Don’t "give up" on all 73 million Americans who voted for Trump

In an op-ed in the New York Times, author Wajahat Ali says he's giving up on reaching out to Trump supporters and thinks Ian Bremmer and others shouldn't bother trying. On this edition of The Red Pen, where we pick apart the argument in a major opinion piece, Ian and Eurasia Group's Jon Lieber explain what Ali got wrong - and right - and why it's important to see the 73 million Americans who voted for Trump with nuance.


Hi, everybody. Ian Bremmer here with your latest edition of The Red Pen. And today we're taking our red pen to an op-ed by New York Times contributor and author, Wajahat Ali. The title says it all, Reach Out to Trump Supporters, They Said. I Tried. I Give Up.Wajahat is saying that trying to understand and connect with Trump supporters is futile for the other side, and that a chorus of voices, mine included, according to Wajahat, who name-checks me and Pete Buttigieg as wasting our breath, are fighting a losing game trying to promote empathy. Here's the tweet from me he specifically referenced.

So, I want to start by saying that there is a lot that Wajahat points out in this piece that is irrefutable. He's right that Trump has worked hard to further divide America. He's right that racism and Islamophobia are real, and that people who hold those bigoted views have been emboldened by President Trump. There have been Trump policies like the Muslim ban that only fueled the notion that there are good immigrants and bad ones, as he states. And yes, way too many people see whiteness as good and blackness as bad, even though they might not admit it. That shouldn't be tolerated. None of it. And I get why Wajahat doesn't want to engage in that conversation any longer.

But I want to defend the idea that we are one country and need to be talking to each other. Canceling 73 million Americans, fellow Americans, the Trump voters, and refusing to find those within that wide swath who might see your point on an issue or three feels like more than a missed opportunity to me. So, let's get out the red pen.

Wajahat argues that he sought to reach out to Trump supporters after the 2016 election, quoting his own video that included the message, "You might not like me and I might not like you, but we share the same real estate." Okay.

"You might not like me, and I might not like you." Not really surprised that didn't work.

So, I'm starting off with an easy one. As Biden might say, "Come on, man." How do you think Trump supporters felt when you started off by saying you don't like them or assuming they don't like you? I got to tell you, if someone started a conversation with me by saying, "I don't like you," I am not inclined to listen to you for much more. Okay. That's the easy one.

Now let's be more serious. Next, Wajahat describes engaging Trump supporters solely on the issue of race. I warned them that supporting white nationalism and Trump in particular would be self-destructive. Here's the heart of the problem. Wajahat's belief that Trump supporters are irredeemably racist blinds him to the fact that there are other economic, social and cultural concerns that really, really matter. In fact, the top issue for voters in the exit poll was the economy, as it most often is.

"I warned them that supporting white nationalism and Mr. Trump, in particular, would be self-destructive..." You can't deny the uglier elements, but there's also nuance in a crowd of 73 million people.

Now, I understand the view that by voting for Trump, you've endorsed those uglier elements, including Trump's racism. But there is a lot more nuance in the 40% of the American population that Wajahat is not acknowledging.

He also writes, "The majority of the people of color rejected Trump's cruelty and vulgarity, and that he supports creating a multicultural coalition of the willing, including white Trump supporters." And look, Wajahat is right that a majority of people of color voted for Joe Biden, but Donald Trump earned more votes from people of color in 2020 than he did in 2016, especially among black voters. It's a sign that the GOP's base is shifting, and the conventional lines and the assumptions about politics in America are no longer totally true. There are lots of other factors at play here that the argument does not address.

"The majority of people of color rejected his cruelty and vulgarity." True. But Trump also earned MORE votes from people of color in 2020 than in 2016.

Heck, maybe it's easier for me because I don't usually talk about race when I'm talking to audiences across the political spectrum. I talk about global issues, and that's where things get a lot less black and white. I mean, hey, the 20-year war in Afghanistan failed. Hey, free trade might be great for me in the 1%, but what have you gotten from it? Even immigration, should we be bringing in as many people when labor needs are actually decreasing? These are conversations that you can have across the entire political spectrum that also matter and that engage people, real people. The future of our country also relies on them.

So, I mean, in the same way you say in your family you used to avoid race and sex and politics, maybe going right into the most divisive issue is not the way you start the conversation with people that you're trying to create any sort of bridge with.

Finally, Wajahat writes that he did his part in reaching out to Trump supporters by going on a speaking tour in states where Trump won. And I want to say here that empathy is more than just being paid to deliver a dozen speeches, and it's more than just chatting with your driver. That's an anecdote that Wajahat actually describes. You can't grab Tom Friedman's talking to your drivers stick in the New York Times op-ed. I mean, that's ballsy. But it's about not assuming the worst of people and trying for a moment to put yourself in the shoes of someone who may support Trump's economic or conservative social policies and is tired of being told he's racist by liberals in New York. I assume Wajahat isn't going to agree with my last point, and maybe some of you won't either. But I still argue there's truth in it.

"I wanted to talk to the people the media calls 'real Americans' from the 'heartland''..." Empathy is about not assuming the worst in others and putting yourself in their shoes.

