Trump's Not So Great Trifecta

On April 15, one of Donald Trump’s myriad felony trials finally got under way.  For many who had been forced to wait, interminably, for Trump to get his comeuppance, it was the wrong one. What has been termed the “hush money” case seemed the least likely to dent Trump’s Teflon armor and might even provide the perpetual victim the opportunity to once more play the persecution card to his advantage.

On its face, trying to morph paying off a porn star into election interference seems like a stretch, giving Republicans the opportunity to persuasively condemn New York District Attorney Alvin Bragg for engaging in a political hit-job.  Many Democrats questioned Bragg’s strategy as well, afraid he was trying to shoehorn Trump’s detestable but personal behavior into broader malfeasance and thereby gaining felony convictions for what would normally have been prosecuted as misdemeanors.  (When the charges were first filed, they had also wondered why, with what seemed far more serious charges pending in Georgia and with the Justice Department, he had not simply waited until one of those was brought before seeking his indictment.  Bragg has clearly been vindicated on that one.)

But those who are looking at the case through a jurisprudential lens are missing the point.  Precisely because the essential facts are so straightforward and Trump’s actions cannot be explained away by spurious claims of immunity or a lack of personal involvement, this trial might be the most damaging of all to his re-election bid.  When it gets underway, the nation will be treated daily to a spectacle of sleaze, with testimony from a series of witnesses who could easily have been lifted, fittingly, from low-end reality television, all in front of a judge who has demonstrated that he will not be intimidated.  In addition, although Trump is unlikely to take the stand himself, there will surely be daily pronouncements from an accused who cannot keep his mouth shut and likely sends his lawyers off nightly to swig Maalox.

Whatever the nuts and bolts of the case, or even the eventual verdict, the real question is how this rather ugly display will play with swing voters in the six or seven states that will decide the election. 

Not well, at least for Trump.  It is doubtful, for example, that graphic descriptions of Trump’s extramarital affairs—while his wife was pregnant—will help his standing with suburban moms, possibly the single most important voting bloc in the upcoming election.

In other words, although the legal technicalities will be debated endlessly in the media, far more important will be the trial’s ability to change the mood of key voters.

But the New York trial is not the only mood changer Trump must deal with. Another is the new Trump Media and Technology Group (NASDAQ: DJT).  When the news hit in January that moribund Trump Media, which owns Truth Social, was merging with a contrivance called a “blank check” acquisition company, and would then begin publicly trading in March, the stock price, which had been floundering in the high teens, began to take off.  It appeared, once the stock traded publicly, that Trump, who owned most of the shares in the new venture, could make as much as $6 billion—although, crucially, he would not be able to sell any of his holdings until September.

DJT started making the rounds among Trump supporters as a means of funneling cash to help their prophet ward off the attacks of evil, deep state prosecutors.  And, hey, they could make money for themselves as well.  After all, Trump was a financial genius, right? 

As this either laughably or tragically unsophisticated pool of investors poured money in, the stock price crept up and then exploded after public trading began, going as high as $80 before closing on March 27 at $66, still almost four times the pre-merger price.  Trump supporters were gleeful, some bragging about investing their entire life savings into the promised gold mine.

The problem is that Truth Social was a bomb.  A few days later, the financials came out, revealing that Trump Media in 2023 had generated only $4.1 million in revenue—less than a Chick-fil-A franchise—against losses of more than $58 million.  The stock began to tank, losing more than half its value in two weeks.  When the company, desperate for working capital, announced plans to issue more stock, thus diluting the value of the existing shares still more, the stock plunged further, trading, as of this writing, at about $26, not much higher than its pre-merger price.

As is usually the case, the professionals had likely traded out of DJT after the Trump-adoring public bought in, leaving the Trumpsters holding the proverbial bag, which for many was now almost empty.

That Trump will find some way to suck money out of this dog is a given—he has already given notice that he intends to dump most of his shares.  But that will not play well either.  He might have been able to boost his popularity by bragging to his supporters that he made a fortune at the expense of groups they loathe, but how will those supporters feel when they realize he has now made money at the expense of…them?  Virtually guaranteed is that one of his disgruntled worshippers will be featured in a Democratic campaign add, detailing how he or she lost everything after investing in Trump.  At a minimum, Trump’s glowing self-portrait of his business acumen will ring just a bit more hollow.

Finally, there is an event at which Trump was not present—the coordinated and remarkably effective response to Iran’s recent attack on Israel, during which old, doddering, virtually senile Joe Biden was not only firmly in charge, but emerged as the key player in what is fast being judged as huge victory for Israel and a humiliating embarrassment for Iran.  Add to that, Biden’s success, for the moment, in persuading Netanyahu not to escalate and risk full-out regional war and you have the question of what might have been the outcome had Trump been in charge.  The likely conclusion of many of those swing voters is that the results might have been both iffier and scarier.

The upshot, although we are way early in the election cycle, is a contrast between a president who appears to know his job and is adept at doing it and a man who is going to spend the better part of the next two months trying to convince twelve New Yorkers he did not have sex with the porn star and is the victim of a miscarriage of justice.

There will be no sure things in November—fair or not, Biden remains a weak candidate.  But so, of course, is Trump.  After a very pivotal few days, Biden got just a little bit stronger and Trump just a little bit weaker.  In an election that promises to be this close, if that holds, it might just be enough.