Electoral Dramaturgy: Insights from Italian Politics about Donald Trump’s 2015–16 Campaign Strategy . . . and Beyond

“Mr. Trump’s buildings, unlike his father’s, have failed to make any architectural contribution to the cities around them or address social needs. Instead they pop up like middle fingers disdaining their surroundings. They are less architecture than marketing, with the Trump sign the most important component. Despite his appeal to legions of voters, his buildings do nothing for anyone but the super-wealthy who can afford the penthouses within.”

—Edwin Heathcote, Architecture Correspondent of the Financial Times, February 17, 2016

The coming of trump

The property tycoon Donald Trump’s surge to the top of the list of candidates for the Republican nomination for the 2016 US presidential election in national polls as well as in early primaries and caucuses has been interpreted in a variety of ways. He is appealing to the interests and prejudices of all those, particularly older white poorly educated men, who feel that they have lost out to women and minorities in an increasingly “politically correct” America. He is a blunt talker whose views on immigration, globalization and guns are free of the caveats that mar the politicians and party hacks he freely insults on the campaign trail. He is seen as a “strong leader” precisely because he lacks nuance, whose personal history as a property tycoon and reality TV star offers a welcome relief from the professional politicians who pivot hither and thither on this issue and that. He is the most effective communicator with an audience that views “nuance” as implying a lack of faith in basic premises about the nature of reality. What these all have in common is not much evidence of policy savvy or even focus on what he might actually do if he were elected president, but overwhelming emphasis on a leader picking up followers irrespective of what he does or says (Mayer 2015).

Trump’s peculiar career as a developer of towering apartment and office buildings and sprawling golf courses offers a clue to his success as a political communicator. There’s nothing very distinguished aesthetically about any of them. What they indicate is enormous skill at selling an image: Trump himself. “His biggest building is Chicago’s 98 story Trump Tower. Designed by the same architects as the world’s tallest tower, Dubai’s Burj Khalifa, it has a resemblance in the sculptural massing, the setbacks and streamlined corners. It is Mr. Trump’s best building but still marred by its massive sign: The Donald is always present, even when he is out” (Heathcote 2016).

Snake-oil salesmen, pastors selling the prosperity gospel, and branding that masks disappointing content are nothing new in American life. But never before has American national politics seen such a political performance that lacks any grounding in prior political office or even previous party affiliation. Trump’s supporters seem obsessed with the “leadership” he could provide. But a history of active involvement in politics is not what this is about. They like it when he says that President Obama is “weak” or his opponents are “losers.” The very casualness of his campaign, statements made and then withdrawn or denied, journalists disdained and regular campaign activities such as massive TV advertising avoided, speak to the uniqueness of Trump’s approach to campaigning (Wallace-Wells 2015). To his supporters, the biggest challenges facing the country, apparently, are “terrorism and immigration” (they are against both, period). They want not only to “Make America Great Again,” Trump’s slogan, but “bigger, better, stronger.” Above all, as pollsters report from their pro-Trump informants: “He tells it like it is,” “Can bring change,” and is “From outside the establishment.” The term “establishment” refers entirely to practicing politicians. Billionaires are exempted. Yet, interestingly, and reflecting the aging demographic at the core of his support, Social Security ranks after terrorism as the top issue for many of his strongest supporters (those for whom Trump is their top pick in their state’s primary or caucus) (Chan 2016). This is a nationalist bloc disillusioned with globalization and the broken promises of the...