What Trump's acceptance speech says about Trump

After surviving an attempted assassination, Donald Trump promised he would seek unity as he accepted the GOP’s nomination.

We take a look at what Trump said, and whether or not that message was embraced by delegates, Republican party leaders, and Trump's base nationwide.

Today, On Point: What Trump's acceptance speech says about Trump.

Jonathan Martin, senior political columnist and politics bureau chief at Politico.

Jennifer Mercieca, professor of communication and journalism at Texas A&M University. Her expertise is American political rhetoric. She’s also the author of Demagogue for President: The Rhetorical Genius of Donald Trump.

Part I

MEGHNA CHAKRABARTI: Donald Trump officially accepted the Republican nomination for president last night.

DONALD TRUMP: I am running to be president for all of America, not half of America, because there is no victory in winning for half of America. (CHEERS)

So tonight, with faith and devotion, I proudly accept your nomination for President of the United States. (CHEERS)

CHAKRABARTI: This is the third consecutive time Trump has made a presidential nomination acceptance speech. This time around, though, it was also the first major public address he's given since surviving an attempted assassination on Saturday.

TRUMP: I'm not supposed to be here tonight. Not supposed to be here. (AUDIENCE CHANTS "Yes you are!") Thank you. But I'm not. And I'll tell you, I stand before you in this arena only by the grace of Almighty God. (CHEERS)

CHAKRABARTI: Trump recounted Saturday's attack in minute detail, while he also stood on stage next to the uniform of Corey Comperatore, a firefighter who was killed in that same shooting in Butler, Pennsylvania.

TRUMP: As you already know, the assassin's bullet came within a quarter of an inch of taking my life. So many people have asked me what happened. Tell us what happened, please. And therefore, I will tell you exactly what happened, and you'll never hear it from me a second time because it's actually too painful to tell.

CHAKRABARTI: Trump described that Saturday as a warm and beautiful day. He said the crowd was happy. He was happy. But then said shortly after he took them to the stage, everything changed.

TRUMP: When I heard a loud whizzing sound and felt something hit me really hard on my right ear, I said to myself, wow, what was that?

It can only be a bullet and moved my right hand to my ear, brought it down. My hand was covered with blood, just absolutely blood all over the place. I immediately knew it was very serious that we were under attack, and in one movement proceeded to drop to the ground. Bullets were continuing to fly.

CHAKRABARTI: Trump complimented the Secret Service agents who rushed to the stage to protect him. He then mentioned that as the Secret Service stood him up, Trump noticed that the rally crowd hadn't fled the scene.

TRUMP: When I rose surrounded by Secret Service, the crowd was confused because they thought I was dead. And there was great sorrow.

I could see that on their faces as I looked out. They didn't know I was looking out. They thought it was over. But I could see it, and I wanted to do something to let them know I was okay. I raised my right arm, looked at the thousands and thousands of people that were breathlessly waiting and started shouting fight, fight. (CHEERS)

CHAKRABARTI: Delegates did indeed at last night's speech chant fight back to Trump. That feedback from the audience seemed to re-energize Trump. The first half hour of his roughly 90-minute speech was hushed, somber, emotional. Then, the Donald Trump of his campaign rallies rose back to the surface in full force.

TRUMP: They're destroying our country. We have to work on making America great again, not on beating people, and we won. We beat them in all, we beat them on the impeachments, we beat them on indictments, we beat them. But the time that you have to spend, the time that you have to spend, if they would devote that genius to helping our country, we'd have a much stronger and better country.

CHAKRABARTI: In the days after the assassination attempt, Trump had promised to tone down what was originally, in his words, a humdinger of a speech. He said that he would seek to unify the nation. So today we'll take a closer look at Trump's acceptance speech and what it indicates about his approach as the campaign continues to march on over the next four months.

And let's go right to Milwaukee, where Jonathan Martin joins us. He's senior political columnist and politics bureau chief at Politico. Jonathan, welcome to On Point.

JONATHAN MARTIN: Hey, Meghna, how you doing?

CHAKRABARTI: Good. I know it was a long night for everyone, so I appreciate you joining us today. First of all --

MARTIN: A long night, a long week, a long month, a long year.

CHAKRABARTI: And it's going to get longer still between now and November. Where exactly were you at the convention last night?

MARTIN: I was on the floor. And listening to that lengthy speech and with the delegates for the most part. And I got to tell you, that section recounting the assassination attempt was ripping people.

