Trump 'Star of David' controversy: Should he stop tweeting?

After Trump tweeted an image linked to white supremacists, RNC head Reince Priebus may wish the presumptive nominee would set aside his keyboard for a few months.

|
David Zalubowski/AP
Presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump speaks during the opening session of the Western Conservative Summit Friday in Denver.

Donald Trump’s Twitter feed keeps landing him in entirely foreseeable trouble. Maybe he’d be better off to cap it for the general election campaign – and not tweet at all.

That’s one conclusion a reasonable person might reach in the wake of Mr. Trump’s latest Twitter controversy.

To review: On Saturday Trump tweeted of an image of Hillary Clinton overlaid on a background of US currency, accompanied by the words “Most Corrupt Candidate Ever.” The problem was that the “Corrupt Candidate” phrase appeared in a shape resembling a Star of David.

Critics quickly called it an anti-Semitic image. After enduring derision on social media, Trump deleted the tweet and replaced it with a similar version that featured a circle instead of a star.

Team Trump today calls the incident an example of political correctness run amok. They pointed out that the shape in question is also the shape of law enforcement badges.

“Not every six-sided star is a Star of David,” Trump campaign adviser Ed Brookover said Monday on CNN. “We have corrected this tweet and have moved on.”

Fair enough. But as so often seems to occur with Trump and social media, there’s a further twist to the story. The news website Mic traced back the image used in Trump’s tweet and discovered it was identical to an image tweeted on an Internet message board for neo-Nazis and white supremacists. It’s unclear how the post migrated to Trump’s feed.

Is Trump consciously dog-whistling anti-Semitic tropes?  It’s perhaps more likely that he is oblivious about the dangers of this imagery, writes Allahpundit at the right-leaning web site Hot Air. A follower aware of the anti-Semitic nature of the Clinton picture tweeted at Trump, and Trump (or some designated social media aide) liked it and appropriated it for use, unaware of its danger.

“Play with fire and you’ll get burned, even if only accidentally,” Allahpundit writes.

From a practical point of view, the controversy was badly timed for Trump. It produced a rainstorm of negative coverage at a moment when Mrs. Clinton was undergoing her own tough news day, due to her Saturday interview with the FBI over her use of a private email server at the State Department.

Google search interest in Trump’s tweet nearly equaled that of Clinton’s interview, according to data crunched by Washington Post numbers guru Philip Bump. Instead of getting out of the way of Clinton’s bad news, Trump created some of his own.

“Donald Trump, once again, nearly turned a good day into a tie,” ran the headline on Bump’s post.

That’s why Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus may wish Trump would set aside his keyboard for a few months. Trump’s undisciplined approach won him the nomination, but isn’t working well (so far) in a general election campaign.

As his poll deficit shows, Trump’s not attracting enough college-educated white women and other key demographic groups to actually win the election. He keeps playing to his base instead. If Trump is to truly pivot to a more measured approach, perhaps Twitter would be a good place to start.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Trump 'Star of David' controversy: Should he stop tweeting?
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/Decoder/2016/0704/Trump-Star-of-David-controversy-Should-he-stop-tweeting
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe