Why Democrats Hear a Secret Racist Dog Whistle and Republicans Don’t (Regarding Trump)

One of the biggest misconceptions about Trump supporters is that they see President Trump the same way his critics see him, and yet they like him anyway. The implication of that belief is that all Trump supporters are racists because they damn-well-know they support a leader who is one. Hardly a day goes by without some stranger on Twitter telling me in ominous tones that I will someday pay dearly for being a racist “apologist.” They assume I see President Trump the same way they see him.

In my book Win Bigly, I describe how the public is watching two movies on one screen. In Movie 1, Trump is a monster with many flaws, racism being at the top of the list. In Movie 2, President Trump ran on a platform of being a Republican who disdains political correctness, and the predictable outcome of that is non-stop accusations of racism. As a public service, I compiled some of the plot differences in the two movies, roughly in the order they happened, so you can compare the two scripts. I won’t try to convince you to switch movies. I’m only making the point that Trump supporters literally don’t see what anti-Trumpers regard as obvious.

Movie 1: In 1973, five years after the Fair Housing Act, Trump’s business settled a claim that it had discriminated against African-American applicants, thus proving he is a racist.

Movie 2: Employees of Trump’s company, whose incomes depended on their job performance, discriminated against African-American applicants in the belief that other potential tenants would be racists and less likely to want to live in a diverse building. Housing discrimination of that type is illegal. The Trump organization settled the suit out of court and took steps to make sure it wouldn’t happen again. There are no facts in evidence of Trump’s inner thoughts from 45 years ago.

Movie 1: In 1989, Trump paid for a full-page ad in the New York Times calling for the death penalty for five African American men falsely accused of rape, thus proving he is a racist. He has never apologized, thus confirming he is a racist.

Movie 2: in 1989, Trump paid for a full-page ad in the New York times saying it was time to get tough on crime, including perhaps using the death penalty. The ad made one indirect reference to the Central Park incident as an example, at a time the police and prosecutors believed the accused were guilty. The ethnicities of the accused was neither mentioned nor implied in Trump’s ad. The topic was crime. When the accused were later cleared, Trump did not apologize, which is normal for him. He doesn’t apologize for anything.

Movie 1: Prior to running for President, private citizen Trump promoted the conspiracy theory that President Obama might have been born in Africa, thus proving Trump is a racist.

Movie 2: Questioning a rival’s eligibility for office, for any reason, is normal politics. We observe Trump using every available form of persuasion against any critic who gets in his way. For example, during the 2016 Republican primaries he also questioned whether Ted Cruz was a Canadian citizen (he isn’t), and wondered aloud if Cruz’ father might have been involved in the assassination of President Kennedy (he wasn’t). In order to believe Trump was acting racist in questioning President Obama’s birth certificate, one must also believe he would not use the same tactic against a white candidate if the opportunity presented itself. In Movie 2, that seems deeply unlikely.

Movie 1: During the speech in which Trump announced his candidacy, he referred to illegal immigrants from Mexico as “rapists,” thus proving he is a racist.

Movie 2: President Trump noted that one of the big problems with illegal immigration from Mexico is that there are criminals in the group, and this country doesn’t need any more crime. This message was consistent with his tough-on-crime stance. The call-out of rape in particular might have been inspired by stories such as this one from Huffington Post, one of the President’s most vocal critics.

Movie 1: In an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper, candidate Trump hesitated to disavow David Duke and the KKK, thus proving he is a racist.

Movie 2: President Trump disavowed David Duke, the KKK, and White Supremacists multiple times, both before and after the Jake Tapper interview. Trump said he couldn’t hear Jake’s question because of a faulty earpiece. Trump seemed confused and/or hesitant about the question.

During the Tapper interview scene, Trump asked for a list of who he was being asked to disavow, clearly signaling that he sensed a trap coming. Would Trump next be asked to disavow non-racist groups that supported his tough-on-immigration stance? The media had already branded those supporters as racist too. In trying to avoid that obvious trap, Trump fumbled the question and made things worse. But racism was never the problem.

Movie 1: Steve Bannon is a known white supremacist, so having him on the campaign staff and later briefly as an advisor in the White House proves Trump is a racist.

Movie 2: Steve Bannon is tough on illegal immigration, and tough on immigration from Muslim-majority countries with poor government records. His critics have framed him as being a racist because of it. People who know him personally say he isn’t.

Movie 1: Racist groups support Trump because they hear his secret racist dog whistle, thus proving he is a racist.

