Pretty interesting take on what has infected my Republican Party over the past 8 years:
One presentation of the rise of Donald Trump focuses on the anti-establishment backlash that the Republican Party experienced during the presidency of Barack Obama. The tea party was one manifestation, and Trump’s appearance as a presidential candidate in 2015 did attempt to leverage that frustration with establishment Washington.
More important, though, was the overlap between that anti-establishment sentiment and the embrace of outright false claims about political subjects. Part of the frustration with Republican leaders was that their actions and rhetoric were increasingly divergent from the rhetoric on Fox News and on fringier upstarts like Breitbart. Trump was both unattached to D.C. respectability and immersed in the fringe-right vernacular, and that’s what he presented to Republican primary voters.
This was the origin of the idea that Trump speaks frankly while others don’t. It wasn’t that he was honest; far from it. It was that he said the things that his supporters were hearing from (dishonest) actors elsewhere because he didn’t care about being seen as dishonest. His supporters saw this as unusual honesty, when it was in fact the opposite.
Trump’s dishonesty has been relentless ever since, often infecting his allies and his party. But he retains a perception of honesty and frankness among his supporters because they dislike and distrust those pointing out his dishonesty — his opponents, the media, etc. Trump is granted the benefit of the doubt, despite being perhaps uniquely undeserving of it.