Dear Reader,

Who in their right mind goes after someone who is arguably the most popular person in the world?

On Sunday, Donald Trump posted on Truth Social, in all caps, “I HATE TAYLOR SWIFT!”

The pop music star had endorsed Trump’s opponent for the presidency, Vice President Kamala Harris, following last week’s debate. Certainly, the endorsement carried sway with Swifties everywhere. But why would Trump pick a fight with a person who is so popular?

Trump’s response is a classic manipulator’s move. The goal is twofold: to distract and to divide.

First, Trump clearly wanted to change the conversation in a week when he faced a deluge of bad headlines, from his widely panned debate performance to his embrace of false claims that Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, were eating cats and dogs. On Sunday, the pet-eating scandal grew even more outrageous, when Trump’s running mate, J.D. Vance, said on television that he had to “create stories” to force the media to pay attention to immigration policies. The false claim, which Springfield’s mayor has refuted, prompted bomb threats at schools, hospitals, and city hall. Trump’s late morning post about Swift got people talking about his insult of the singer instead of the news that had shadowed him all week.

This strategy is one that has been used by other authoritarians throughout history. In the counterespionage world, the tactic is referred to as “reflex control”–saying something for the purpose of provoking an emotional response. Jair Bolsonaro, a Trump ally, used this trick in 2019, when the former Brazilian president’s son was under fire for allegations of corruption. Instead of answering a reporter’s question about the issue, Bolsonaro told the journalist he had “a homosexual’s face.” The incendiary comment sparked so much shock that it quickly overshadowed discussions of corruption.

Trump has used this tactic before. In 2019, when the House Oversight Committee was investigating Trump’s daughter Ivanka Trump and son-in-law Jared Kushner for using private email accounts, Trump referred to committee chair Elijah Cummings’s district in Baltimore as “a disgusting rat and rodent-infested mess.” The accusation was so outrageous, tinged as it was with barely veiled racism, that the national conversation quickly moved to Trump’s statement and away from the investigation.

Which brings us to the second purpose for the strategy–divide and conquer. Like Boslonaro’s statement to the reporter and Trump’s insult of the people of Baltimore, his latest post about Swift is all about the outrage. While Swift sells out concert arenas around the world, she is not without controversy. Some football commentators and fans complain that television cameras spend too much time focusing on her cheering on her boyfriend, Kansas City Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce, from the luxury boxes at Arrowhead Stadium, rather than focusing on the game. Sportscaster Rich Eisen has accused such fans as espousing “toxic masculinity.” What better target, then, than Swift to rile up the MAGA faithful and pour cold water on her endorsement?

The problem is that with such tactics comes danger. Just as the people of Springfield have been put at risk by the false claims of immigrants eating pets, Swift may now find herself at greater risk for threats, harassment, and violence. Already, Swift was forced to cancel three concerts in Vienna in August when law enforcement authorities uncovered an alleged plot to attack the shows by three people inspired by the Islamic State. Swift expressed guilt for canceling the shows because of the disruption of travel plans for her fans, and she also confessed to “a new sense of fear.”

By now, Trump must know that stoking anger with such statements creates risk. Some will hear his post as a call to action. In August 2022, after Trump falsely accused the FBI of planting evidence during a search of his Mar-a-Lago home, a man called for agents to be killed “on sight” and attempted to breach the agency’s Cincinnati office. He was killed later the same day in a standoff with police. And on January 6, 2021, of course, Trump supporters descended on Washington to “stop the steal” at Trump’s urging in a Twitter post and speech at the Ellipse. Their attack on the U.S. Capitol was a deadly example of vigilante violence.

Any hope that Trump might learn his lesson seems futile in light of his continued verbal attacks, even after his own brush with an assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania, in July, and a second apparent attempt in Florida over the weekend. Instead of hoping for a Trump reform, our best defense is to see through the tactics, and use our voting power to ensure that someone who seeks to manipulate public opinion gets moved offstage, where he belongs, and leaves the spotlight to those who are worthy of our attention.

Stay Informed,

Barb