The men who launched the American Revolution (1763–1791) were not saints — there were slaveholders, speculators, and schemers among them — but they wagered everything on a set of Enlightenment propositions that no government had ever been founded on before: that legitimacy flows from the consent of the governed, not bloodlines; that reason and deliberation can govern better than throne and altar; that no man, however rich or loud, is above the law. “We hold these truths to be self-evident” was written by a man who didn’t live up to it, and the country has spent 250 years being indicted by its own founding document — through Gettysburg, Seneca Falls, and Selma — which is precisely what makes the document remarkable. Out of it grew an idea bigger than the imperfect republic itself: the America of the Statue of Liberty and Emma Lazarus’s “huddled masses,” the arsenal of democracy that broke fascism in 1945, the patient adversary that outlasted Soviet communism in 1991, the open commercial republic that built the postwar trading order of open sea lanes and multilateral — not bilateral — agreements, and that absorbed more immigrants than any nation in history. The myth was never the whole truth. But it was a standard to be held to. So the question on the country’s 250th birthday is a fair one: can a man whose entire public record — decades of it, fully in the open — runs against consent, law, reason, and welcome be the proper leader of a country founded on those propositions? Because Americans did choose him. Twice. And the explanation matters more than the indignation or the disgust.
Millions of Americans genuinely like Trump. “The Apprentice” premiered in January 2004 and drew roughly 20 million viewers a week at its peak, running 11 years until NBC cut ties in June 2015. (The network dropped him within two weeks of his campaign-launch speech describing Mexican immigrants as criminals and “rapists” — severing the show and the Miss USA and Miss Universe pageants in one stroke.) Trump won the presidency in 2016 with 304 electoral votes while losing the popular vote by 2.9 million — then won it again in 2024 with 312 electoral votes and, this time, a popular-vote plurality. He improved his share among Latino voters from roughly 28% in 2016 to approximately 46% in 2024 (exit-poll figures; approximate), and made double-digit gains with young men.
Sit with that. The man who launched his campaign calling Mexican immigrants rapists nearly doubled his Latino share in eight years. How? It was driven by inflation; by working-class men who heard his economic message rather than his rhetoric; and by Latino Americans — especially in South Texas border counties like Starr and Zapata, which flipped Republican for the first time in a century — who themselves favored stricter border enforcement. The same pattern hit the young: men under 30, the demographic supposedly most progressive, most educated, most online, swung toward Trump by double digits between 2020 and 2024, with exit polls showing him roughly splitting or narrowly winning young men outright after Biden had carried them by approximately 15 points (figures vary by survey; approximate). That shift was channeled less through Fox News than through podcasts, gym culture, and a manosphere where Democrats had simply stopped showing up. No theory of Trumpism survives unless it can explain both.
Now consider what was on the public record the whole time. The 1973 Justice Department suit against the Trump Organization for refusing to rent to Black tenants. The full-page ads in 1989 calling for the death penalty after the Central Park jogger attack — and his refusal to retract them after DNA evidence exonerated the five Black and Latino teenagers in 2002. Five years of birtherism against the first Black (half-Black?) president, 2011–2016. The claim that an Indiana-born federal judge couldn’t rule fairly because of his “Mexican heritage” (June 2016). Telling four congresswomen of color, three of them born in the United States, to “go back” where they came from (July 2019). The reported “shithole countries” remark about African nations (January 2018; he disputed the wording, attendees confirmed it). And the misogyny, not alleged but adjudicated: the Access Hollywood tape released in October 2016, one month before he won anyway; the Megyn Kelly “blood coming out of her wherever” comment (August 2015); and the E. Jean Carroll verdicts — a Manhattan federal jury found him liable for sexual abuse and defamation in May 2023, and a second jury added an $83.3 million defamation judgment in January 2024. Add the six corporate bankruptcies, the two impeachments — by the House in December 2019 over the Ukraine pressure campaign and in January 2021 over the Capitol attack, with Senate acquittals both times, the second falling 10 votes short of the two-thirds needed despite seven Republicans voting to convict — and the 34 felony convictions of May 2024. All of it completely in the open, much of it for decades. Millions of Americans saw all of it and said, “Yeah, I’m voting for Trump” — in growing numbers, too.
Explain why.
No, I’m serious. Go ahead. Explain to me why.
My theory is as follows.