Movie 2: Racists approve of Trump’s tough immigration policies in part, one assumes, because they think it will allow fewer non-whites into the country. Non-racist Trump supporters support Trump’s immigration policies because they place a high priority on law and order. Different groups can like the same thing for different reasons. For example, target shooters like guns, and murderers like guns, but that doesn’t make target shooters murderers.

Movie 1: Trump once referred to African-Americans as “the blacks,” thus proving he is racist.

Movie 2: Trump says almost everything differently than the average person, and he doesn’t obsess over political correctness.

Movie 1: President Trump said a “Mexican” judge couldn’t be fair, thus proving he is racist.

Movie 2: President Trump spoke about the judge using the common vernacular, in the the same way Americans typically talk about their own ethnic backgrounds. Ask a neighbor whose grandparents immigrated to the United States from Italy to describe his family and he’s likely to say, “We’re Italian.”

Trump mentioned Judge Curiel’s Mexican heritage to point out that it could be a source of bias in the Trump University case because the media had successfully framed Trump as being racist against U.S. residents with Mexican roots. In the context of a legal case, it can be good strategy to question a judge’s impartiality. The intended effect of it is to influence the judge to bend over backwards to avoid the appearance of bias. In this situation, Judge Curiel had to rule on when to schedule the trial, and he chose the option that had the best appearance of fairness, scheduling it after the election, as Trump preferred. Trump’s legal strategy probably worked.

Movie 1: Trump called White Supremacists “fine people,” thus proving he is a racist.

Movie 2: Trump has publicly disavowed white supremacists numerous times, both before and after running for president. In the context of Charlottesville, the “fine people” he was referring to were non-racists who prefer keeping confederate statues for historical/cultural reasons. The anti-Trump wing of the media distorted President Trump’s statements to fit their racist narrative, saying incorrectly that he referred to the racists with tiki torches as the “fine people.” He didn’t.

Movie 1: President Trump referred to the African-American football players kneeling during the national anthem in protest of police brutality as “sons of bitches,” thus proving he is a racist.

Movie 2: President Trump would criticize any American who disrespected the country. The main topic of the NFL protests has been police brutality, but the method of protest strikes many observers as disrespect for the flag.

Movie 1: During a closed meeting, Trump referred to people from several non-white-majority countries as “shit,” thus proving he is a racist.

Movie 2: In the context of immigration, Trump referred to some countries as “shithole countries” as a shorthand way of saying they have poor educational systems and low-performing economies. During the meeting, Trump asked for an explanation on the pros and cons of favoring those countries for immigration versus a merit-based system.

Movie 1: President Trump referred to illegal immigrants as “animals,” thus proving he is a racist.

Movie 2: President Trump referred to MS-13 gang members as animals and the media took it out of context to mean immigrants in general.

Movie 1: Roseanne tweeted that Valerie Jarrett, who is part African-American, was like a cross between the Muslim Brotherhood and Planet of the Apes. Years earlier, Roseanne once tweeted that Susan Rice, who is African-American, was a man with big swinging ape balls. President Trump did not disavow Roseanne’s comparisons of black people to apes, thus proving he is racist.

Movie 2: Roseanne said she didn’t know Valerie Jarrett was part African-American, and neither did most Trump supporters who couldn’t deduce her ethnic background by looking at her. That suggests Roseanne uses insulting monkey references no matter the assumed ethnicity of the target. President Trump did not disavow Roseanne’s tweet because the accusation that it was intentional racism was fake news. Trump supporters see Roseanne’s Planet of the Apes reference as a humorous comparison to the character played by Helena Bonham Carter, a white actress. And Trump supporters understand that white people routinely compare other white people to monkeys. For example, parents call their own grandkids monkeys. And they sometimes refer to large white men as big apes. In Movie 2, Roseanne made a terrible mistake, but it wasn’t an intentional racist reference.

Movie 1: President Trump succeeded in banning several Muslim-majority countries from immigration to the United States, thus proving he is a racist.

Movie 2: President Trump banned immigration from countries with dysfunctional governments because it is hard to do background checks without reliable government records. The focus on Muslim countries is because Islamic terrorists can more easily blend in with Muslim refugees than they could with non-Muslim refugees, and we know they have tried to do exactly that.

As I often say, we humans are not good at knowing which movie is the “real” one because the facts in evidence often fit more than one explanation of the past. So instead of looking to the past, I recommend seeing which movie best predicts future scenes.

For example, if you had been making predictions based on these different movies, Movie 1, predicted that President Trump would not be popular with Israel, and he wouldn’t take the bold step of moving the American embassy to Jerusalem. But both of those outcomes are compatible with Movie 2.

