Opinion: Donald Trump and America’s Scandal Prevention

Editor’s note: CNN’s six-part series “American Scandal and Jake Tapper‘ will premiere on February 18th at 9pm ET/PT. Julian Zelizeris a political analyst for CNN and a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University. He is the author and editor of his 25 books, including the New York Times bestseller “.“American Myths: Historians Challenge the Biggest Legends and Lie About Our Past.”” (Basic book). The views expressed in this commentary are his own.view more opinions On CNN.

CNN
—

Why does it seem that scandals no longer matter?

According to one Merriam-Webster definition: A scandal is “a situation or act that violates decorum or established moral concepts or humiliates those involved.”

But scandal in American politics no longer necessarily leads to disgrace (or at least disqualification). Former President Donald Trump has scrutinized this question more than any modern elected official. Trump has had more traditionally defined scandalous moments as president than almost any other senior official in recent memory, perhaps even more than his infamous predecessor Richard Nixon. What was notable about Trump was that nearly all of his scandals, including his efforts to overturn the 2020 election and the resulting violence at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, It was done in broad daylight.

But President Trump appears to be covered in more Teflon than the late President Ronald Reagan. Even if the scandalous story takes root, it appears to have little political impact. The politician who has done almost everything that once would have been career-ending remains the clear front-runner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination. It seems unlikely that the Supreme Court will grant him immunity from prosecution, but outside the legal world Mr. Trump doesn’t really need that protection.

It’s fair to say that Trump is not an anomaly. In recent years, many politicians have had their careers ended due to scandals, but now they seem to have much more room to survive. Some of President Trump’s closest allies, such as Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, have weathered personal and political turmoil, but the storm Yet they only seem to be gaining more power and money.

what’s happening? Why aren’t scandals like they used to be? Why do politicians seem more immune to moments like this than before?

Part of it has to do with Watergate itself. The aftermath of the epic scandal that destroyed Nixon’s presidency, combined with the aftermath of the Vietnam War, created a high level of distrust in government. Public opinion polls show that trust in government officials has been in steady decline since the early 1970s, a reversal from its high point in 1964.

Although this distrust had a positive impact on politics, encouraging investigative reporting and producing government reforms that strengthened accountability, this sentiment created a public culture in which many Americans expected less from their leaders. As a result, when scandals involving personal conduct or political ethics occurred, a significant portion of voters tended to dismiss the stories as similar. Why change horses halfway through if the next one is exactly the same?To paraphrase the band Pink Floyd, too often the nation has become comfortably numb.

Like many other phenomena in American politics, political polarization also plays a role. As the divide between Democrats and Republicans tightens, voters are less concerned with punishing the misdeeds of individual politicians and more concerned with whether their party can stay in power.

When polarization combines with unstable majorities on Capitol Hill, there is an even greater willingness to tolerate politicians who have done untoward acts. The potential costs of ousting an official are usually weighed against the possibility of shifting the balance of power to the other side.

This calculus prevails in an era when most Americans are more concerned about the political affiliation of their children’s future spouses than their religion.

At the same time, the asymmetry of polarization has made one party, the Republican Party, so extreme that most guardrails are no longer relevant. The effects of the scandal are more pronounced among Republicans than among Democrats. The party still puts government at the center of its agenda and therefore still adheres to more traditional norms and governance processes.

There were enough New York Republicans who pressured Congressman George Santos to resign before the House passed a resolution to expel him after mounting evidence of his lies. , many Republicans could not suffer such a fate. Equally noteworthy, it took a figure as extreme as Santos to persuade the Republican-led House of Representatives to expel him and conclude that it was politically too expensive to keep him. It was necessary. Some people within the party now display a very high tolerance for bad behavior, and a tendency to rally around those under investigation rather than circling the wagons and banishing them as they once did. There is.

Whether Republican or Democrat, the current media ecosystem is not suited for the kind of scandals that characterized Watergate. In modern times, many Americans who follow politics tend to receive news through a fragmented and partisan lens, where information reifies existing political beliefs and discredits opposing views.

Damaging information about members of Congress or the president can be dismissed as “fake news” by their supporters, and their stories end up being reported through partisan news outlets supporting the defense. Furthermore, many more Americans will ignore this story altogether. There is no public commons like there was in the days of network television and print journalism. Our systems of streaming, podcasting, and smartphone viewing make it much easier for politicians seeking accountability to reach broader audiences and less likely to be ignored.

The kind of shared cultural vocabulary that presidential politics once provided still exists only at Sunday’s Super Bowl or Taylor Swift’s tour. Also, our attention spans are very short, so those who can endure humiliation in the moment, or simply avoid feeling shame, are the ones who do something about what they’ve done. It often outlasts the interest you want to have.

Politicians have learned over the years the effectiveness of patience. President Bill Clinton demonstrated this dynamic when he emerged with high approval ratings in 1998, surviving impeachment on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice after an affair with an intern. New Jersey Sen. Robert Menendez has rejected calls from Democratic lawmakers to resign as he faces renewed corruption charges. (He denies wrongdoing and maintains his innocence.) One study found that lawmakers often raised more money after a scandal, especially if the issue was reported in the media. .

For all these reasons, the scandal of 2024 is not your grandfather’s scandal. Many politicians can feel relatively secure that they will survive even if they find themselves in the middle of a storm. While there are some positive elements to this new era, such as the fact that no indiscretion or mistake will end the career of a good official, the risks are immense.

Watergate taught Americans not to trust that the officials they elected would use their power well. But that healthy anger did not produce improvement, but rather a nihilistic way of thinking about politics. It is extremely important to hold politicians accountable for their wrongdoings. Once that disappears, we will be left impoverished as a democracy and face the prospect of further fraud just around the corner.