I've been thinking about it all week and they weren't engrossed by it, what I don't understand is why he then proceeded to give over an hour or more of remarks that were much more Trumpian and as most people know it, and fairly indulgent and rambling when he would have, I think left an incredible rhetorical mark.

If he had just mostly kept it to the account of Saturday and a bit more puzzling strategy.

CHAKRABARTI: Yeah. So we'll talk about that more in a few minutes, but because you were standing amongst the delegates for, over time, Donald Trump has proved that he is authentic self, right? I'm not sure he can be anyone else other than who he is at any particular moment.

And so that first, 25 minutes, half hour did seem to be profound. He was, he seemed, to be showing a profound vulnerability. And I'm wondering how the delegates around you responded to that. What was the energy on the floor?

MARTIN: They were wrapped. They were emotional in some cases.

Absorbing every word that they obviously had watched the clips like everybody. I think hearing it firsthand from somebody that they really admire was a powerful experience. And yeah, it was interesting listening to him talk about what happened to himself and the hand of Providence and the tragic killing of one of his supporters. And the moment where he walked over and embraced the fire helmet and jacket of the supporter of his who was killed by the shooter, was probably the most powerful moment.

And, remarkably, it was the most powerful moment that lacked any words, which is to say that I think the emotional high point of that speech may have been that moment where he just walked over, didn't say anything and embrace the helmet. There's been a lot of reporting in the past couple of days that seemingly Trump has been actually changed by a near death experience and undoubtedly and that he's thinking more about his legacy now and how his grandchildren might remember him.

I'm wondering from your conversations at the convention and your reporting, if that tracks for you.

MARTIN: I think anybody who has something of a brush with death like that has to be impacted. And he obviously believes he was extraordinarily lucky and perhaps did enjoy divine intervention. Because he didn't move his head at the last minutes of the bullet only grazed his ear. I tend to be skeptical that there's some kind of dramatic change in his personality.

If you watch that speaks last night. He eventually returned to what you could call the gold bullies referring to Nancy Pelosi as crazy Nancy, slipped in and invoked Biden's name at one point when he didn't want to do that, going on about the charges against him. Very familiar litany.

I tend to think in that sense, he's probably the same person. Maybe he's more conscious of legacy now. I think it's still the same Donald Trump that we know, broadly speaking.

CHAKRABARTI: So give us your take on then how Trump's speech last night. And I promise we will definitely hear more of it. We've got lots of clips, and we'll talk about how it evolved over the 90 plus minutes, which I understand is one of the longest presidential accept, or not presidential nomination acceptance speeches since the mid 1950s in America.

But give us your sense of the speech in terms of the larger context of the RNC, because it does seem as if this was quite a different Republican National Convention, obviously, than 2020, which was COVID impacted, but even 2016.

MARTIN: Yeah, this is a very different moment.

And I think, people who did not participate in the 2020 conventions as we know them, they missed having the traditional pomp of a convention like this and I think enjoyed being able to gather again and obviously If you're a trump supporter, this was the 2020 convention that you didn't have. And so I think people were happy to be back together, I still think looking at the eyes of the delegates and watching them look at their phones and shuffle their feet, even for his most committed supporters it was pushing the strains of their tolerance.

CHAKRABARTI: Yeah. I wondered about that. Because by the end, it seemed as if it didn't have, he transformed back into the Trump we know from the rallies. It didn't seem to have the same energy that his rallies often do. So did you get the sense?

MARTIN: No, because he was torn, I think, between trying to give a dignified teleprompter speech and also be true to his supporters and give them the Trump show, which they've come to know and love.

And you can almost see that unfold and then the tension between those two things, because he was pretty faithful to the teleprompter. Through the recounting of the shooting and then through the initial talk about his policy agenda, I think what happened is he got bored doing the litany on his teleprompter and it was fairly starchy for Trump, and he went back to what he does, which is he went off prompter and just started doing a veritable standup routine and that's what stretched this so long.

I can tell you, I was on the far, if you're looking stage part of the floor, where I can see the teleprompter going in front of him. And he just stopped for some time because he was off that he was just telling stories and, Kim Jong Un liked me. It's not a bad thing to get along with people.

Part II

CHAKRABARTI: Jonathan, you've been talking about how after a while, after about half an hour or so, Trump visibly went off script essentially and stopped following the teleprompter. I just have a little, I have a moment of that here and I'd love to hear your response to that. Because as you had mentioned, Trump had not wanted to say Joe Biden's name, but in one of those off teleprompter riffs, he ended up doing that.

