Today is another one of those days when the challenge of writing this blog depends on finding a back story or angle that has been overlooked by professional journalists and pundits who make their living trying to decipher events and the vagaries of society.  The key is often to forego one’s first instincts.

That was the case when House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy went on the Sunday talk shows and pointed the finger at video games as the culprit behind the mass shootings in El Paso and Dayton.  I and everyone else, except Trumpist purveyors of pseudo-science, immediately thought, if only we had a control group to test McCarthy’s hypothesis.  What if we selected a random sample of young people, exposed them to violent video games a la Malcolm McDowell’s violent behavior therapy in A Clockwork Orange, but restricted their access to semi-automatic weapons?  How would that affect their propensity to commit mass shootings?

Oh, wait!  We already have such a control group.  In fact, we have several.  Every other civilized country on earth. They have impressionable young people who play violent video games.  Some are even predominantly white and speak English as their primary language.  No need to call Mr. Obvious to determine the differential factor between the United States and these multiple control groups. Cable news and late-night talk show hosts have already made this case.  Last night Seth Meyers used the following Vox.com graphic which represents the relationship between gun deaths and gun ownership by nation. He then pointed out, “We’re farther away from the UK on this chart than we are in real life.”

But that’s not what I came here to talk about.  I would prefer to set up a new controlled experiment.  One with a dual hypothesis.  Hypothesis #1: Donald Trump will admit he is responsible for the hate-fueled massacre in El Paso.  No, he is not going to say it out loud.  But empirical evidence will make the case.

We start with the null hypothesis.  Donald Trump’s tweets and rallies are not a factor in the increase of white supremacy inspired violence.  If that is true, there is NO reason for Trump to stop vilifying people of color or using immigration as a scapegoat and distraction from his own failings.  So Donald, if you honestly believe it’s not you, don’t change a damn thing.  Keep mentioning the invasion and infestation.  Keep inviting alt-right commentators and white nationalists to the White House (is that redundant?)

But what if he does tone down the rhetoric?  What if he actually asks rally attendees to cut back on the racist chants?  What if future tweets are devoid of verbal attacks against people of color or references to invasions at our Southern border?   Why would he possibly do that unless he knew he was complicit in the increase in white supremacy domestic terrorism as reported by his own FBI director.  One can argue he already implicitly admitted guilt with yesterday’s scripted condemnation of racism and white supremacy.

My question.  Will the press recognize this concession for what it is.  Unfortunately, if the banner headline in this morning’s New York Times is any indication, the answer is no.  “TRUMP URGES UNITY VS. RACISM” (Their all-caps, not mine.)  Within an hour of hitting the streets, the Times announced the same story would have a different headline in the second edition, “Trump Assails Hate But Not Guns.”  Another example which proves the above argument.  If there was nothing wrong with the original headline, why did you change it?

Which brings me to Hypothesis #2: Hillary Clinton was largely correct; a majority of  Trump supporters are deplorables.  To test this theory, we need to look at three data points.  First, is there a drop-off in attendance at Trump rallies if he no longer uses these venues to promote racist animus?  Will they still come to hear their glorious leader ramble about health care, universal background checks, mental health or record stock prices?  Or will they stay home when their political rock star refuses to play his greatest hits?  A Trump rally without racial dog whistles is like a Stones concert without “Satisfaction.”

Second, how will yesterday’s “pivot” affect Trump’s approval ratings?  Many were stunned when there was a slight uptick when he suggested four members of Congress, American citizens of color, should go back to where they came from.  As several comedians joked, “It’s as though some folks on the fence previously wondered if Trump was racist enough for them.  Now they’re sure he is.”  The obvious corollary?  If his disapproval rating climbs, is it because these Trump late adopters jumped ship when they realized he is sometimes “racist enough” but they want someone who is “racist enough all the time?”

Third, will previously pro-Trump social media turn on him even if his change of heart about white supremacy is temporary?  Will the people who have looked to Trump to validate their own bigotry realize they have been tossed aside when politically expedient like so many other Trump associates?  Can you say Alex Acosta or John Ratcliffe? Of course they may brush it off, knowing as in the case of Charlottesville, Trump will “repent” once off script.

Remember, his critics do not make the best argument Trump is a racist.  Self-identified racists do. They believe he is a racist, one of them.  Will they feel betrayed by any indication he is having second thoughts about his race-based strategy to energize his base, regardless of his sincerity?

Quod erat demonstrandum!

POSTSCRIPT

At dinner last night, my wife posed a most insightful question.  While everyone was talking about Trump’s comments, did any media outlet mention the detention center in Homestead, Florida has been closed?  And did anyone ask what happened to the children who were being held there?  Members of our community have been visiting detainees at Homestead and are now at a loss as to what happened to them.

Which raises a more important question.  Will journalist and pundits primarily focus on what Trump’s says but not what he does, ignoring the administration’s continued racist and anti-immigrant policies and actions?

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP