Donald Trump’s problem and the problem of many American voters, though separate, are very much intertwined. Trump’s problem is his propensity for stream of consciousness speaking, and it was on full display for much of the September 10th debate with Kamala Harris. The voters’ problem is that Trump’s speaking mode invites his enemies to lie about him and deceive the public.
Let’s discuss Trump’s problem first. Stream of consciousness is a form of communication that presents one’s thoughts and feelings as they come to mind without organization or formatting. It is best recognized in the literary writings of Marcel Proust, James Joyce, and Virginia Woolf.
Here is an example of Trump’s stream of consciousness in the debate with Harris: (Note: it is not a direct quote, but my construction of a typical Trump speech pattern.) “I fired some people because they did a terrible job. I had a perfect presidency. I have a great relationship with Putin and Xi Jinping and Rocket Man. Ask intelligent people what they think of me. They love me. You [Kamala] are stupid and Biden is resting on the beach. I had the best economy in the history of the world. If you are elected, the country will never recover. You lie about everything. You were a terrible senator. I was robbed of the presidency in 2020.”
Stream of consciousness can be effective in literature, but it is grossly ineffective in debate, particularly timed debate. Debate demands clarity and thus requires careful focus on one thought at a time, together with the facts and reasoning that support it. When such clarity and focus are lacking, the argument is likely to be garbled and the debate lost. Sadly, this can happen even if the person’s argument is completely sound.
So why did Trump use stream of consciousness in a debate with so much at stake for the country? I believe the following:
His thoughts come so fast that he finds it easier to blurt them out as they occur than to filter and organize them. Unfortunately, doing this can confuse or mislead people and even drive them away from views they would otherwise embrace. Nevertheless, it has been so successful in Trump’s rallies that it has become his default speaking method. Thus, when Harris baited him (with considerable help from ABC’s biased moderators) he abandoned the strategy his advisors surely recommended and went automatically into his more comfortable default mode. As a result, it took almost until the end of the debate for him to regain focus and respond effectively to the moderators’ questions and Harris’s assertions.
But we should not miss this important truth: though Trump’s stream of consciousness has become a habit he has formed, like any other habit, it can with effort be set aside or overcome. When Trump chooses, he can be disciplined. In fact, he has been demonstrably well-disciplined in one-on-one discussions with Mark Levin, Sean Hannity, and others. On such occasions he not only avoids interrupting the other person (or himself) and jumping from one thought to another, but is focused, soft-spoken, humorous, a good listener, and able to delve deeply into issues. I am certain that is the kind of discussion he brought to meetings with friendly and unfriendly leaders of other countries, and he has the capacity to do so in the future.
So much for Trump’s problem. Let’s now turn to the problem of American voters, which is to overcome the years of defamation aimed at him. This will not be easy. The mainstream media have relentlessly presented negative stories about him. He was maligned since he first came down the escalator in New York as a candidate for president. And this was followed by false accusations (for example, regarding Russia), impeachment efforts when he was in office, and attempts to imprison him thereafter.
Yet as despicable as the media’s attacks on Trump have been, their silence about or denial of his achievements is perhaps worse. Here is a brief list of his achievement categories during his first two years in office that have received little or no acknowledgment:
“Igniting a historic economic boom, Rolling back red tape, Negotiating better deals for the American people, Unleashing American energy, Expanding options for quality and affordable healthcare, Fighting the opioid crisis, Standing up for the sanctity of life and protecting religious liberty, Keeping American communities safe, Enforcing our laws and securing our borders, Restoring American leadership abroad, Honoring America’s commitment to our veterans, Transforming government.”
Keep in mind, these are just the categories. Add the specific achievements listed under these categories and the achievement total is over 150. And that in the first two years alone! (Click here to see the entire list.)
Another fact the media have generally ignored is that Trump refused to take his president’s salary, which totaled $1,600,000. That decision alone speaks well of his self-less respect for the country and its people. (His detractors know that if this were widely understood, their lie that he is money-hungry would be exposed.)
Two factors have made it difficult to find the facts about Trump’s presidency. Authors and commentators have difficulty finding publishers for such books or articles. Also, there is pressure on knowledgeable people to remain silent. They therefore understand that to break that unspoken rule is to risk denunciation and ridicule from their peers and the loss of friendships. Thankfully, a number have had the courage to resist that pressure—Elon Musk, Tulsi Gabbard, Robert F. Kennedy Jr, Leo Terrell, and Tammy Bruce come to mind. Their stories, and those of others like them, are worth learning.
The key question is this: How important is it for Americans to separate the lies about Trump from the truth? The answer is very important, for several reasons. There must be a serious purpose for a broad campaign defaming one person to persist over many years. Moreover, if rooted largely in falsehood, as this one is, it cannot be honest, and therefore will likely do harm. And given the context of a presidential election, that harm will be to millions of Americans and perhaps the entire country. For citizens to cast their ballots without knowing whether they are choosing the better candidate will therefore be a grave danger to present and future generations.
Copyright © 2024 by Vincent Ryan Ruggiero. All rights reserved.
