Is Trump Attempting A Coup Disqualifying?

Yep

In a recent article, I argued that Trump attempted a coup. He organized slates of fake electors and tried to get Pence and the state legislators to approve the fake electors so that they would declare him the winner of an election that he knew he lost. Then, he tried to pressure Raffensperger to fabricate votes and stood by for hours as a violent mob attacked the Capitol because he hoped they’d convince Pence to agree to his scheme. He talked about the spinelessness of Pence as a mob of his fanatical supporters searched for Pence, attempting to hang him (talk about bad timing!). He made a concerted effort to overturn the result of a free and fair election and got frighteningly close to triggering the most severe democratic crisis since the Civil War.

Lots of people agree with this conclusion. Both Richard Hanania and Ben Shapiro think that Trump tried to overturn the results of the election but despite that, he’s still worth voting for. I think this is nuts—the philosopher Michael Huemer articulated this quite well:

Conservative commentator Ben Shapiro is still planning on voting Trump, even though he knows that Trump tried to steal the 2020 election. Shapiro explained that there is no cause for concern because “the guard rails held”, and Trump can’t do the same thing again since he’s not eligible to run again after his second term.

Let me tell you how I view this. Say you’re on a bus ride on a winding mountain road. You see the driver suddenly swing the wheel to the right, trying to send the bus over the cliff. Fortunately, the guard rail on the side of the road holds, and the bus bounces back onto the road. The bus driver does this repeatedly during the drive, but every time, the guard rail holds the bus back.

When you finally get off the bus, one of your fellow passengers declares that this was an excellent bus driver. He proposes hiring this driver to drive the same group to another city.

“What are you, out of your f—ing mind?” you reply. “He tried to drive us off a cliff!”

“Oh that,” says the other passenger. “The guard rail held, so what’s the big deal? Don’t worry, this next drive won’t go by a cliff. Since the rest of his driving performance was fine, we should hire him.”

That guy is Ben Shapiro.

Do I have to spell it out, Ben? Driving off a cliff is not the only bad thing a bus driver can do. There is an indefinite number of disasters a crazy person can cause. Anyone who would try to drive a bus off a cliff can never be trusted with a bus, or indeed anything else, and if you think he’s an acceptable driver, you’re as crazy as he is.

Indeed. If someone is the kind of person to try to attempt a coup, they are a serious threat to the world and should be nowhere near the levers of power. If a person has already seriously endangered democracy, then re-electing them is nuts. Hanania and Shapiro apparently disagree with this conclusion; Hanania thinks that Trump won’t attempt anything like the fake electors scheme again because he’s not up for re-election and Shapiro thinks that the guard rails held.

Imagine if Trump had attempted to launch a nuclear first strike against one of our nuclear-armed adversaries on the grounds that doing so would help his re-election chances by creating a rally around the flag effect. Suppose that this action had been prevented at the very last minute by the heroic actions of his vice president who was needed for the order to go through, who as a result of his courage is now permanently excised from Republican politics. Sure, if the VP hadn’t demonstrated courage, it’s possible the local commanders wouldn’t have launched the nukes or that the attack would have fizzled out and been relatively small, but nonetheless, it would have seriously risked nuclear war.

Such an action would be utterly disqualifying. Now, imagine in such a world, conservative commentator Shen Bapiro argued that we should reelect Trump after he tried to launch a nuclear first strike because the guard rails held, and Hichard Ranania argues that Trump is no longer up for re-election, so he has no need to try to launch a nuke for political purposes.

Those well-versed in subtle metaphor might be able to see the analogy that I’m going for here.

It seems that it would be reasonable to reply to such people just as it’s reasonable to reply to those advocating for re-electing Trump:

1. If a guy is the sort of person to try to either attempt to overturn the results of a free and fair election or attempt a nuclear first strike then there are lots of crazy things that they might attempt that could be extremely bad. The fake electors scheme wasn’t on anyone’s mind four years ago. If a chef tries to poison your drink with hemlock, you shouldn’t allow him to cook your meals on the grounds that there’s no more hemlock in the house—there might be all sorts of other poisons he could use.

2. Such a person might make a serious attempt to challenge democracy in other ways. Maybe alt-world Trump would try to launch a nuke to shore up his approval ratings. Similarly, perhaps the real-world Trump would attempt to declare a national emergency and not leave after a second term. It sounds unlikely, and I agree it’s not the most probable scenario (maybe 8% probability), but remember: we’re talking about a guy who attempted a coup. After a guy attempts a coup, you shouldn’t be shocked if they try to undermine democracy in other egregious ways. “What, Nigerian paramilitary leader Amadou Abdramane would never do anything undemocratic after leading a coup?”

3. Such a person might undermine institutions in other important ways. Perhaps they’d push for major change to the judiciary if they feel undermined by them. Trump in his second term will have fewer experts and generals and more suck-ups and sycophants, so it’s likelier this will happen in a second term than in a first term. Alt-world Trump might attempt aggressive military actions—if someone tries to launch a nuke, they might do any number of other bad things.

4. Even if he ends up being a fine president, it’s important to vote against him to disincentivize attempting to overturn elections. If after trying to overturn an election Trump gets re-elected, that sends a credible signal to future politicians that trying to overturn elections isn’t such a big deal.

Kamala Harris, whatever you think of her, is a relatively normal Democrat—further left than I’d like on various issues, but sane and reasonable. When a sane and reasonable adult is running against a crazy person who attempted a coup, the choice is clear. Trump tried to drive our democracy off a cliff. As Huemer says “Anyone who would try to drive a bus off a cliff can never be trusted with a bus, or indeed anything else, and if you think he’s an acceptable driver, you’re as crazy as he is.”