But in the middle of this clip, you hear him taking quite a big breath and then his tone changes, as I believe he goes back on script. So here it is.

TRUMP: Only going to use the term once, Biden. I'm not going to use the name anymore. Just one time. The damage that he's done to this country is unthinkable.

It's unthinkable. Together we will restore vision, strength, competence, and we're gonna have a thing called common sense making most of our decisions, actually. It's all common sense. (CHEERS)

CHAKRABARTI: So it's that moment, at least as far as I can see, on the televised thing, of the televised version of the speech where he goes from it's unthinkable, and then he goes together, we will restore vision.

Just talk about how those moments played actually on the floor.

MARTIN: Some of his lines hit and some of them didn't. Which is a lot of trump rallies, right? He's just in real time going through. It's a stream of consciousness and one thing goes to the next and he then doubles back when he remembers something. And then he'll get lost in a cul-de-sac rhetorically and then eventually find a way out of it. People like it, others like it less.

I think it depends on the nature of his supporter. You know, some of this stuff is, he does this impression of his critics where he changes his voice. He says, I got along with Kim Jong Un, they say you're not supposed to, Oh he's being nice to a bad man, he does the impressions of his critics.

And like that's when you know, he's off the prompter. And he certainly did that last night. So I think some of his folks love it. And others, not so much. I think the challenge he had last night is he wasn't giving his supporters the sort of rhetorical red meat with the prepared remarks, and he tried to then give them something that they could like.

And so that's why he did that. But then he eventually had to come back to the remarks they had prepped for him. To get through the speech, and by then, we're looking at midnight eastern, and this thing has become an epic.

CHAKRABARTI: Here's another clip where I think a lot of things come together that happen in that speech.

Obviously, him talking about the assassination attempt on his life, trying to reach out directly to his core supporters in the MAGA movement, and then at times trying to ring out that message of unity. So here's what he said. He said that the MAGA movement is essentially not about him.

Trump said to the delegates on the floor, it's about everyday Americans.

TRUMP: The attacker in Pennsylvania wanted to stop our movement, but the truth is, the movement has never been about me, it has always been about you. It's your movement, it's the biggest movement in the history of our country by far. It can't be stopped.

It has always been about the hard working, patriotic citizens of America. For too long, our nation has settled for too little. We settled for too little. You've been told to lower your expectations and to accept less for your families. I am here tonight with the opposite message. Your expectations are not big enough.

CHAKRABARTI: Well, joining us now is Jennifer Mercieca. She's professor of communication and journalism at Texas A&M University, and her expertise is in American political rhetoric. Professor Mercieca, welcome to On Point.

JENNIFER MERCIECA: Hello.

CHAKRABARTI: So in evaluating the effectiveness of any political rhetoric, we have to make that evaluation based on who the intended audience is, right?

So who do you think the intended audience was for this quite major speech of now nominee Trump?

MERCIECA: Yeah. Conventions are designed to obviously show that the party is unified, that they're enthusiastic about their candidate, and to present the policy and values that they think will lead the nation.

But they're really designed to appeal to people who are uncommitted. And I don't know that there are a lot of uncommitted voters at this point in America. And so I think what we saw throughout the entire week is them trying to present a new Donald Trump, as if we didn't already know who he is, and reintroduce the candidate and to give us what they said was the real Donald Trump, someone who's a grandfather and soft and a nice friend and things like that.

So not the sort of tough and scary and self-centered Donald Trump that we've come to know.

CHAKRABARTI: Jonathan, do you want to respond to that? Because there may not be very many actual undecideds out there, but maybe swayables. And given how our electoral system works, you don't actually have to convince that many swayable voters in certain key counties, for example, to win enough electoral votes to take a person to the White House.

So do you think this speech may have had an impact on those kind of voters?

MARTIN: I'm skeptical. Maybe at the margins, folks who were uneasy about Trump's persona are somewhat reassured now because they'll see a clip of this and a more mellow version of Trump. I don't think it has a huge impact like it would have in an earlier generation where we had a less fractured media and culture, and everybody was watching three channels and of course they watched the convention speech.

I just don't think we live in that world any longer, but I can just tell you, listen to that clip you played, that gets to the heart of the challenge with the speech, which is Trump is delivering those lines like he's reading a grocery list, right? Oh, I have to get those two zucchinis, some skim milk.

