“The Trump credo seems to be so many people to attack, so little time,” stated Peter Wehner, a former strategic adviser to President George W. Bush and now a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.
Garry Wills, a historian who has studied different presidents, stated, “No one else fires off omnidirectional personal insults in such fire-wheel fashion.” The exceptions appear to be President Vladimir V. Putin in Russia and white supremacists in Charlottesville, Va.
“I don’t think his intention is to be divisive,” stated Christopher Ruddy, the leader government of Newsmax Media and a buddy of Mr. Trump’s. “He desires to be considered as robust but additionally anyone who speaks the fact as he sees it and now not afraid what the established order says about it. He enjoys a combat and a problem, in order that might play into a few of this.
“My personal view,” he added, “is that he should adapt Floyd Mayweather’s boxing style — hold most of his punches for big opportunities, and tire out your opponents for a win in later rounds.”
Intentional or now not, lots of his maximum divisive feedback rate immediately into one in all the maximum subtle problems in American existence, race, whether or not or not it’s his assaults on unlawful immigrants, his “both sides” equivocation after the racial violence in Charlottesville or now his blasts at African-American soccer and basketball stars like Mr. Curry, the Golden State Warriors participant who stated he didn’t wish to seek advice from the White House for a conventional champions rite.
Speaking with newshounds prior to boarding Air Force One on Sunday, Mr. Trump insisted race was once now not the factor. “This has nothing to do with race,” he stated. “I never said anything about race. This has nothing to do with race or anything else. This has to do with respect for our country and respect for our flag.”
To his supporters, Mr. Trump’s method does now not essentially appear polarizing such a lot as animating. In an us-and-them global, he’s chatting with a a part of the nation that has lengthy felt ostracized by way of those that appear to have the whole lot, whether or not or not it’s Washington politicians or high-paid sports activities stars.
“These attacks sound divisive to the people outside that ‘us’ — and Trump’s ‘us’ is a lot smaller than most presidents’ — but not to those inside it,” stated Nicole Hemmer, a student of conservatism and social actions at the University of Virginia’s Miller Center.
“There’s a larger politics of grievance at work,” she added, and “the base’s desire for Trump to be tough and combative” is one observed in different presidents, if much less continuously and brazenly. Richard M. Nixon appealed to the “silent majority,” and Bill Clinton castigated an African-American rap megastar named Sister Souljah to succeed in out to disaffected white citizens who had fled the Democratic Party.
Mr. Wehner, on the other hand, stated Mr. Trump gave the impression to “draw a kind of psychic energy” from struggle. “We’ve never had a president who so relishes producing animosity and hate among Americans, and who does it so consistently, so gleefully and so intentionally,” he stated. And when there aren’t any glaring goals, he added, Mr. Trump is going on the lookout for them. “He seems to have a psychological need to keep everyone around him on edge and at each other’s throats.”
Open appeals to department, whilst more and more not unusual on the marketing campaign path, were rarer in the trendy White House. Ronald Reagan offered a sunny constructive view of America as a “shining city on a hill.” The first George Bush referred to as for a “kinder, gentler” America. Mr. Clinton vowed to “repair the breach” of partisanship. The more youthful Mr. Bush promised to be a “uniter, not a divider.” Barack Obama declared that “we are not a collection of red states and blue states; we are the United States of America.”
None of them totally lived as much as the ones beliefs, and now and then each and every of them appealed to department in the behavior of his presidency or campaigns. The elder Mr. Bush’s election was once remembered for the racially charged debate over the furloughed assassin Willie Horton. The more youthful Mr. Bush’s critics complained that he impugned their patriotism for criticizing his nationwide safety insurance policies, whilst Mr. Obama’s combatants complained that he incessantly puzzled their motives and talked right down to them.
In 2015, Gallup found that the 2d Mr. Bush and Mr. Obama had been the maximum polarizing presidents in trendy instances, as measured by way of the hole between how Republicans and Democrats noticed them. At that time, Mr. Obama held six of the most sensible 10 years of that polarization index and Mr. Bush the different 4.
But neither Mr. Bush nor Mr. Obama openly aspired to department on a regimen foundation. A Washington Post-ABC News ballot discovered that 66 percent of Americans consider Mr. Trump has finished extra to divide the nation than unite it; at their peaks, not more than 55 % stated that about Mr. Obama or Mr. Bush.
Mr. Trump turns out unbothered by way of that and in that sense could also be a president who fits his technology higher than his predecessors. He is a divisive president for a divisive time.
“We know previous presidents pursued political strategies that exploited racial divisions in our country,” stated Ellen Fitzpatrick, a historical past professor at the University of New Hampshire. “We know Nixon had his enemies list. But the public whipping up of this sentiment in mass campaign-style rallies with the crass language Trump used in Huntsville has no precedent I am aware of.”
H. W. Brands, a biographer of Reagan and different presidents at the University of Texas at Austin, stated different presidents had been tactically divisive. Andrew Jackson pilloried the moneyed categories, whilst Theodore Roosevelt inveighed towards the “malefactors of great wealth.” Franklin D. Roosevelt blamed the inventory marketplace crash on the “money changers” and stated he welcomed their hatred of him.
“Trump’s divisiveness looks different,” Mr. Brands stated. “It appears more impulsive and more a matter of simply stirring the pot. It makes sense from the perspective of one who has long sought to attract media attention. There doesn’t seem to be any larger purpose. I really can’t see what he hopes to win by taking on the N.F.L.”