This explains the ability to interpret different roles and improvisation in his political staging, script reading skills (teleprinter) and mastering the techni- cal elements of recording (regardless of the scenario) when competing with his party mates in the primary and with his Democratic opponent in the presidential campaign.
In the recording of “The Apprentice,” Donald Trump had the opportunity to publicize his personal charisma and his entrepreneurial idiosyncrasy, awakening conflicting positions among the audience, which transcended ideologically. Loved and hated, as a celebrity of the first rank, Trump was determined to enter politics, surrounded by his family and his closest asso- ciates, as he had undertaken by challenge throughout his professional life.
The last season of his contest ended in December 2014, and a few weeks later, at the same facilities of “Trump Productions” in New York, in January 2015, Jared Kushner began to prepare the announcement of the nomination of Trump`16 to design the strategic lines in advertising and communication and to configure the logistics and financial structure of the pre-campaign (Trump, 2015, pp. 1-5 and 7-18). From the very moment that the White House bid was announced in June 2015, all sorts of speculation about the true intentions of the candidate come out, which would be very beneficial for the interests of the Trump family and all its companies structure and organizations.
overwhelming victories in the history of the primary consultations of the
“Grand Old Party.”
Table 1. The results of the primary in the Republican Party in 2016 by state
Date State Trump % *Others %
February 9 New Hampshire 35.2 37.8
February 20 South Carolina 32.5 52.4
March 1 Alabama 43.4 44.2
March 1 Arkansas 32.8 59.0
March 1 Georgia 38.8 53.6
March 1 Massachusetts 49.0 45.1
March 1 Oklahoma 28.3 64.0
March 1 Tennessee 38.9 51.2
March 1 Texas 26.8 65.7
March 1 Vermont 32.3 58.7
March 1 Virginia 34.8 58.2
March 5 Louisiana 41.4 55.4
March 8 Idaho 28.1 68.7
March 8 Michigan 36.5 58.3
March 8 Mississippi 47.2 50.2
March 15 Florida 45.7 50.9
March 15 Illinois 38.8 58.6
March 15 Missouri 40.8 56.8
March 15 North Carolina 40.2 57.2
March 15 Ohio 35.9 62.6
March 22 Arizona 45.8 49.6
April 5 Wisconsin 35.0 63.3
April 19 New York 60.2 39.9
April 26 Connecticut 57.9 40.0
April 26 Delaware 60.8 37.2
April 26 Maryland 54.1 42.9
April 26 Pennsylvania 56.6 41.8
April 26 Rhode Island 62.9 34.9
May 3 Indiana 53.3 44.7
May 10 Nebraska 61.5 33.4
May 10 West Virginia 77.1 17.1
May 17 Oregon 64.2 32.4
May 24 Washington 75.5 20.6
June 7 California 74.8 20.8
June 7 Montana 73.7 19.6
June 7 New Jersey 80.4 19.6
June 7 New Mexico 70.6 20.9
June 7 South Dakota 67.1 32.9
* The rest of the candidates in the primary elections: Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and John Kasich. Source: own elaboration, according to Nelson, M. (2018). The Elections of 2016. Los Angeles: SAGE and CQPRES, pp.51-52.
Table 2. The overall results of the primary in the Republican Party in 2016
Trump *Others
Total vote 13,757,244 14,974,447
Percent 45.6% 49.6%
Number of primaries won 33 4
* The rest of the candidates in the primary elections: Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and John Kasich. Source: own elaboration, according to Nelson, M. (2018). The Elections of 2016. Los Angeles: SAGE and CQPRES, p.52.
Table 3. The results of caucuses in the Republican Party in 2016 by state
Date State Trump % *Others %
February 1 Iowa 24.3 52.6
February 23 Nevada 45.9 48.8
March 1 Alaska 33.6 55.6
March 1 Minnesota 21.4 71.0
March 5 Kansas 23.4 75.4
March 5 Kentucky 35.9 62.4
March 5 Maine 32.9 66.1
March 8 Hawaii 43.4 55.5
March 12 District of Columbia 13.8 85.2
March 12 Wyoming 7.4 85.4
March 22 Utah 13.8 86.2
* The rest of the candidates in the primary elections: Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and John Kasich. Source: own elaboration, according to Nelson, M. (2018). The Elections of 2016. Los Angeles: SAGE and CQPRES, p.53.
