Donald Trump can obviously win again

Anders Lindberg  

Donald Trump can obviously win again  

A nightmare yes, and next time the coup d'état may succeed  

Published: Yesterday 21.30  

Aftonbladet's editorial page is independent social democratic.  

Donald Trump at CPAC Photo: Alex Brandon / AP  

LEADER

A week ago, Donald Trump took the stage at the Conservative Political Action Conference, CPAC 2023, in National Harbor in Maryland.  

Did you think he was calculated and can't win the next election? That's how it often appears when you read Swedish media. 

I think you should think again.  

CPAC is today one of the main platforms of the American extreme right. It's Trumpland and more clean-room Republicans stayed away this year.  

Donald Trump, who was the main attraction of the conference, spoke for almost two hours. The entire speech can be seen on C-Span for those who wish. It's true that it's two hours of your life you don't get back, but if you want to look into the future, it can be pretty good. 

Because this is the future. 

Trump began the speech by thanking, among others, Jair Bolsonaro, Brazil's authoritarian former president, for coming to the conference.  

After the election loss, Bolsonaro's supporters tried to stage a somewhat half-hearted coup d'état in line with the same rhetoric that drove the attack on the Capitol on January 6, 2021. But the coup failed.  

The speech was at times magnificent. A summary of recent years' political conflicts, culture wars and folly condensed into one man and a podium. 

 

Trump described the upcoming US election as "An epic battle to save our country" and the opponents as anti-US foreign elements out to destroy the country. 

"We will destroy the deep state and throw out the warmongers," he promised. 

"We must drive out the globalists, we must throw out the communists. We must throw out the political class that hates our country, they really hate our country.” 

The speech was too long, a bit like when Cuba's former leader Fidel Castro could talk for hours until people passed out. The benches were empty. But the speech was at times magnificent. A summary of recent years' political conflicts, culture wars and folly condensed into one man and a podium. 

The Donald Trump we saw at CPAC is the one we will see in a thousand representations, on every channel and everywhere for the next two years. 

The policy has not changed. Trump would likely immediately abandon Ukraine and possibly try to leave NATO. Parts of the Republicans are today Putin's party. Climate policy would again be taken over by climate deniers, racists and the extreme right would be welcomed in the White House.  

Perhaps the commentators are right that the American people are tired of the lies, the foul play and the essentially insane politics. In that Trump passed his best-before date. And there are other Republicans waiting in the wings for the Emperor to be overthrown.  

But I remember the election in 2016. On Aftonbladet's editorial page, we had prescribed two different texts before the election night. One was about why Hillary Clinton won the election. We based the analysis on opinion polls and scores of experts.  

But we were not completely sure, the experts warned of a dark story. People who for various reasons did not want to answer, who lacked confidence in opinion polls or could not be reached. These voters liked Trump.  

So I wrote another op-ed with the message that it was too early to say who had won. My somewhat whiny headline: ”The scorched earth campaign continues”. 

Then we went to bed. 

Early in the morning I went to the US Embassy vigil. My whiny deputy leader about the election campaign had been sent to print because the polls showed it was even. We didn't dare write that Hillary won until we knew a little more. Then we would publish the first text online. 

Once at the vigil, something was clearly wrong. The figures from the electoral districts did not match the forecasts. Donald Trump looked set to win.  

At three o'clock in the morning, my boss gave me the task of writing an additional, third, version of tomorrow's editorial page. I got into a taxi to work, turned on the computer and wrote: “The evening started well. Then they started counting the votes.” 

I quoted the Israeli newspaper Haaretz's analysis of the election campaign. It was headlined "Thanks to Trump, we can better understand how Hitler was possible".  

Our headline became ” Donald Trump is a middle finger to the world ”.

As I follow CPAC, I think about my late-night taxi ride on November 9, 2016. Why was I so wrong? 

In retrospect, I should have read Haaretz more carefully. They knew what they were talking about, they saw, they understood and realized the danger.  

Personally, I believed deep down that fascism was actually dead, or at least that it would not be able to gather this type of mass movement again.  

Of course I saw the MAGA Republicans with their red caps, tactful rants and hateful rhetoric. I understood that the words would turn to violence.

I immediately understood the similarity between Trump's "Fake News Media" and Adolf Hilter's "Lügenpresse".  

And I wrote many texts about it. Which got a lot of scolding from the right. But it was only in the taxi that I really felt in my gut that our democratic society may actually lose this battle. 

When I listen to Donald Trump today, that's exactly the feeling that comes back. What if he wins?  

FOX News star Tucker Carlsson began a disinformation campaign this week to portray the Jan. 6 coup attempt as "sightseeing." The reactions were harsh both from Republicans and Democrats. But this is probably how it will sound. 

What you saw for yourself last time Trump was in power didn't really happen, is the message. 

Is memory really this short? Does it cost this little to try to stage a coup d'état? 

And the SD media in Sweden hung up immediately and repeated Tucker Carlsson's lies.  

Last time, the world was saved by independent officials and courts refusing to obey Trump and believe his misinformation about the election. How will it be next time? 

I do not know. But I have learned one thing. Underestimating Donald Trump is something you do at your own risk.