donald trump<u+2019>s post-debate ranting about alicia machado, the former miss universe elevated by hillary clinton as proof of trump<u+2019>s misogyny, has been similar to his other meltdowns but distinctive in one particular way: it<u+2019>s the first time in this election that trump has clashed with someone who actually resembles him. other targets of trump<u+2019>s ire, like judge gonzalo curiel and the khan family, seemed handpicked for their uprightness, their dignity, their not-like-donald virtues. but machado, like trump himself, is a creature of the celebrity-industrial complex, a dogged self-promoter with a fascinatingly checkered past . maybe she was genuinely devastated by trump<u+2019>s fat-shaming. who can say? but the press<u+2019>s portrayal of her as a wounded martyr has obscured her actual persona in spanish-language pop culture, which has been defined by (among other things) repeated reality-television stints and soap opera-ish relationship on-camera and off-, an alleged involvement in a murder plot (she supposedly drove the getaway car and threatened the case<u+2019>s judge), and persistent rumors that her child was fathered by a mexican drug kingpin. she shares, in other words, trump<u+2019>s desperation for the spotlight and his shamelessness in reaching for it, and her shrugging, <u+201c>i<u+2019>m not a saint girl<u+201d> response to anderson cooper<u+2019>s questions about her interesting past had a very trumpish feel. which is probably part of why her sudden prominence has driven him so nuts. he clearly feels like he should be able to swat away machado<u+2019>s allegations, given her <u+201c>no such thing as bad publicity<u+201d> biography. but given their resemblances, he<u+2019>s in no position to make that kind of case. in a world where a playboy like trump is a major party<u+2019>s nominee for the presidency, why shouldn<u+2019>t a playgirl like machado be a character witness against him? for that matter: in a world where a figure like donald trump is a major party<u+2019>s nominee for the presidency, why shouldn<u+2019>t a character like alicia machado aspire to high office as well? i<u+2019>m joking (and anyway machado is constitutionally ineligible for the presidency), but there is an interesting underlying question here. trumpism represents the conquest of the still relatively staid world of politics by tabloid seaminess and the reality-television carnival. but that seaminess, that carnival, is hardly limited by ideology or partisan affiliation. democratic voters swim in the same cultural sea as the <u+201c>apprentice<u+201d>-watching republicans who helped make trump the g.o.p. nominee, and most of the culture<u+2019>s major celebrities <u+2014> from c-listers like machado all the way up to hollywood royalty <u+2014> will be pulling the lever for hillary clinton this november. given all this, could a trump-style celebrity takeover someday befall the democrats as well, without the white identity politics but with all the raging telenovela drama that<u+2019>s trailed in trump<u+2019>s wake? right now it couldn<u+2019>t, because the democratic party isn<u+2019>t a dysfunctional entity in which ratings-obsessed entertainers wield outsize influence over a base that feels consistently betrayed. the liberal elite has a level of popularity and influence with its voters that slipped from the g.o.p. leadership after the collapse of the bush administration. the democratic party<u+2019>s regulars <u+2014> african-americans, especially <u+2014> have shown a consistent small-c conservatism in the candidates they<u+2019>ve favored recently. and the multiculturalism of the democratic coalition means that a celebrity rabble-rouser would have to cobble together support across multiple (and very different) demographics, rather than playing identity politics with a single large constituency as trump did. some kind of celebrity (ahem, oprah, ahem) might be able to win the democratic nomination under present circumstances. but they would need to be respectable rather than disreputable, and run a campaign that accepted guardrails and gatekeepers rather than gleefully destroying them. the wrecking-ball left-wing analogues to trump that pundits have imaginatively toyed with <u+2014> an oliver stone, a sean penn <u+2014> wouldn<u+2019>t stand a chance. but what<u+2019>s true today might not be true forever. the differences between the democratic party<u+2019>s younger, poorer, browner base and its older, whiter, richer and more moderate leadership are a potentially unstable equilibrium. the anger coursing through left-wing protest politics could find a cruder, more nakedly demagogic avatar than bernie sanders. a hillary clinton administration could supply various betrayals and compromises or foul up in some disastrous way, encouraging a sense that the professional class that dominates liberalism<u+2019>s upper reaches needs to give way to a revived (and larger) version of jesse jackson<u+2019>s rainbow coalition <u+2014> a <u+201c>real american future<u+201d> analogue to trump<u+2019>s <u+201c>make america great again<u+201d> appeals. if trump has thrived by imitating europe<u+2019>s right-wing nationalists, a trumpism of the left would imitate the left-wing populists of latin america and asia <u+2014> the chavismo of alicia machado<u+2019>s native venezuela, or the trumpian socialism presently being served up by the ranting , trigger-happy president of the philippines, rodrigo duterte. this may sound implausible, indeed frankly un-american <u+2014> but so did the ascent of trump<u+2019>s national front-ish politics, and yet here we are. cultural and demographic change can ripple into politics slowly, and then all at once. the elite checks on a gonzo left-wing populism are real and powerful, but so are the cultural forces roiling underneath. and the same demographic changes that have made the right more nativist and populist, more european and reactionary, could expose the left to a latin american temptation if liberal governance ever really hits the rocks. if and when it does, the hillary clinton campaign<u+2019>s skillful deployment of alicia machado may be cast in a somewhat different light. it<u+2019>s clinton<u+2019>s democratic party today <u+2014> managerial, technocratic, polished, a little smug. but machado<u+2019>s wilder, messier, <u+201c>i<u+2019>m not a saint girl<u+201d> style might have its own claim on the american left<u+2019>s future, if the technocrats and managers ever let her kind of democratic voter down. i invite you to follow me on twitter (@douthatnyt) . follow the new york times opinion section on facebook and twitter (@nytopinion) , and sign up for the opinion today newsletter .
a trumpism of the left
noauthor