Trump’s drift strains his complex alliance with the Republican Party | International

Amid the protests that continue to shake the country, 11 days after the death of George Floyd at the hands of the police, the president stokes the flames. But within five months of the election, many Republicans would like me to at least try to extinguish it. The military’s rejection of authoritarian drift has encouraged some senators to speak and has highlighted the silence of others. Donald Trump’s inability to deliver a message of unity, amid a health, economic and social crisis, is testing his complex alliance with the traditional sector of the Republican Party.

The rejection of Trump’s strong hand in the protests expressed this week by high command of the Army, retired and in office, adds pressure to Republicans to externalize the internal debate that has consumed many during these three and a half years. TO the criticism of the head of the Pentagon, Mark Esper, added a devastating statement from his predecessor, Jim Mattis, that accused the president of “abuse of power” and of violating the Constitution. “Perhaps we are getting to the point where we can be more honest with the concerns we have internally, and have the courage to raise our voices,” said Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski.

Trump responded to the Republican lawmaker with the same tweeting artillery he had fired at Mattis earlier. “Few people know where he will be in two years. But I know it. I will be in the great State of Alaska campaigning against Senator Lisa Murkowski. Prepare any candidate, good or bad, I don’t care, I will support him. If you have a pulse, I’m with you! ”He tweeted.

The senator’s words reflect the internal debate of many Republicans. Murkowski is one of the few who has traditionally dared to break the Republican wall of support for Trump on Capitol Hill. But now it’s not just her or Mitt romney – the only one who voted for the impeachment of the president in his impeachment and who has now also criticized his response to the protests – those who have publicly questioned Trump’s behavior.

The president called the governors “weak”. He defended the sending of the military to the streets to crush the protests. He spoke of “domestic terrorism”. And on Monday, a peaceful protest in Washington was cleared with tear gas by the military police. so the president could have his picture taken in a church. At least half a dozen senators publicly expressed their rejection, something highly unusual.

“It was painful to see peaceful protesters receiving tear gas so that the president could cross the street to a church where I think he has only attended once,” said Senator Susan Collins. “There is a fundamental and constitutional right, and I am against clearing a peaceful protest for a photo that treats God’s word as political propaganda,” said Ben Sasse. At an event with journalists, Tim Scott, the only black Republican senator, said: “If your question is whether tear gas should be used to make way for the president to take a photo, the answer is no.” “The country seeks healing and calm. And I think the president needs to project that in his tone right now, ”said John Thune, in charge of discipline for the Republican majority in the upper house.

The timid criticism shows growing concern in the Republican ranks about the president’s response to the protests five months after the elections, at a time when the country, in the midst of a pandemic and the worst economy since the Great Depression, is going through a critical situation. In November, Americans will choose whether to change the course by placing Joe Biden in the White House or to revalidate Trump’s America for four more years, an election that acquires a more dramatic nature if possible in the midst of a health, economic emergency and, now, also social.

Donald Trump entered the Republican Party like a bomb, and in three and a half years, he has managed to turn the old party into a cult of his person. Among Republican lawmakers, there are those who value his strident ways. There are also those who tolerate them as a lesser evil, with the end result of achieving fundamental objectives such as conservative dominance in the judiciary. And there are those who simply fear the consequences, personal or electoral, of opposing the boss. Their divisive way of doing politics is not so bothersome when things are going well. But now many regret that reconciliation does not enter their repertoire.

–