In a desperate attempt to defend Trump’s grotesque comments about women in the leaked tapes from 2005, surrogates for Trump have been spewing weak analogies and empty deductive arguments in dealing with the fallout of these tapes over the past week. While the defense arguments might seem ridiculous, if one analyzes the potential audiences for these messages, they could be continuing attempts at galvanizing the Trump base while simultaneously creating attempts at disillusionment in all other voters, especially those voting for Hillary Clinton.

Example #1

In an interview yesterday (October 11^th) on CNN with Betsy McCaughey, former Lieutenant Governor in New York, McCaughey in discussion about Trump’s video scandal attacked Hillary Clinton through Beyoncé. In a desperate attempt to distract the conversation topic, she blames pop-culture for rape-culture and blames Hillary for being part of it. Rhetorically, McCaughey offers a deductive argument: because Hillary Clinton has spoken out her fandom for Beyoncé, Hillary is a promoter of rape-culture and inappropriate rhetoric that is destroying our culture. Of course to deduct Hillary Clinton supports rape-culture through being a fan of Beyoncé is not only weak at best, but misses the point altogether when it comes to Trump’s comments. While I believe it’s a weak and elementary argument, it is strategic in a positive way towards Trump supporters as an audience. We saw in the debate Trump doubling down on his supporters trying to disillusion those not voting for him. This deductive argument McCaughey offers continues to feed into the values of hard line Trump fans while trying to throw any dirt possible on Clinton to keep her voters either at home or not voting for her through attacking Beyonce, rap and even taking a crack at voters who are fans of artists and pop icons (alienating something many Trump fans could probably care less about).

Example #2

Furthermore, Trump supporters Scottie Nell Hughes and former Congressman Joe Walsh doubled down for Trump with a wild analogy. They equated Trump’s comments to the popular book “Fifty Shades of Grey” saying what Trump said should be compared to the book. If the book is accepted, why are not Trump’s statements accepted? While it’s obvious comparing what a presidential candidate said to erotic fiction is crazy, as an Independent article put it, this terrible analogy of Trump to Fifty Shades of Grey once again galvanizes his fan base. Many in his fan base probably hate the book, so taking a shot at it was an easy way to score points with Trump voters. It even caused enough of a stir to have the author of the popular book, E. L. James, tweet out a “reminder” to Trump and his followers that “pussy” is not a word used in his books and that the book is fiction, Trump is real life. And maybe that’s the strategic attempt Trump surrogates are attempting to create, fiction. Political entertainment so insane it might cause people to buy into it.

The Problem

A lot has happened for Donald Trump in the past week, which is to be expected by now with his campaign. He has been on blast by the media for his continuously crude and vulgar comments towards women. The hot mic situation regarding old tape recordings of Trump speaking in a very derogatory way has captured the full attention of the media. These recordings have in some ways seemed to be brushed off by Trump as “locker room talk,” as reported by the New York Times. Hillary’s campaign has done a great job of trying to highlight his comments and appeal to the female audience by representing Trump as a sexist individual who does not have respect for women. In many ways, Trump’s platform to reach women voters has only continued to diminish, which is vital for Hillary in this election. Hillary needs to capture the female vote and they have done an extremely good job of trying to make sure that happens. In return, Trump’s campaign has needed deal with the situation, and has used a few different avenues, such as Trump’s wife to do so.

How Melania has helped:

Melania released a statement following the exposure of the recordings denouncing Trump’s statements as “unacceptable and offensive,” but also stating that he has the heart and mind of a leader and that she has accepted his apology and encouraged others to do the same. (USA Today) This was the first time Melania has really spoken out since her own mistakes at the Republican convention. She used her platform to denounce Trump’s behavior, which was very necessary for someone, particularly a woman, to do for Trumps campaign. Trump’s campaign needed to have a female voice that was in support of Trump and one that would carry some weight. By using his wife, it gave them a lot of publicity since she is a popular figure in this election, and also gave him the support of a female voice in his campaign. Which is important to portray as the election approaches.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/10/08/melania-trump-urges-america-forgive-trump-vulgar-comments/91791400/

An October Surprise for the Books

With the release of the 2005 video in which Donald Trump boasts about his sexually predatory behavior towards women, it seems as if an insurmountable obstacle has now planted itself right in the path of the GOP candidate’s journey to the presidency. In the wake of the media frenzy this deadly October surprise has created, it seems only fitting that Trump would send his army of female surrogates to speak on his behalf – which, depending on what side of the political spectrum you are on, may have actually made the issue worse.

Damage Control or Damage Done?

