Well, it didn’t take long. When the National Association of Black Journalists (NABJ) handed Trump an opportunity to make an ass of himself, Trump eagerly seized it. He did so by jumping into the deep end of the racial identity pool. His sin was to question the identity of Kamala Harris as “black” rather than Indian.
As if the respective characterizations are (1) important and (2) mutually exclusive. Why skin tone should be important to anyone with an IQ above room temperature is something of a mystery. And as a simple empirical matter, as intermarriage continues to gain ground, lots of Americans have a multi-racial, multi-ethnic background.
None of which should be taken as an excuse for Trump’s real sin, which was, and is, political amateurism. He should have known better than to dive into this trap. In effect he validated the race, class, gender ideology of his opposition.
Similarly, his pick of J.D. Vance, lately of cat-lady fame, to be his running mate demonstrated a foolhardy over-confidence. Not only that, it also provided evidence that the Trump campaign is undeniably amateurish. How else to explain why the campaign could not, or did not, foresee the possibility if not probability that President Joe Biden would be forced out of the race, thus refocusing the campaign. How is it that the campaign did not adequately vet Vance so that they at least had prepared responses to his many controversial remarks?
The best explanation for the unforced errors thus far is that Trump is being…well, Trump. Which is probably the best way to remind voters exactly what they don’t like about Trump. Which is an awful lot. And that leaves out his disgraceful behavior on January 6, 2021 which alone is, or ought to be, disqualifying.
It is also important to recognize the reason that Trump has the Republican nomination. Sure, he was given a big assist by the Democrats’ lawfare campaign, which may turn out to be one of the biggest backfires in the history of American politics. Beyond that though, it has to be acknowledged that Trump secured the nomination by getting far more votes than any of his challengers in the Republican primaries.
Those voters include a lot of people who either believe, or profess to believe, that the 2020 presidential election was stolen. It also includes a whole lot of elected Republican officials who pretend to believe that the election was stolen, some of whom actively encouraged the mob on January 6. Which is another way of saying that this is not your father’s Republican Party.
In some sense then, the nomination of Trump is the exact opposite of the Democrats’ claim that Trump is a threat to democracy. What you see is what you get. And what you see is not another Hitler, despite the fervent beliefs of the Democratic party faithful. On the contrary what Trump represents is transactional politics at its worst. Trump’s core belief is not ideological; rather it is that he should be in charge, details to follow.
What we have in HRH Donald Trump is a 78 year old man with the intellectual and emotional maturity of a 15 year old; a needy adolescent who loves being at the center of attention. Which is exactly where Harris and Co. would like to place him.
So can we use game theory to predict the behavior of voters? Possibly, yes. Let’s make some assumptions about voter preferences and how voters rank order them. Assume the following preferences among the voters.
Trump Voter Pool
- Diehard Trump voters are centered on personality; they want Trump to be president come hell or high water. They do not care very much about policy details.
- Trump voters whose minds are made up feel culturally besieged; they are looking for a counter-cultural leader.
- Trump persuadable voters care somewhat about policy; specifically they care about a fluid border policy, they are bothered by inflation, the family budget and the general state of the economy.
- Possibly persuadable Trump voters are uncomfortable with the personality of Kamala Harris
Harris Voter Pool
(1b) Hard core Progressives and committed Democrats see Harris as ideologically compatible; they want her to be elected. Further, they are convinced that Donald Trump really does represent a threat to democracy.
(2b) People who consider themselves to be liberal and who are college educated; they believe that Harris represents their cultural values. They are squeamish about the Israeli — Hamas War.
(3c) Harris persuadable voters care somewhat about policy; those policies, however, differ somewhat from Trump voters. They are mostly in favor of abortion rights, are worried about climate change, and favor some expanded social programs.
(4d) Potential Harris voters are very uncomfortable with Trump’s personality. They tend to be blue collar, are probably not college degree holders. However they are relatively comfortable, live in suburbs, are probably female, are concerned about crime and public schools and are hesitant about getting stuck with the bill for progressive priorities.
Now lets put the respective priorities in a grid and see what it tells us. (See below).
| HARRIS Voters | ||
| TRUMP Voters | 1, 4 | 3, 2 |
| 2, 3 | 4, 1 | |
Trump voter priorities are rank ordered in the first column in the grid on the left; Harris voter priorities are rank ordered in the second column in the grid on the right. Assuming that the respective priorities are described correctly, it is immediately apparent that neither Trump voters nor Harris voters would be content with a victory by the other side. Each has victory as the #1 priority. Neither will gracefully acknowledge the other’s victory. Trump will insist the election was stolen. Harris will insist that she was done in by racism and mysogenism.
The remaining solutions remain cyclical, meaning either a 3,2 or 2, 3 solution, which suggests that the November results will not be ideologically dispositive. Each side, and especially the losing side, will look forward to the next contest. In turn this suggests that the election campaign will be contested almost exclusively with respect to personnel. And not in a good way.
Policy discussion will be next to non-existent because Trump side policies are inconsistent, entirely transactional and personality driven. On the other hand, the Harris side is largely driven by her personality in that she is the candidate solely because Biden was thrown overboard; her personality (and the Democratic Party) is integrally tied up with identitarian politics, and she will try to run away (perhaps successfully) from the very left-wing proposals she made during the 2020 Democratic primaries.
All in all a game theory model suggests what the polls suggest. Namely, the outcome of the contest is likely to be extremely close; it will satisfy almost no one except hard core supporters, there will be little serious policy discussion and the political system will remain unstable.
That said all is not bleak. There is plenty of policy ferment where people live: at the state and local level. That is cause for hope that the nonsense coming out of the national parties will burn out and we can return to normalcy. One of these days, anyway.
JFB
