When the news broke of a foiled assassination attempt on Donald Trump during a political gathering last July, his supporters were swift to blame Democrats for their unabated critique of Trump. They argued that such severe oppositional discourse was an inevitable trigger for violence. Eric Trump appealed for a transformation in the tone of conversation, echoed by echoes from Mike Johnson, the House Speaker, to ‘reduce the heat’ suffusing the nation. Subsequently, when a weapon-wielding man poised at Trump’s golf course to attack him was detained by federal agents, the call for a modulation in the left-wing’s discourse intensified. Trump contended that the planner of the assault was swayed by the rhetoric of President Biden and Vice President Harris.
However, despite the clamoring for moderation in political discourse, Trump continues to ratchet up his rhetoric. As the election looms closer, it is unclear if he views this as a strategic tactic or if he’s merely shedding any inhibitions, thereby laying bare his most unfiltered instincts. For whatever purpose, his recent political rallies demonstrate a contender eager to bring an elevated degree of provocation, anger, outrage, and a growing endorsement of violence.
Over the past week, Trump’s litany of criticisms aimed at Vice President and Democratic nominee Kamala Harris have grown increasingly erratic. In a political rally held in Wisconsin, the former President brazenly labeled her as ‘unintelligent’, accused her of being ‘intellectually deficient’ since birth, and discredited her competency. Such an explicit onslaught on an adversary, who had convincingly outperformed him in a recent debate, even for Trump, was an unusually vivid attack.
Trump has a history of delighting in the idea of violence against those he deems his antagonists. Be they accused criminals, immigrants or his political adversaries, he’s expressed wishes of physical harm in the past. However, his rhetoric seems to have escalated recently. His depiction of immigrants, for example, at the same Wisconsin rally, transcended his customary ‘murderer’ label to incorporate a gruesome account that renders even criminals in the US seem innocuous in comparison.
Trump went on to provide an alarming portrayal of these immigrants as ruthless killers that would break into homes and resort to extreme violence. According to Trump, the blame for such infiltration rests squarely on Harris’ shoulders, who is permitting the entry of such individuals ready to cause destruction. ‘These individuals are beasts’, he added.
At a subsequent rally, Trump presented an unorthodox strategy to alleviate criminal activities: employ more violence. He touted that a single day of intensified violence would be sufficient to troubleshoot the problem. ‘A single rough hour, particularly rough, that news will spread and the situation will normalize instantly’, he stated.
This perspective contributes to the broader perspective propagated by Trump, wherein the U.S. is characterized by impending perils and violence, which, in turn, need to be countered with more violent threats, both governmental and vigilante-like, against those he and his followers abhor. Being in Trump’s spotlight promises a life fraught with fear, with widespread repercussions.
They began disseminating offensive misinformation about Haitian immigrants supposedly consuming pets, leading to a surge of threats, school closures, and evacuations in the affected town. This sequence of events is now so commonplace that it no longer surprises us. If you are targeted by Trump or even if you are a regular citizen contradicting him publicly, be prepared to be swamped with threats and harassment. And whom to hold accountable for this treatment of political dissenters is no enigma.
Trump appears to have drawn the lesson from previous elections that inciting fear and hate are surefire strategies to political success. He seems to believe his only missteps in the election campaigns of 2016 and 2020 were not going far enough in fostering these sentiments. With merely five weeks until the upcoming election, trends suggest Trump will veer on the side of being ‘very rough,’ as per his terms.
Over the weekend, Trump launched an unwarranted attack on Vice President Kamala Harris at a rally in Wisconsin. Remarkably, unlike his usual style, the attack was blatant, labeling her as ‘dull-minded’, questioning her mental capability and implying her incompetence from birth. This marked an extraordinary deterioration, even by his standards, in his manner of attacking an opponent who arguably outperformed him in a recent debate.
Indeed, Trump has been known to foster fantasies of violence committed against those he perceives as threats—criminals, immigrants, and political adversaries alike. His famous 2016 quote about a protester, ‘I’d like to punch him in the face,’ bears testament to this. However, his rhetoric seems to have taken a darker turn in recent times.
In that same Wisconsin rally, he bore deeper into his usual depiction of immigrants as murderers, painting a chilling picture that persuades his audience that local criminals are less ominous in comparison. In his narrative, these newcomers are merciless killers capable of breaking into homes and committing violent acts.
Trump’s solution to the growing crime rate, as expressed at another rally the following day, advocates for an increase in violent retaliations. According to him, a single day of intense violence would serve as a deterrent to future crime. This idea promotes a dangerous precedent of violence begetting violence, with its efficacy being based solely on ‘putting the word out’ and ending any lawlessness ‘instantly.’
In his vision, America is constantly under siege from impending threats and violence, demanding increased intimidation and violence in response. His stance recommends either sanctioned or extrajudicial violence against those individuals he and his supporters have marked. This endangers both targeted individuals and collateral victims, fostering fear within the population.
Trump’s political ethos seems shaped by the conviction that engendering fear and hatred can be potent tools in securing a favorable electoral outcome. He appears to believe his only shortcomings during the 2016 and 2020 elections were his untapped potential to whip up further fear and animosity. With the election drawing nearer, it is reasonable to anticipate that Trump, true to his character, will continue to turn up his ‘real rough’ rhetoric— as he puts it, in the run-up to Election Day.