One of Trump’s more well-known surrogates, Scottie Nell Hughes, made the media rounds in the attempt to salvage her candidate’s reputation with women. What resulted from that, however, was a series of viral news clips in which Hughes ended up on the chopping block by fellow Republicans that not only labelled Hughes a “reality-denier,” but also added to the long list of reasons why Trump is not the candidate for women.

(Hughes, bottom left.)

A New Set of Problems

In addition to the most obvious maelstrom his surrogates have been left to clean up after, another issue has arisen as a directly-paralleled result of Trump’s comments – one that even his spokeswomen have no hope of combating at this point: the surfacing of women who claim to have been sexually assaulted by Trump. Not only is Trump dealing with the aftermath of his words – a task which has, apparently, fallen into the laps of his more well-spoken surrogates (as it probably should) -, but he must now also face the consequences of an accumulation of years-worth of predatory and inexcusable behaviors toward women.  The fact that his surrogates – Hughes, in particular – are trying to pass his words and behaviors off as “locker room talk” or “nothing we haven’t seen before” has simply added to the inflammatory rhetoric now slamming Trump’s campaign.

It will certainly be interesting to see how Trump’s latest – and, perhaps, most fatal – blunder will factor into his performance in tonight’s presidential debate on CNN. Only one thing is for certain now, though: Trump’s surrogates will have their work cut out for them every minute of every day leading up to the election – and, perhaps, for many years to come.

Trump as the “genius” 

Donald Trump has had a media frenzy surrounding the issue of whether or not he paid his taxes in the preceding 20 years. It would be expected for him to lose support as information has recently come out indicating that he has not paid taxes, yet
it seems as though the opposite is true. Surrogates who are prominent Republican figures, such as Chris Christie and Rudy Giuliani, have been at the front of the movement to bring up the “brilliance” in evading tax payment. Christie went as far as stating “there’s no one who’s shown more genius in their way to maneuver around the tax code.” [Politico] Christie has used this as an example of the ways in which the tax code is extremely messed up and Trump’s ability to maneuver the tax code shows precisely why he should be the one to fix it while he tries to “Make America Great Again.”

Two Wrongs Definitely Make a Right 

In an article by the Washington Post, Giuliani is quoted talking about how poor people also do not pay their taxes (ignoring entirely that many of them do not make enough to pay taxes). Even if the poor had chosen not to pay taxes, how does this justify Trump not paying his? One major issue that has yet to be addressed by Trump’s surrogate speakers is the following: if it was “no big deal” and was a “genius move” on Trump’s part, then why keep it a secret for so long? It seems evident that Trump saw the wrong in his actions and was afraid that it would hurt his political prospects, so he tried to hide the documentation. Instead, they default to “the poor people did it, so he can do it too,” making it pretty evident that they never learned a basic childhood lesson: two wrongs do not make a right.

Why not just apologize? 

Rather than going with the traditional ways of giving speeches of apologia when faced with a divisive issue (as Clinton has on multiple occasions with her emails), it seems like Trump and his surrogate speakers have gone with a much different route of apologia; one in which they try to make the action seem legitimate rather than controversial. This should not come as a surprise, however, given Trump’s attempts to paint himself as a bold, unapologetic figure.

[Fact Check]

The Trump family, specifically the Trump children have been placed in a unique position during this presidential campaign as their father attempts a run for the President of the United States. Normally, important/key surrogates for presidential candidates come forward from political and/or economic positions to vouch and speak for their candidate usually being able to say things the candidate is not able to say deflecting flack from potentially controversial statements.

Yet for Trump, he has not only had problems not with finding surrogates, but ones that seem to have any credibility and voice in the mainstream public. Thus, his children have become important voices for his campaign. They try to act as channels for the public to see the “real Donald” acting as voices of reason and focus for a father who can’t seem to stay on tracks very long speaking off the cuff creating controversy and division. While the children are some of the “best” speakers he has, many their attempts at showing a “softer side to trump” are haven’t come off very well. Many of their insensitive inappropriate comments have come off tame compared to the bombastic fiery fear rhetoric of their father. Much seems to be desired in the way the Trump children have handled issues and have even been criticized earlier last month for comments about their father’s lack of tax returns, the media and women (specifically mothers). 

Even more specifically, Donald Trump Jr. has been under fire for a tweet recently equating Syrian refugees to skittles (graphic below). Within hours, Donald Jr. received much deserved criticism ranging from accusations of racist undertones, inaccurate understanding about terrorism statistics in the US, and even the Wrigley company (owners of Skittles) quickly coming out to sever any associations of their candy with Donald Jr’s. comments.