And don't forget the cereal. I [think] that there's no energy and emotion. ... That's not him, it's somebody else's words trying to make him look like somebody. And frankly, he's not.

CHAKRABARTI: I get it in terms of his delivery of those lines. But Professor Mercieca, let me turn back to you on this.

I picked this clip because rhetorically I actually found it quite effective. And I want to note that you have been, professor, you've been following Trump's speeches since 2015. And you've written a book called Demagogue for President: the Rhetorical Genius of Donald Trump. And you point out that demagogue in the original ancient Greek means leader of the people.

So just, can you just analyze this last clip that I played a little bit? Because this is the speech writer. Of course, it's not necessarily Donald Trump off the cuff, but I do feel like the message in there is one that actually resonates quite powerfully with a lot of Americans.

MERCIECA: I don't know the clip.

CHAKRABARTI: Oh, sorry. It's the clip that I played where just a minute ago, I'm sorry, where he talked about the MAGA movement not being, not, it cannot be stopped, it cannot be stopped. And then he says to people, he says, for too long, our nation has suffered, settled for too little. We settled for too little.

You've been told to lower your expectations and accept less for your families. I am here tonight with the opposite message. Your expectations are not big enough.

MERCIECA: Oh, yeah. So Donald Trump likes to do two things to connect himself to his followers. One is an ad populum where he's constantly praising his followers.

They are the wisest, the smartest, the best of all Americans. So pulling in an American exceptionalism appeal. And he does this thing where he's always telling them how strong they are, what a great and powerful movement they are. He's been doing that since 2015. And then it's circular, right?

Because they love him. And he is their leader. And so therefore he is the apotheosis of American exceptionalism. He is the greatest political leader, because he leads this great, big, strong movement. It's very consistent with the message that he has been presenting to his followers. And frankly, it's quite appealing to them, right?

So if they're told that they're the best of America, but that these corrupt Democrats or others don't know that, don't recognize that they've been left behind. They've been humiliated, right? All of those are very motivating factors. If you have someone like Donald Trump who says, and I see you, right?

And I see how valuable you are. And I'm going to restore things so that your place in the hierarchy is guaranteed and secure.

CHAKRABARTI: How is that though materially different from what, let's say, the great orators of the Democratic Party have done? Because this idea that we should hope for more, that we should, that people, Americans should strive for more, want more, expect more.

I think that's a familiar rhetorical line regardless of party. So is Trump just more effective at delivering that line?

MERCIECA: He does it differently. So think about Barack Obama, right? His whole campaign in 2008 was about hope and change. And he blamed the corruption of the elite and of a system that wasn't designed for average folks.

And it was a different message in that he wasn't saying, I alone can fix it, right? He was saying, Yes, we can. So, be hopeful. We can do this together. And I think, in fact, that a lot of folks thought that when Obama was saying, Yes, we can. And so there was a lot of expectations that Obama would snap his fingers and everything would be better, and it wasn't.

And then people were really disappointed with him. Trump's using a different strategy, right? He's saying, I alone can fix it. Put me in power and I will make everything better for you. So there are differences. But yeah, you want your politics to be aspirational, right? You want people to think about a hopeful future.

CHAKRABARTI: Let's listen to a little bit more of Trump later in his speech last night, because as both of you note, and Jonathan, you talked about this, he did, when he started riffing on themes that are quite familiar to his followers and people who've been observing the election thus far. Last night, he claimed that the world is on the brink of World War III, as he put it, and that he could stop all international conflict with a single phone call, unlike the current administration, Trump claimed.

TRUMP: It's time for a change. This administration can't come close to solving the problems we're dealing with. Very tough, very fierce people, they're fierce people. And we don't have fierce people. We have people that are a lot less than fierce, except when it comes to cheating on elections and a couple of other things.

Then they're fierce. Then they're fierce.

CHAKRABARTI: So there was that unfounded but often repeated claim from Donald Trump that there was cheating in the 2020 presidential election. Just a few moments after that, he once again made that claim.

TRUMP: We had that horrible result that we'll never let happen again.

The election result, we're never going to let that happen again. They use COVID to cheat. We're never going to let it happen again.

CHAKRABARTI: Once again, there was no evidence of cheating in the 2020 election and judges in 60 plus cases brought by the Trump campaign and other Republicans agreed with that. No findings of cheating.

