Donald J. Trump, once more the putative nominee of the Republican Party for the office of President of the United States, speaks (now and always) in the promotional vernacular of a New York real estate mogul. “Making the sale” in Trumpese means that people, positions and projects he supports are always “fantastic,” invariably “the greatest” (possibly in history), all in all something only a fool couldn’t see. At the other end of the spectrum, those he rejects are “a disgrace” and “a disaster,” scornfully branded “losers,” headed for an ignominious fate that “no one has ever seen before.”
Love it or hate it, employing anything less than the most super of superlatives or damning of pejoratives is simply not his style. Alas, even Mr. Trump’s most ardent supporters realize that what’s commonly recognized as “statesmanlike” language and comportment rarely emanates from this most singular of men.
That fact forms the basis of much of the persistent, almost pathological revulsion to him experienced by those who, for reasons perhaps mostly related to ego, are unable to also factor his undeniable strengths into their equation. They can’t come to terms with the fact that this rollercoaster ride he’s endured over the last eight or so years has nevertheless failed to persuade him of the necessity of appreciably altering his manner of expression.
Rather than seeking to inspire or even uplift, Trump the salesman has always attempted to “close” the deal. His aggressive, Patton-like posture and exaggerated language often annoys those raised from childhood to abstain from bragging, but also in the process serves to starkly reveal the prejudices of those attempting to twist his provocative words into something sinister and threatening.
The recent auto industry “bloodbath” kerfuffle at an Ohio rally is a prime example of the media’s sophomoric attempts to paint Mr. Trump as a dangerous figure while assiduously ignoring the peril created by Joe Biden and his cohorts as they push this country into a depth of disrepair and division from which we may never recover.
The ungodly mess Biden and company have made of things both foreign and domestic has caused many voters, who for a variety of reasons, turned against Mr. Trump in 2020 to re-evaluate their disdain for his less-than-presidential quirks. Indeed, politically-incorrect tweets and ill-advised outbursts don’t look so bad now when also accompanied by years of prosperity, low inflation, and a relatively peaceful world.
But there’s one issue where #45’s earthiness may require a little refining, perhaps a defter touch before he can safely be sworn in as #47. Those potential Democrat logs on the tracks intended to derail the Trump train are of course the controversy over abortion.
President Biden’s grating SOTU address, complete with an Obama-esque public flogging of the Supreme Court, leaves little doubt that he and the Democrats consider the abortion issue to be their get out of jail card, their virtual reprieve from the governor, sparing them the political execution their dismal handling of the nation’s affairs has justly earned. It didn’t occur to Mr. Biden’s speechwriter/handlers in crafting this discordant national harangue that of all the people to threaten with the “political power of women,” members of the Supreme Court are the least appropriate officials to address in this manner. It’s their clear duty to keep their eyes firmly planted on the Constitution and ignore prevailing political winds and passions of the kind to which Mr. Biden mindlessly alluded.
But Biden’s people are not wrong in concluding that there are millions of female voters who consider access to abortion at some stage of a pregnancy as a sine qua non, ruling out support for any candidate who is perceived to be seeking to block its availability.
And Trump, the man seen as the principal organizer of Roe v. Wade’s overruling, is of course the one set by Dems to take the rap. Kamala Harris’s recent visit to an abortion clinic, once considered out of bounds for even the most stridently pro-choice of politicians, is an attempt to shove the issue to the very forefront of the upcoming presidential contest.
How ironic it would be if it came to pass that it took a brash, occasionally crude, notoriety obsessed real estate developer/reality show host, multiply betrothed tabloid celebrity — and oh yeah, highly competent single term president of the United States now seeking the office again — to turn the tables on his opponents and point a reasonable way out of the decades-long morass in which we have been mired, all over the practice of abortion.
But unlikely as it may seem at first blush, the vicissitudes of American politics have put Trump in just such a position of opportunity, however fraught it is with danger.
There are indications that Mr. Trump plans an important announcement laying out his post-Dobbs position in the next few days. Will he be bold or try to play it safe?
Successfully navigating this political minefield will require carefully chosen words, a seriousness in both expression and demeanor that up until now has very often eluded Mr. Trump, especially when addressing one of his raucous rallies. He will need to gently suggest a concept that has hitherto been almost completely absent from the abortion debate — the dreaded “C” word — compromise.
Mr. Trump has always been a far deeper thinker than his prosaic words would indicate, and he’s obviously thought hard about how to present his views. On occasion he’s dipped a toe in the water, obliquely suggesting that the six week “fetal heartbeat” limitation advanced by Florida (and his defeated former challenger Ron DeSantis) and Texas is “too restrictive,” and has come to the realization that most Americans seem to support a limit of 15 weeks or so.
The recent amendment of the French constitution, ostentatiously “enshrining” abortion rights into French law and society, offers insight into the muddled way liberals around the world view abortion. Ostensibly hailed as a reaction to the “narrowing” of women’s rights as a result of the overruling of Roe in the U.S., one would have to search long and hard (if it appeared at all) into a typical celebratory account of the French legislation to find any mention that the amendment’s “guaranteed right” to an abortion remains as it was in the first fourteen weeks of pregnancy — more or less in line with the laws of other western European nations. At the same time, the less restrictive fifteen week limit imposed by the Mississippi law that formed the basis of the reviled Dobbs decision is routinely termed a ban by American and world media.
Now it’s just possible that come November, Joe and Kamala will have made such a hash of things that abortion is too far down on voters’ priorities to any longer be crucial to Trump’s chances. The eradicated southern border and the violent crime/drug/terrorism problem it creates, stubborn inflation, and a nightmarishly erupting world may work to obscure abortion in peoples’ minds. But in a close race, with Democrats pulling their usual ballot harvesting shenanigans, those “suburban women” we’ve heard about interminably for years may yet again be positioned to play a critical role.
Whatever Trump decides to do, whether he goes big or tries to finesse the issue, there will be some people that are left unsatisfied, perhaps angry. A pursued compromise, by its very nature means that no side will get entirely what it wants. Abortion absolutists on both sides may be disappointed; but Trump finds himself in a unique position to actually do some good on a very thorny issue. Can the consummate salesman suggest an acceptable middle ground? It will require not just salesmanship, but the utilization of that other seldom heard word in connection with abortion: the “P” word if you will — persuasion.
Does Trump have the right words in him for real, honest to goodness statesmanship? Will he even need them to beat this imposter posing as a president?
Stay tuned.
American Thinker
Comments are closed.