This is just another story in the ever growing narrative that Trump’s children haven’t fallen too far from the Trump tree. Not able to articulate our national/international issues in any sort of respectful manner and too disconnected from any average American as their upbringings are rooted in extremely wealthy soil far different than most Americans. Normally, family to presidential candidates are not scrutinized as much about their political comments, but with them being the few people who are surrogates to Donald Trump their voice carries a unique, concerning and closely tied echo to the Republican presidential candidate. 

Daughter or First Lady? 

Ivanka Trump has played a unique and vital role throughout the course of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign. Since the start of his campaign, Ivanka has been a figure who has been front and center and heavily depended on by Trump. She has often been portrayed as level-headed and in many cases, the voice of reason when Trump tends to have one of his political outbursts. In several ways, Ivanka has been the female figure in Trump’s life that has stood out. With two divorces under his belt and being on his third marriage to Melania, who is not well versed in politics, Ivanka has been a dominating character who Trump continues to depend on to draw public support. Her role has continuously mirrored that of the typical first lady candidate and Trump has done nothing but encourage the media to focus on her. He has used her to speak on political matters, promote his campaign through social media, and headline different campaign ads like televised commercials. Meanwhile, little to no attention has been focused on Melania, except for when she was caught plagiarizing her a speech at the Republican National Convention. Since that mistake, Trump’s campaign has fought even more to hide Melania and focus their attention on Ivanka as a competent and reliable female figure in Trump’s inner circle. This has been extremely vital for Trump who has often come across as sexist and as someone who does not respect women.

Has Ivanka’s role hurt his campaign? 

In some ways, Trumps heavy dependency on Ivanka has called into question the type of relationship they have. This was further called into question when he made an inappropriate remark to Rolling Stones in 2015 stating, “Yeah, she’s really something, and what a beauty, that one. If I weren’t happily married and, ya know, her father …” This creepy remark, and others have made it easy for Hillary’s campaign to paint their relationship in a negative light and use one of Trump’s greatest strengths as his weakness. It was an easy way for them to question Trump’s character. Overall however, Trump needs Ivanka in order to appeal to a female audience he otherwise would be unable to reach. His audience needs to know he has a solid female voice in his group who will be present during his presidency and Ivanka fits that role.

Sources:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/trump-seriously-20150909

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/after-convention-stumble-melania-trump-has-largely-vanished-from-campaign/2016/09/08/c887d576-6bab-11e6-8225-fbb8a6fc65bc_story.html

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-campaign-releases-general-election-ad-featuring-ivanka/story?id=42483585

While most major media outlets sit back on their haunches and wait for the symbolic “other shoe to drop” in the wake of Donald Trump’s latest verbal blunder, his surrogates lean forward practically foaming at the mouth with the fine new prospects presented to them: they’ve finally been given a new angle to work. With each bombshell Trump drops into the melee of this election cycle’s political storm, his surrogates are given the opportunity to embark on an exercise of creativity – the task of turning their candidate’s inflammatory rhetoric into a proclamation of genius which, in and of itself, is actually quite ingenious in terms of its manipulative stratagem.

A New Form of Apologia

Though some might consider this strategy to be verging on desperate at times, it seems to stand as a refreshing new take on what would normally be considered apologia in the face of a mishap or questionable statement. Instead of issuing formal apologies or even attempting to deny what has been said – though Trump does this fairly often when he, himself, is speaking in a public forum –, his surrogates simply use his multitude of missteps as an opportunity to appear on major news networks or talk shows and unpack Trump’s statements in ways that leave viewers confused though, admittedly, somewhat impressed. They often point out unheard-of loopholes in policy that Trump has managed to get around or dig up old skeletons from the closets of those who have publicly challenged the Republican candidate, using the challengers’ proverbial demons as a means to delegitimize whatever accusations they’ve brought up.

Speak for Yourself

A prime example of this is statements made by Rudy Giuliani this morning on ABC News. The former Mayor of New York spoke to George Stephanopoulos about the mogul’s 1995 property tax returns published by the New York Times on Saturday morning. Though the published report is somewhat incriminating, Giuliani provided a very different take on the issue, saying, “He’s (Trump) a genius. Absolute genius… This is a perfectly legal application of the tax code. And he would’ve been a fool not to take advantage of it.”

Whether they are defending Trump’s defamatory statements regarding a former Miss America pageant or his affinity for delaying the release of his tax returns, it is clear that his surrogates are determined to work whatever angle they are given – which, it would appear, may be their only viable option at this point.