Donald Trump has always been somewhat of a mystery to me.
The announcement of a Trump campaign seemed, at the very least, strange at its onset, yet, even in those first weeks, I was willing to accept that a multi-billion dollar kingpin might have some political prowess. After all, politics can be considered a sort of business — an exchange of capital, whether it be human or monetary. Plus, Reagan was a celebrity before being immortalized for his fiscal and foreign sleight. Why not Trump?
However, as the race went on and the debates started to heat up, Trump's minimalist policy rose in tandem with my disbelief. How could Trump, whose overall domestic and foreign policy could be boiled down to a few choice, one-syllable words, be the new conservative golden boy?
And then I found out that the answer lied in the question.
Sure, it's been argued that Trump's success has been contingent on fear mongering, an anti-political or government-cynical sentiment, his pretty face or his Buckley vs. Valeo-conforming independence. But all of those things are secondary — the source of his authority, his power and his perceived maverick acumen is something different entirely.
That source is simplicity.
(Beforereading on, I suggest you take a look at this bit of Trump-ology. It's a very acute analysis of what I'm about to talk about, and all credit goes to the YouTuber for enlightening me. Thanks, Nerdwriter1!)
Trump is not just a powerful speaker — he's an effective one. While Trump doesn't let actual policy get in the way of his answers, he supplements this with sweet, succinct and general language. He's a master of manipulating an issue, identifying the visceral core of what voters want to hear and appealing to these fundamental sentiments with even more fundamental language.
Let's compare, for instance, two answers from two separate politicians. These are the responses to the first questions regarding illegal immigration, of both Trump and Rubio, during last Thursday's debate. Trump's is as follows:
"As far as coming back in, No. 1, you wouldn't even be talking, and you wouldn't have asked that as the first question if it weren't for me in my opening when I talked about illegal immigration. It wouldn't even be a big subject. But we either have a country or we don't have a country. We have at least 11 million people in this country that came in illegally — they will go out. They will come back, some will come back, the best, through a process. They have to come back legally. They have to come back through a process. And it may not be a very quick process. But I think that's very fair and very fine..."
Alternatively, Rubio's:
"Well, first of all, before we do anything — and I've been abundantly clear on this — when I'm president of the United States, before we do anything on immigration, we are going to secure the border. That's not just the physical border with Mexico. It's visa overstays — that's 45 percent of the problem right there. That's why we need E-Verify, an entry-exit tracking system and so forth. And until that happens, we're not doing anything else. And then we'll see what the American people are willing to support..."
How do these two answers compare? For one, their readability. A typical passage or text meant for the general public should aim to be at around an eighth grade reading level in accordance with Flesch-Kincaid standards. Rubio is right on the money with about an 8.1. Trump, however, must believe the American public to be far more stupid — his ranks at a 4.7, or about a fourth to fifth grade reading level. Trump isn't just popular because he's Trump — he's popular because he's easy to follow. If it can be assumed that Trump's up in the polls because he doesn't demand his supporters to think and makes it easy for them to follow, then he's a very scary candidate indeed.
Secondly, Trump is a master of shadows, making himself appear far more grand than he is. His words reflect it. He made immigration a "big subject." We "wouldn't even be talking" if it weren't for his prompts. Of course he appears amazing — he's demanding to appear that way.
Not only that, but Trump isn't really asking you to follow anything — he's simply reinforcing the fact that an issue exists. There is no policy. Between the two answers, Trump is telling you that illegal immigrants "will go out" — good, sure, fine. How, you ask? Well, "through a process." What kind of process? All we know is that "it may not be a very quick" one.
Rubio, on the other hand, at the very least offers his voter base a few actual answers. What must be done? "We must secure the border — both physical and through visa overstays, which are 45 percent of the problem." How, Mr. Rubio? "Well, through E-Verify, an entry-exit tracking system, and so forth." Good — real answers to real problems.
Whether Trump actually has a policy that he's not elucidating on is beside the point here. The point is that he's not offering it in debates — that's not the sort of voters he's trying to attract. While he's looking for those voters who want a change in Washington, who want innovators who aren't subject to the puppet strings of the bureaucracy, he's not the anti-political maverick that everyone wants him to be. In fact, he's more manipulating in regard to his language and promises than his opponents. Of course he's not making false, politically-motivated promises — he's not making promises at all.
If you're thinking Trump, you don't need to put your faith in any false promises or policies, mostly because his policies don't exist. Just rest your faith on his empty words, his vigor and his bronze face, and you've got yourself a champion president.