Table 4. The overall results of the caucuses in the Republican Party in 2016
Trump *Others
Percent 26.9% 67.7%
Number of caucuses won 3 8
* The rest of the candidates in the primary elections: Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and John Kasich. Source: own elaboration, according to Nelson, M. (2018). The Elections of 2016. Los Angeles: SAGE and CQPRES, p.53.
As Trump cornered his Republican opponents in the primaries, progres- sively, he reached tactical and formal agreements on joint collaboration and cooperation (Sabato, 2016, pp. 3-6). The great element of opposition in the interior in the organizational structure of the Republican Party focused on the set of organizations of the Christian Right.2 Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, had the personal support and budgetary support of many Christian activist groups close to the confessional Protestant reformed block. These groups considered a life full of excesses, several marriages (and their successive divorces) and a multitude of sexual scandals were not the most appropriate elements to build an image of a conservative political leader. The second major element of opposition against candidate Trump was the Republican ruling party; many leaders and relevant members of the party considered that the experience had always been one of the electoral guarantees. From their perspective, a candidate like Trump would not only lead to an elec- toral defeat, but would destroy the image of seriousness and confidence of the Republicans before the voters of the conservative “America.” George W.
Bush mentioned the primaries3:
“[…] ‘I´m worried,’ Bush recently told a group of Republican operatives in Dallas, according to Politico, [Magazine] ‘that I will be the last Re- publican president’ […] Members of the Bush family have long opposed Trump […]” (Business Insider)
2. The first relevant personality of the Christian Right in approaching Trump’s candidacy was Jerry Falwell Junior, through the communicative platforms of Liberty University, he covered the messages of the Republican candidate and paved the way for cooperation with other American religious leaders.
3. However, when Donald Trump won his presidential victory in November 2016, a state of euphoria broke out among the Republican ranks. Even the most critical voices surrendered to the unlikely win- ner. The animosity of the Bush family for Donald Trump was not new.
Many Republicans prepared for a possible Trump defeat. At the same time they were trying to create firewalls, to prevent Trump’s political actions from damaging the traditional image of the Republican Party:
“More than 70 Republicans have asked by letter to the party not to ded- icate their economic efforts to the Trump candidacy to the White House […]” (El País)
Surprisingly, the closest candidates to the conservative Christian move- ments, such as Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz, did not know or could not exploit the sex scandals, the accusations of illegitimate children and adultery and the verbal excesses of a sexual component that leapt in the process of primaries around the figure of Trump. They could not assemble a moral dis- course and presidential suitability, as other times it had been done against Democratic and Republican candidates.
“[…] Trump, downplaying his remarks as ‘locker room talk,’ denied he had ever kissed or groped women without consent. […] ‘No one has more respect for women than I do,’ he said. […]” (CNNpolitics)
As the weeks and elections of the Republican primaries progressed, candi- date Trump was becoming more popular and his message of regeneration was becoming more widespread and impactful. The staging, gesticula- tion and aesthetic and linguistic symbols of Trump stole all the attention from the rest of the candidates, converting the pre-campaign debates into an improvised amplifier of his political message, favoring his aspirations of confrontation with the Democratic candidate and his pro-government stance. The simplification of language, theoretical reductionism and every- day exemplification were all the rage among a mass of conservative voters:
very disoriented by the previous Democratic victories, very disenchanted with the previous government alternatives and absolutely outraged by the drift of the socio-economic reality of the country.
“[…] Once the Republican primary season began in February, Trump continued to ride right, with his success achieved against a backdrop of large Republican turnouts. Trump won three of the opening four events in February (losing only Iowa), and in three of the four states more votes were cast on the Republican side than the Democratic. […] Trump continued to dominate the Republican race until the abrupt end of the contest in Indiana on May 3 […]” (Cook, 2017, p. 86)
In the face of this explosion of popularity (see Tables 1, 2, 3 and 4), pro- gressively, virtually all of the positions contrary to Trump’s project turned into energetic support when they verified its effect of electoral revulsion throughout the whole country. The overwhelming dominance of Trump in the primary and the Republican Congress of 2016 hardly allows for compar- ison from the historical point of view.