping a glass of cognac, being what he actually is and not pretending one damned bit–I’ll take _that_ happily if the other option is someone from the same country club pretending all of a sudden he’s just one of the miners the moment he wants their votes or their signature on the contract for whatever ripoff he’s selling now. Nothing sets my teeth on edge like those cons. Incredibly insulting. Yes, do please insult my intelligence in _addition_ to just being nasty. Fuck off, seriously, with that.
But here’s the thing: not so much surprising, either. But somehow, all this ‘oh, we could have a beer with him’ weirdness is the one bit of all this I actually don’t just shake my head over…
First, because I’m used to this. It’s pretty much predictable, now. If he gives me hives, there’s a huge group will absolutely _love_ him. Were I (more) evil I figure I could probably rent myself out. Bring your candidate to me for a highly predictive test: if my hair stands on end and I audibly, painfully hiss when I meet him, you’ve probably got yourself something will absolutely get you killer votes with the ‘we loves us a smarmy, despicable faith healer type’ crowd.
Second, you don’t have to be able to stand him actually to grasp: he _is_ slick, in his own little repellent way, inside the box he can work his magic in. Just watch him. He knows how to tell people exactly what they want to hear. It’s like watching a soapbox preacher at work; scary terrorists and criminals and Economic! Disaster! where that other operator delivers fire and brimstone. People love to be told the Earth is a place of tribulation, but you, my brethren, are my chosen, and I will protect you! (Only me, of course. That’s just traditional.) Seriously, it’s like watching Popoff or any of that lot at work, again.
As to this ‘working class’ thing (again), I think it’s a bit of a simplification. Even a bit of a distortion. Even the myth he _wants_ to project (and, as with everything he tells you, check it because look, people, he lies as easy as breathing). And, more kindly, I think media and everyone else do like to keep things simple, and it’s just the standard narrative they’ve been presented, so here it’s just: let’s go get some folk who fit that story. So sure, there _are_ people you can interview who aren’t making a whole lot who hope his protectionism will do them some good (and no, I do not find this entirely irrational–very unwise, even very naive, given his history, but not entirely irrational). But what polling we’ve got doesn’t exactly show his supporters as lunch bucket types exclusively, exactly (to put it gently). So it doesn’t look to me like the whole of the working class is exactly buying this wholesale or anything. To their credit.
It difficult to retain the appropriate pretense of sympathy or respect for anyone foolish enough to think that Trump represents anything but himself.
But it seems that if a demagogue can hit certain buttons, he can generate a level of support that is impervious to contrary facts. Outsiders considered Hitler absurd, but to a unexpectedly large class of Germans, he was mesmerizing. There are accounts of people attending his speeches on a lark, and coming away as dazed converts.
There is nothing ‘elite’ about frustratingly formulaic and evasive public speech. I loved that when Hitchens wrote an essay on ‘PC’ he chose Clarence Thomas as his chief exhibit. The language of evasion and euphemism permeates the broad range of social/political attitudes.
Trump, like Fred Phelps and perhaps Anjem Choudary, gains a bit of extra ‘juice’ from shock value.
People often claim to want authenticity in politicians but it is very difficult for politicians to be authentic because they do a job where they have to make compromises and alliances. They cannot simply say and do anything they want. An authentic politician is often an unelectable one.
I am always puzzled by the way people see Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage as “authentic” but it’s because they don’t pretend not to be elite. While David Cameron downplayed his poshness and forgot which football team he supported, Boris Johnson happily plays into the humourous posh person role and comes across as a jolly good sport as a result. They are also good communicators. The politicians who avoid looking at the camera and mumble are probably more authentic but the ones who can appear at ease are considered more trustworthy, when actually they are just better performer.
All I’ve really seen of Trump are short clips. That’s all I need, that’s all it takes. The things he was saying might have been being taken “out of context”, but there is no context imaginable (short of directly quoting someone else) in which these statements are not bullshit or horrible, racist bigotry.
“Nobody knows the system better than I do.”
(Shrug. Smirk. It’s like he knows he’s telling a whopper. Which, of course he is, having never been in public service or held elected office.)
“Which is why I alone can fix it.”
Alone, he can do very little. The only things “he alone” could possibly fix involve organ transplants requiring an exact tissue match. Even then, he’d need the help of surgeons. He has an inflated sense of what he as President would be able to do.There is no political task which he is somehow uniquely qualified to perform, no thing he could do that nobody else would be completely incapable of doing.
Bullshit and delusion neatly encapsulated in two sentences.