First, collapsed trust in institutions. In 1964, Pew found 77% of Americans trusted the federal government to do the right thing most of the time; the figure has hovered near 20% for a decade (approximate). Gallup’s confidence numbers for newspapers, television news, Congress, and big business sit at or near record lows. Some of that collapse was earned by the institutions; some was deliberately cultivated — Newt Gingrich’s 1990 GOPAC memo, “Language: A Key Mechanism of Control,” taught a generation of Republican candidates to describe opponents as “sick,” “pathetic,” and “traitors,” and the partisan media economy that followed monetized the result. For a large share of Trump voters, the vulgarity and rule-breaking aren’t disqualifying — they’re credentials. They prove he isn’t one of the people who run things. The diploma divide is real — Trump won non-college voters decisively while losing college graduates — but it tracks alienation from elite institutions more than ignorance. The same wave is hitting highly educated electorates everywhere: the Sweden Democrats became Sweden’s second-largest party in 2022; the AfD finished second in Germany’s February 2025 election with roughly 21%; Geert Wilders’s PVV won the Dutch election outright in November 2023; Giorgia Meloni has governed Italy since 2022; and Marine Le Pen’s Rassemblement National leads French polling for 2027 despite her March 2025 embezzlement conviction. Sweden and Germany are not undereducated countries.
Second, a fragmented media environment in which Americans no longer share a common set of facts. The three-network era that ended in the 1980s — its death accelerated by the FCC’s repeal of the Fairness Doctrine in 1987, talk radio in the 1990s, Fox News from 1996, and partisan digital media after 2008 — has been replaced by parallel information universes that profit from each other’s outrage.
Third, both of these accelerated by social media algorithms that reward engagement over accuracy, and now compounded by AI-mediated search that decides what people see before they see anything.
So what do we do?
Money in politics. Buckley v. Valeo (1976, per curiam) held that political spending is protected speech; Citizens United (January 2010, Kennedy writing) extended it to unlimited independent corporate expenditures. I think both were wrongly decided — Musk’s roughly $277 million through America PAC in 2024 (approximate; FEC filings are the primary source) corrodes legitimacy even if it didn’t determine the outcome. And it probably didn’t: the Harris side outspent the Trump side overall and lost every swing state, and Bloomberg’s $1 billion in 2020 bought him American Samoa. The honest fix requires a constitutional amendment or a Court willing to revisit Buckley. Start that long fight openly; in the meantime, pass what survives scrutiny — real-time disclosure, foreign-money enforcement, coordination rules with teeth.
Social media. Government-mandated “balance” is dead on arrival under Miami Herald v. Tornillo (1974), and Moody v. NetChoice (2024) confirmed that platform moderation is itself protected editorial judgment. Gutting Section 230 (1996) would produce mass preemptive deletion, not balance. What’s actually available: algorithmic transparency mandates, disclosure requirements for paid political content, researcher access to platform data (the EU’s Digital Services Act already requires this), age-verification and design rules for minors, and antitrust enforcement so no single feed dominates the national information diet.
Education — as one tool, not the cure. Banning private schools is unconstitutional under Pierce v. Society of Sisters (1925), and federalizing 3.2 million teachers would confirm the populist right’s core story about distant elites seizing local life. France’s education system has been centrally run from Paris since Napoleon, and the RN leads its polls anyway. Instead: decouple school funding from local property wealth, raise teacher pay enough to compete with private-sector salaries for STEM graduates, and rebuild civics and media literacy — Finland has run national media-literacy curricula since 2014 and consistently tops European misinformation-resilience indices (approximate ranking; the index is published by the Open Society Institute–Sofia).
Finally — and this is the part lists like mine usually dodge — fix the actual grievances.
Regional economic decline. The “China shock” eliminated roughly 1 million US manufacturing jobs directly between 1999 and 2011, over 2 million counting spillovers (Autor, Dorn, and Hanson’s research; approximate), concentrated in exactly the Midwest and Appalachian counties that swung hardest to Trump. Case and Deaton documented the parallel rise in “deaths of despair” among non-college whites starting around 2015. The response: serious place-based industrial policy, not relocation lectures. The CHIPS Act fabs and IRA battery plants landing disproportionately in red districts are the right instinct — defend and extend that, whoever gets the credit. Copy the German-Swiss apprenticeship model, where most young people enter paid vocational tracks versus a small single-digit percentage in the US (approximate); fund sectoral training programs like Project QUEST and Per Scholas, which have randomized-trial evidence of lasting 20%–30% earnings gains (approximate; see MDRC evaluations). Anchor universities and federal labs in left-behind regions the way the Fraunhofer institutes anchor German industrial towns.
Immigration perceived as uncontrolled. Southwest border encounters hit roughly 2.5 million in FY2022 and stayed above 2 million in FY2023, with a record month near 250,000 in December 2023 (CBP figures; approximate) — and by mid-2024 Gallup found 55% of Americans wanting immigration decreased, the highest since just after 9/11. The political lesson is Denmark: Mette Frederiksen’s Social Democrats adopted strict enforcement, kept the populist right marginal, and held power — proof that the center can own this issue rather than cede it. Concretely: fund the asylum system so claims are decided in months, not the current multi-year backlog of over 3 million immigration-court cases (approximate); mandate E-Verify; pair enforcement with expanded legal pathways so the economy’s actual labor demand runs through the front door. The February 2024 Lankford-Murphy border bill was roughly this package; Trump killed it because the problem was more useful than the solution. Democrats’ error was needing him to make that obvious — they should have built and passed it in 2021.
