Divisive Rhetoric Continued in the 2018 US Midterms: The Case of Obama versus Trump

Democratic and Republican speakers in the 2018 midterm campaign mostly told their base voters exactly what they wanted to hear. That was somewhat effective, but it was (needlessly?) divisive. Let’s look at two divisive speeches.

Former President Barack Obama gave a series of campaign speeches during the 2018 midterm election’s closing days. One typical speech was in Gary, Indiana, a steel town not far from Chicago. Very blue-collar ethos, traditionally Democratic, hit hard by economic changes. President Donald Trump stumped for Republican candidates. One typical speech was at a Cleveland, Ohio rally. Also a traditionally blue-collar city, also a steel town, also traditionally Democratic, also hit hard by economic changes.

Donald Trump, WH portrait

Let’s start with Trump. Trump’s rally in Cleveland hammered on immigration issues. No one who looks at actual information could possibly think that immigration is our biggest threat. Illegal immigration is way down, mostly because of economic changes and partly because of changes in law enforcement. Immigrants commit crimes at a lower rate than the American population as a whole. Indeed, the conservative Cato Institute found that immigration does not lead to crime. But immigration is Trump’s signature issue. Build the wall! Separate families! Send the army to stop the immigrant invasion! In his rally speech, Trump said: "Democrats are inviting caravan after caravan. Isn't that right? Illegal aliens to flood into our country and overwhelm our communities." Trump’s fear appeal was obviously a wild exaggeration, but politicians do exaggerate, and Trump is no exception. Democrats are more pro-immigration than most Republican voters, so Trump made his point.

Barack Obama, WH portrait

Obama made the election all about Trump. He said, “when you vote, you can be a check on bad behavior.” He said that, “the only check right now on the behavior of these Republicans is you and your vote.” He became almost apocalyptic: “In two days, you get to vote in what I believe will be the most important election of our lifetimes. I know politicians always say that but this time it’s really true.” He gave a positive but vague theme: “Change is gonna happen. Hope is gonna happen. With each new step we take, hope will spread. Goodness will spread. And you will be the ones who will have done it. It starts with you. Let’s go vote. Let’s go make change. Let’s go make hope.”

That’s all noble enough, but may be off the point. Most local Democratic candidates focused on health care, the issue that Democratic voters care about the most. Media pundits, like Obama, have mostly made the election out to be a referendum on Trump. In the long run, most voters care more about having a successful country than they do about their leaders’ personalities. Trump’s often-outrageous personality is an inviting issue, but it distracts us from what people care about. Although, as I pointed out in my last blog post, issues don’t really drive elections, they do help people focus their s needs and concerns. Issues also give voters a center as they make excuses for supporting their favorite party.

Senator Jeff Flake said that Obama's "tone" was more positive that Trump's. True enough, However, if we want a healthy republic, both speeches disappointed. Trump appealed to nativism, prejudice, and irrationality. He butchered his facts. He made wild accusations that have little basis. He appealed to some of our worst instincts. Obama took a high-minded approach, which is wonderful, but we also need to think about what direction we are traveling. Just being in favor of hope and against “the behavior of these Republicans” isn’t a direction. We know what you oppose. What are you for?

By the way, let us not attach too much meaning to the voting results. The president’s party almost always loses some votes during the midterms. The Republicans lost far fewer Congressional seats than the Democrats did in 2010. The election meant a lot, but it was neither a blue wave nor a repudiation of President Trump. Millions of voters care very much about what Trump is saying and the nation as a whole did not turn against him.

My former professor Charles Urban Larson distinguished between the "pragmatic style" of persuasion and the "unifying style." Even when their presidencies were divisive (Lincoln? The Civil War?), great presidents often speak in a unifying style. Yet Obama and Trump were both divisive, each in his own way. Trump’s speech expressed nasty, untrue accusations. Obama condemned the very concept of Republican leadership. One or the other of them may have been right – I think that Obama came closer than Trump – but both concentrated on dividing us from our own kind rather than unifying us. That, I think, is a real shame. 

P.S. About unifying presidents, I'll need to say more about the underestimated William McKinley. Stay tuned.