A woman’s studies professor says that Trump supporters will demand that he be allowed to stay in office after his two terms are up and will foment a violent civil war to keep him in power.
Julie Novkov, also the chairwoman of the political science department at the State University of New York at Albany, said that Mr. Trump’s supporters whom she calls “overt racists” smoldering with “white racial resentment,” will “provoke violence” when he leaves office no matter the circumstances.
“I believe that Trumpers — the core supporters Trump has bound to himself through his consistent and persistent messaging — will not accept as legitimate any means through which he departs from the presidency,” Ms. Novkov wrote in an article last year for New Political Science called “How Do We Solve a Problem Like the Donald?”
“We” can’t, she apparently concludes.
The latest Mr. Trump can constitutionally remain president is when the winner of the 2024 election is sworn in, on Jan. 20, 2025. But according to Ms. Novkov’s surmises about Trump backers, it won’t end there.
“Even if he makes it through two terms, they will vociferously demand that he be permitted a third,” she claims.
DOCUMENT: 'How Do We Solve a Problem Like the Donald?'
“The real questions remaining are how they will respond to his departure, in whatever manner it comes, and whether their response will entail violence, and if so, how much state violence will be necessary in response to maintain order,” she claims.
What she calls the best-case scenario is a kind of Jim Crow.
It “might shift some areas of the country back to the political configuration common in some areas of the American South in the 1920s, when gaudy populist racism vied with conservative, racist legitimation projects for hegemony entirely within the Democratic Party.”
“At worst, this group could provoke violence and place the nation in the position of having to engage in its violent suppression,” she adds.
She even explicitly makes a Civil War analogy.
“Can the Trumpers be reincorporated into a democratic republic as engaged political actors who accept the fundamental premises of democratic governance? If they cannot, the solutions available do not lie in the constitution. Constitutional structure cannot fix broken politics. Rather, we are left with hopefully a lesser form of the tragic choices posed by constitutional failure; the nation ultimately chose to drown in blood over the uncertain path of constitutional union symbolized by John Bell” in the election of 1860, she wrote.
It was not clear from glosses on her article at Campus Reform and elsewhere this week how many Trump supporters told her they would demand a third term in 2024 or fight a civil war over it.