Visible institutional failure. New York builds subway track at several times the per-mile cost of Madrid or Seoul (the NYU Transit Costs Project documents this); California’s high-speed rail was approved in 2008 at a $33 billion estimate and is now past $100 billion with no full segment running; an average federal environmental impact statement takes about four and a half years (approximate). Meanwhile the counterexamples prove competence is possible: Operation Warp Speed produced vaccines in under a year, and Pennsylvania rebuilt the collapsed I-95 overpass in 12 days in June 2023. The agenda: permitting reform (NEPA and judicial-review timelines), procurement reform, rebuilding in-house civil-service expertise instead of consultant dependence, and zoning liberalization — Austin’s building boom cut rents roughly 7% in 2024 (approximate), and Minneapolis’s 2018 reforms did similar work. This is the “abundance” argument Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson made book-length in March 2025, and its political logic is simple: every visibly failed public project is a campaign ad for the man who says the system is broken. Government that demonstrably works is the only durable rebuttal.
Candidates who don’t radiate contempt. “Basket of deplorables” (September 9, 2016) and “cling to guns or religion” (April 2008) each did more recruiting for the right than any Fox segment. The counterexamples win in hostile territory: Marie Gluesenkamp Perez holds a Trump district in Washington as an auto-shop owner; Jared Golden holds one in Maine; Dan Osborn, an industrial mechanic running as an independent in Nebraska in 2024, lost but ran roughly 14 points ahead of Harris (approximate). The pattern is consistent — local roots, working-class biography, no performed disdain. Recruit for that, fund it, and stop treating the people you’ve lost as a pathology to be cured rather than an electorate to be won.
And the stakes compound, because the wrecking ball is no longer a metaphor. In its first year back, the second Trump administration drove more than 260,000 workers out of the federal government — by some counts over 300,000, through layoffs, deferred resignations, and a hiring freeze (OMB and Challenger, Gray & Christmas figures; approximate) — gutting USAID outright, halving the Education Department, and cutting deep into NOAA’s forecasters and the CDC’s disease trackers. Musk promised $2 trillion in savings, revised it to $1 trillion, then $150 billion; DOGE’s own disputed ledger claims roughly $214 billion while the deficit grew by nearly $2 trillion and total spending rose — and Musk himself was gone by the end of May 2025, the chainsaw left running. Nor was this improvised: Schedule F — reclassifying career civil servants as removable at will — was published in Project 2025 back in 2023, which means the hollowing was a blueprint before it was a result.
Understand what this is: a movement powered by the conviction that government doesn’t work elected a man who is making certain it doesn’t, manufacturing the very institutional failure that fuels the movement. The FDA reviewers, the air-traffic hires, the epidemiologists who walked out the door carried decades of institutional memory that no successor — of either party — can simply rehire. That is the feedback loop closing. And the ordinary correctives have been disabled in the same motion: the courts removed the referees just as the executive claimed new powers — Rucho v. Common Cause (2019) declared partisan gerrymanders beyond federal judicial reach, the Shelby County line dismantled the Voting Rights Act’s operative machinery, and the Citizens United line keeps removing limits on the money — so “the system will self-correct” now assumes machinery that has been progressively switched off.
Every future breakdown, every slower disaster response, every backlog will be a campaign ad for whoever runs against “the broken system” next, quite possibly the heirs of the people who broke it. The founders worried about demagogues seizing the machinery; they spent less time on the scenario where the machinery is sold for parts and the demagogue’s successors campaign against the empty lot.
The founders’ deepest insight was not that Americans would be virtuous — Madison assumed the opposite, and built Federalist No. 10 and the whole machinery of checks around the assumption that men are not angels. Their insight was that institutions could channel ordinary self-interest toward decent outcomes, and that the system would survive demagogues only as long as it visibly delivered enough to be worth defending. That is the standard we’ve failed, and it is recoverable. The threat Trump represents was never really the man — New York City produces his type by the dozen — but the conditions that made tens of millions of rational people conclude the system deserved a wrecking ball more than a steward. Restore the conditions and the demand for wrecking balls collapses; that is how Denmark contained its populists, and how Warp Speed and a 12-day bridge briefly reminded Americans what their government can do.
The Enlightenment bet was never that the truths were self-evident to everyone at all times. It was that a free people, given functioning institutions and honest information, would find their way back to them. On the country’s 250th birthday, the way to honor the revolution is not to mourn the myth or sneer at the half of the country that stopped believing it — it is to make the idea of America once again something the evidence supports. Lazarus’s lamp was lifted beside a golden door, not a closed one, and not a broken one. The work is to make the door function: lawful, open, and worth walking through. That is a standard the founders would recognize — and one the country has met before, when it decided to.
Categories: Uncategorized
Gregory's Writings 
Leave a comment