Jonathan, talk to me about your thoughts on these familiar themes that came back up last night.

MARTIN: Yeah. There was no chance that Donald Trump's 2020 acceptance speech, that he was going to skip over the fact that he believes that he was cheated out of a reelection in 2020. Oh, I should have tried 2024 convention speech.

I should say, this is Trump 101. He's got to propagate this myth, because he can't stand the idea of having lost to Joe Biden, so there's gotta be some kind of a nefarious reason why, the dark hand somehow the robbed him of the election he deserved. And of course, everybody knows that's BS. And his own party had a pretty good election here in 2020 and he lost a narrowly in the electoral college because he alienated so many people who otherwise would have voted for him. Not because the mail in ballots done for reasons of health safety during COVID somehow denied him a second term, but he can't let that persist. Of course, he has to he has to obviously indulge in this fiction once more.

And the way you said that clip you played was more classic Trump, off teleprompter. They're not fierce about anything except for cheating elections and a couple of other things, who the heck knows what the other things are. But of course, you can leave that to the crowd's imagination, and they enjoy it. This is the connection with his supporters. Is this, the sense that he's been wrong.

They've been wrong. The elite somehow are out there dirty and that's made them strong.

CHAKRABARTI: Professor Mercieca, is this one of the reasons why you call, in your book, Donald Trump is a genius at using a particular form of rhetoric.

MERCIECA: Yeah, absolutely. He's really excellent at using dangerous demagoguery, using rhetoric as a weapon to attack his opposition, to name call, to keep and attract our attention, to control the narrative and the framing.

I've been baffled by the framing this week that I've read in the news and it's all Trump's framing. It's all from exactly what we saw at the convention. Grandpa Trump is kinder and gentler and a changed man. And he wants to unite. But when I listened to the speech, I hear him saying Democrats need to capitulate.

I didn't hear him saying anything about wanting to cooperate with Democrats. I didn't hear a changed man.

CHAKRABARTI: So when you say that you've been baffled by the framing you've seen in news coverage, you mean that it seems to you that the coverage is being uncritical of the narration coming out of the RNC.

MERCIECA: Yeah, it just seemed very clearly to be the framing that had been provided to the media.

CHAKRABARTI: Okay, Jonathan.

Is that kind of how coverage during conventions work because conventions are these odd, hermetically sealed bubbles that in a sense are alternate realities, even.

MARTIN: Yes.

CHAKRABARTI: Yeah, go ahead.

MARTIN: No, that's exactly right. Want to create the sense of purpose and community with their delegates and live in the sort of political world that those folks bathe in, are comfortable in. Now the broader purpose of a convention is not for those in the hall, and it's not for the committed supporters watching at home.

It's for people who maybe are still making up their minds politically and want to be convinced of the message of a given candidate campaign. I think that's why there was the effort to make Trump the grandpa, the theme of the week. Now the challenge with Trump is that he inevitably is going to break from that mold.

He doesn't want to be refashioned. He wants to be Trump classic. To borrow a good 1980s reference, which is fitting with Donald Trump.

Part III

CHAKRABARTI: Here's a couple more moments where again, we hear the Donald Trump of his very wildly popular campaign rallies that crept up during his 90-minute address last night.

He had said that he'd make an effort not to name call, but that effort seemed to slip a couple of times.

TRUMP: It's every week they get another subpoena from the Democrats, crazy Nancy Pelosi, the whole thing just boom.

CHAKRABARTI: And that was Trump referring to the subpoenas that his family members had received, both for the January 6th Congressional Committee investigations and for the various court cases that Trump has been involved in, including the ones he was found guilty on.

Here's another moment. It's quite interesting, because of course Trump talks extensively about immigration and the southern border. He said last night, quote, there's an invasion at the southern border. And then he made the claim that increased migration from places like Venezuela and El Salvador has increased crime in the United States.

But he then went on and said, it's also decreased crime in those countries.

TRUMP: Our next Republican convention in Venezuela, because it will be safe. Our cities will be so unsafe, we won't be able, we will not be able to have it there in El Salvador, murders are down by 70%. Why are they down?

CHAKRABARTI: To answer the question of why are they down?

The numbers of homicides in El Salvador did drop nearly 70% in 2023. President Nayib Bukele has credited the prolonged state of emergency there in the attempt to fight criminal gangs. The El Salvadoran president made no mention of U.S. border policy having an impact on the drop in El Salvador's murder rate.