Now, in his final sentences, Wajahat makes an argument I strongly agree with. We should all work to combat misinformation and lies coming from political henchmen and landing onto social media sites. And those sites need to be doing a hell of a lot more to prevent those lies from catching like wildfire. Agreed. But no, I do not believe we should stop talking to people who don't see it our way. And I don't think Joe Biden as president will get very much accomplished if he can't find a way to connect with some of the 73 million people who didn't vote for him.

The main reason to engage with people you disagree with in your own country is they are fellow citizens, regardless of what they believe. And I tell you, if you don't, you can be damn sure that somebody else will. If you want to give 73 million Americans over to the Proud Boys and Steve Bannons of the world, they'll be more than happy to organize them on Facebook.

Anyway, that's your edition of The Red Pen this week. I'm Ian Bremmer. Stay safe and avoid people.

During the past year, 58% of all cyberattacks observed by Microsoft from nation-states have come from Russia. And attacks from Russian nation-state actors are increasingly effective, jumping from a 21% successful compromise rate last year to a 32% rate this year. Russian nation-state actors are increasingly targeting government agencies for intelligence gathering, which jumped from 3% of their targets a year ago to 53% – largely agencies involved in foreign policy, national security or defense. The top three countries targeted by Russian nation-state actors were the United States, Ukraine and the UK. These are just a few of the insights in the second annual Microsoft Digital Defense Report. Read additional highlights from the Microsoft on the Issues blog and find the full report here.

If you had to guess which current world leader has made the most trips to Africa, who would you say? China's Xi Jinping? Nope, hardly — he's been there just four times. France's Emmanuel Macron? Pas de tout.

The answer may surprise you: it's Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who's been to the continent more times than the leader(s) of any other non-African state. Just this week he notched his 28th visit, with stops in Angola, Nigeria, and Togo. Sure, being in power for two decades creates a lot of opportunities for exotic travel, but even Putin isn't close: he's been to Africa just five times, all to visit South Africa or Egypt.

More Show less

Former Libyan strongman Muammar Qaddafi was killed by rebels on 20 October, 2011, after a NATO intervention designed to protect civilians helped strengthen an uprising against his regime. Since then, the country has been mired in chaos as different factions have battled for control, resulting in extensive destruction and human causalities. Libya has been nominally governed since 2014 by warring administrations backed by foreign powers in the west and east of the country. Last year, UN mediation efforts finally began to gain traction with an agreement on a cease-fire and a roadmap for elections to be held later this year. We talked with Eurasia Group expert Ahmed Morsy to find out how things are going.

More Show less

China's GDP grew a lower-than-expected 4.9 percent year-on-year in the third quarter of 2021, a whopping three percentage points less than in the previous period. It's a big deal for the world's second-largest economy, the only major one that expanded throughout the pandemic — and now at risk of missing its growth target of 6 percent for the entire year.

Normally, such a drastic slowdown would have put the ruling Communist Party in a tizzy. But this time, Xi Jinping knows this is the price he must pay for his big plans to curb rising inequality and boost the middle class at the expense of the CCP's traditional economic mantra: high growth above all else.

More Show less

6,000: Poland has doubled the number of troops guarding its border with Belarus to almost 6,000 because of a surge in migrants trying to cross over (there were 612 attempts on Monday alone). Warsaw accuses Minsk of sending non-EU migrants into Poland as payback for EU sanctions against Belarus.

More Show less

Religious tension rising in Bangladesh: Clashes between Hindus and Muslims in Bangladesh have surged over the past week, leaving at least four people dead. After an image was posted on Facebook showing the Quran at the feet of a statue at a Hindu temple, Muslims burned Hindu-owned homes and attacked their holy sites. Both sides have taken to the street in protest, with Hindus saying that they have been prevented from celebrating Durga Puja, the largest Hindu festival in the country. Such acts of sectarian violence are not uncommon in Bangladesh, a majority-Muslim country where Hindus account for nine percent of the population. Indeed, as Eurasia Group's Kevin Allison recently warned, unverified social media content stoking inter-ethnic conflict is a massive problem throughout South Asia, where for many people Facebook is synonymous with the internet.

More Show less

Ian Bremmer's Quick Take:

Read Ian Bremmer's wide-ranging essay in Foreign Affairs that puts in perspective both the challenge, and the opportunity, that comes from the unprecedented power of Big Tech.

Hi, everybody. Ian Bremmer here on the road, something we haven't done very much recently, but will increasingly as we try to move through COVID. And I want to talk to you about a new article that I just put out in Foreign Affairs that I'm calling "The Technopolar Moment." Not unipolar, not bipolar, not multipolar, technopolar. What the hell does technopolar mean?

It means that increasingly big technology companies are themselves geopolitical actors. So to understand the future of the world, you can't just look at the United States, Europe and China. You need to look at the big tech companies, too.

More Show less

China gets away with a lot these days in Hong Kong, Xinjiang, and elsewhere. That's because over the past decade, its economy has experienced explosive growth, making it an indispensable trading partner for almost every country in the world. At the same time, China has been expanding its share of the global economy, and is now set to overtake the US as the world's biggest economic powerhouse in the near term. We take a look at China's annual growth rate and share of the global economy based on GDP over the past decade.

Subscribe to GZERO Media's newsletter, Signal

GZEROMEDIA

Subscribe to GZERO Media's newsletter: Signal

Colin Powell's legacy

US Politics

GZEROMEDIA

Subscribe to GZERO Media's newsletter: Signal