Movie 1 would have predicted there is no way President Trump would grant a posthumous pardon of African-American boxer Jack Johnson because it wouldn’t fit the racist dog whistle script. But Movie 2 is compatible with the pardon. Same with the pardon of Alice Johnson.

Movie 1 would have predicted that President Trump would underplay the fact that black unemployment reached its best level in the history of America. That’s the sort of accomplishment that would make his racist supporters stop hearing the secret racist dog whistle. It doesn’t fit. But President Trump’s frequent highlighting of gains for African-American citizens fits Movie 2 perfectly.

I realize no one reading this post will change movies because of it. My only point today is that mainstream Trump supporters are not knowingly supporting someone they believe to be a racist. It only looks that way to the folks trapped in Movie 1.

Scott Adams is the author of the famous comic strip Dilbert, and rather famously called the election for Trump rather early, say in July of 2016. His analysis is based on his study of persuasion techniques, which he immediately recognized Trump an expert at.

This rather long post from his blog is as good an explanation of how the Left and Right view various current issues as anything I’ve seen, and is useful in understanding where the Left is coming from. It doesn’t make their views any more acceptable, but it’s useful from a “know thine enemy” standpoint.

Liberals are quick to accuse other people of being biased but they’re unwilling to acknowledge the fact they’re biased against other people, too.

Unless it’s so obvious that even the casual observer can discern it then you’re the damned rascist for assuming it is offensive and racist. Ironic that those living in their gentrified lily white neighborhoods are the ones most vociferous in their outrage. The first time someone of color approaches them on their street or god forbid, moves in next door, they will sh*t their pants. The liberals are the true racists. Not a comment directed at the poster I responded to, just a general comment on the subject :-)

Trump: libtards loved him, before they hated him.

Look at all the pics of bigtime libs all sh1t-eating smiles and laughs aroud Trump before he took down the white whale (or she took herself down).

Everyone one of us is biased... that’s human nature and liberals don’t consider themselves biased because they assume everyone subscribes to the values of the dominant liberal culture.

And they’re shocked, confused, repelled and angry when they discover people exist who don’t and who reject and that leads them to conclude those people are bigoted.

We really are watching two different movies in America.

Why Democrats Hear a Secret Racist Dog Whistle and Republicans Don’t...Democrats don't hear any "Secret Racist Dog Whistle" - they have no ideas or policies that can match conservative/Republicans in a reasoned, dispassionate discussion, and so use diversionary, specious accusations such as "racism" and attendant accoutrement including "dog whistles" to distract from the real issues and beat the opposition into submission - trying to out-argue them when such phantom crap starts flying is only playing into their hands - argue the issues instead....

I think that’s part of his success. He was around them, at their parties and events for years, and he was the non-drinker in the crowd. He picked up a LOT of useful intelligence.

This was a very clear explanation from Scott. The two movie thesis is one of the best. And is why no one believes anyone anymore.

I have to ask, "if you can't change the movie you are watching because of Adams' blog post--then you are an idiot."

Adams makes the point with a question--which narrative fits future events? If your "movie" fails to explain future events-- you are in the wrong movie.

Why Democrats Hear a Secret Racist Dog Whistle...

You know you catch AIDS of the ear? By listening to too many assholes!

Re: "Muslim Ban Scene"

Also, the ban list was created by the Obama administration. They determined that it was impossible to get reliable background data on travelers from those countries.

An excellent summary.

Liberals, while claiming to be the most tolerant people on earth, can’t believe that other people have intelligent and well thought out reasons for disagreeing with them.

I make this point frequently when sparring with ‘tards. Most have no response (I’ve skewered them), and the typical retort is that they “know better” now.

My next reply is usually something to the effect that, had he run on the “D” ticket they would all be standing in line to fellate him. That usually gets the homo card in response - not debating the fact that he would have gotten huge support from the left, but rather a deflection.

I think this is well done. I bet the book is good as well. This is so very true. I spend every day behind enemy lines, though the Gullibles I deal with don’t understand anything for real. They just say and believe what the Propaganda asks them to.

Thanks for posting this... Great Read!! He is exactly right.

I made a simple comment on a news channel 3 article (local Phoenix news station) that had my congress critter saying this is America and we don’t separate children from families... I said excuse me but we take American kids away from American parents every day when they commit crimes and go off to jail... so don’t even go there. Well it also posted on Facebook and immediately generated a big discussion on F/B today with a raging lib and after destroying him point by point, this will make a nice nightcap to pass along to him to keep him fuming all night.

Donald Trump is such a racist.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.