Now, Professor Mercieca, the reason why I wanted to play that is obviously there's a lot of rhetoric around Trump's view of immigration in that clip, but he also delivers it with kind of a warm toned joke that seems to resonate with the delegates there. And I feel like this is another skill that he has quite mastered in delivering very provocative and controversial red meat to his listeners, but while also using humor.

MERCIECA: Yeah, absolutely. And the invasion language itself is fascinating. We were talking about framing earlier, and if you think about the crisis at the border as an invasion, then that means that of course you're going to bring in armies and guns and weapons and that it's a war. As a metaphor, as a frame, as opposed to thinking of it as a humanitarian crisis, right?

And that frame would lend itself to bringing tents and diapers and water and providing care. The Republicans have framed this issue as an invasion consistently. And so the joke really for Trump as he's telling the story is that of course it's an invasion, wink. These people are terrorizing our streets.

And so look at, we'll just go there now and it's so safe. And so there's a humor to that in that we're all in the know here, we all know what's really happening.

CHAKRABARTI: So it's like an insider knowledge and that's why they can laugh about it. Jonathan though, on the other hand, There was that chart that Trump showed last night, which was the same chart that he was looking at on Saturday in Pennsylvania when the shooter attempted to assassinate him, and he credits the fact that he was looking at this chart of border crossings with the reason why the shooter didn't actually kill him.

That chart doesn't seem to carry any falsehoods. It does show an increased number of border crossings under the Biden administration. So while we're examining Trump's rhetoric around it, it's effective because the Democrats don't quite know how to handle the truth of the increase in border crossings.

MARTIN: Yeah, sometimes I feel like we're living in a movie here. The immigration issue, I talked to Trump's campaign manager yesterday, Chris LaCivita for an event that Politico held at the convention, and they believe that the immigration is the best possible issue. They have, in fact, asked him if Kamala Harris becomes the nominee rather than Joe Biden, what's the biggest vulnerability and LaCivita has said her role that was assigned to her on migration.

That they'll pressure on that issue. And yeah, it's the great, the remarkable irony of our time that Trump avoided assassination in part because he turned his head, was pointing to this immigration chart. And of course, he brought it out last night to create fanfare and talk at length about how this was the exact same chart, but I hadn't seen it.

I hadn't seen it because when I tried to look at it Saturday, I had bullets whiz past me. And of course the crowd loved that gallows humor and absorbed his immigration rhetoric. I think the immigration issue is obviously the great issue for him. And it's what galvanizes so many of his supporters.

It's the fact that he brought out that chart last night, had a double meaning for them, right? It's the issue that drives so many of them. And it also now is permanently going to be recalled with his shooting.

CHAKRABARTI: Yeah. So I want to note that, of course, we are talking about a now nominee who is a convicted felon, right?

The facts are that Trump was found guilty of 34 felony counts. In that hush money trial, sentencing is coming on September 18th. That doesn't seem to swayed or dissuaded any of his supporters from being very passionate about him. But all of the times that Trump has spent in court, whether it had to do with the hush money trial or the operations of the Trump organization, et cetera, Donald Trump has repeatedly voiced his sense of victimization about it.

And the fact that the Biden administration and President Biden himself has now been, clearly and directly saying that they believe Donald Trump is a danger to democracy. And here is how Trump talked about that last night.

TRUMP: In that spirit, the Democrat Party should immediately stop weaponizing the justice system and labeling their political opponent as an enemy of democracy, especially since that is not true. In fact, I am the one saving democracy for the people of our country.

CHAKRABARTI: Professor Mercieca, you've written about that last line in particular about Trump saving democracy. You've actually written in the past that presidential candidates will often use campaign speeches to depict the nation in crisis and themselves as the savior. So is what Trump did last night any different than history has shown us.

MERCIECA: That's right. Presidential candidates, especially in the last 50 years or so, have presented themselves as the nation's hero. This is a moment of crisis. They narrate the story of the nation and they are the only ones who can save the nation from this particular crisis.

Trump has used victimization as you've mentioned. As far back as 2016, he was a victim of the corrupt media. He was a victim of the party elites. And so then throughout his presidency, he was a victim of all this bad press. And the Democrats who wouldn't go along with his plans.

And so now, of course, he's still a victim. He's a victim of the Biden administration. And all of that victimage by the way, is a key thing for authoritarians and fascism. All of that language of victimage helps him with his followers. Because they also feel like victims. And he tells them that in fact that they are actually after his followers, right?

That he's the only thing standing in the way, there's a meme that he uses quite frequently. Eric Trump referenced it in his introduction of Trump last night. As part of his 2024 campaign and it's a very fascist message. It's very authoritarian. It says, I am your protection and the only thing that will save you from them who are clearly out to get you.

It's not politics as usual. It's instead a sort of meta narrative that says politics is war and the enemy cheats.

CHAKRABARTI: How, so I want to play another clip here, because I'm wondering how that constant discussion or projection of victimhood stands alongside another really classic aspect of Trump's speeches, when he talks about strength, right?

That he's going to make America stronger, that he is a strong leader. Last night he basically declared that he would be, if he was sent back to the White House again, an international strongman, because there was a moment where he quotes what he says Hungary's president, Viktor Orban, allegedly had to say about Trump's influence on the world stage.

TRUMP: He said Russia was afraid of him. China was afraid of him. Everybody was afraid of him. Nothing was going to happen. The whole world was at peace. And now the world is blowing up around us. All of these things that you read about were not going to happen. Under President Bush, Russia invaded Georgia. Under President Obama, Russia took Crimea.

Under the current administration, Russia is after all of Ukraine. Under President Trump, Russia took nothing.

CHAKRABARTI: So Professor Mercieca the constant talk about victimhood at home within the United States, but the assertion of almost a miraculous strength on the global stage, how do those two things work in concert within Trump's rhetoric?

MERCIECA: Yeah, so the victimage gives him strength,  that may seem contradictory. But again, that's the way that authoritarian fascist leaders have always presented themselves. They are these heroic victims. And because they are so strong, because they are such, fighters, they have this indomitable spirit right there, the Hegelian Ubermensch. They are the one who has the heroic quest, that they will save the nation.

It's another thing that Trump has always done, which is to anchor to authoritarians. In 2016, it was Putin. Remember, Putin thinks that he's smart and Putin thinks that he's so great and all of those kinds of things. So here he's having Orban essentially give him an endorsement, right?

By telling this story and anchoring to his authority. It's a very interesting thing when a presidential candidate is constantly praising authoritarian leaders of other regimes. It's not something we like to see in America.

CHAKRABARTI: All right. We have just a few minutes left. So Jonathan, I want to talk about what we might see in the coming weeks and months.

But to your point earlier that conventions are aspirational projections of what a party and its candidate or its nominee believes it can bring to America or for Americans. And on that point, let's listen to how Trump ended his speech talking about how if he's returned to the White House, America will once again be great.

TRUMP: America's future will be bigger, better, bolder, brighter, happier, stronger, freer, greater, and more united than ever before.

And quite simply put, we will very quickly make America great again. Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Wisconsin. God bless you.

CHAKRABARTI: Jonathan, I think that a lot of convention speeches are deliberately thin on actual policy because that's by design. But it seemed very interesting here because how much of what we heard over the course of the week and in Trump's speech, how far is it from the actual policies that a Trump-Vance ticket would bring to the White House?

And do you think that basically, ultimately, this speech isn't going to matter much on the campaign trail, because will more focus be put on those actual policies?

MARTIN: Let me take your second question. I don't even think that this is a policy dominated election. I don't think people are going to focus on the policies that much.

Yes, I think some pocketbook issues will shape this election. We're in a 19th century style era of identity politics now. People vote ... based on their identity, just like they did after the Civil War. 90% of the country has decided on Donald Trump and this is an election mostly about Donald Trump.

People know how they feel. Okay. And I think that's what's driving this election. I think most folks' minds are made up regardless of any convention speech. To take your first question. Yeah. Like the presentation of a party that is channeling the spirit of the working man is obviously designed for political sensibilities and some cultural issues.

Republicans have become more aligned now with non-college voters. The challenge for Republicans is like their economic supporters, i.e. their donors and really the beating heart of their rank-and-file activists are still Republicans, and they don't want, they don't want sort of economic intervention. They mostly want deregulation and then tax cuts and so that's what you're almost certainly going to get. Now with Donald Trump.

There may be some tariffs There may be some talk of brain wars, it obviously, that scares the Wall Street Journal crowd. But I think, yeah, to your point, you're mostly getting a version of what the Republican Party has been dressed up now with a hard hat.