The 2012 Presidential Debate between President Barack Obama and Senator Mitt Romney opens up with a cordial meeting: a handshake and congratulations on an anniversary. Viewers saw a constructive, mature discussion on policies between two opponents. Four years later, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton took the debate stage. The two threw around words like “crooked” and “criminal,” and insults to character were commonplace. Another four years pass and on the debate stage, President Trump and Vice President Joe Biden don’t even shake hands and Trump later refuses to accept Biden’s victory. Most recently, in 2024, Trump unfoundedly denies Vice President Kamala Harris’s racial background and Harris takes to calling Trump “weird”.
This behavior is a result of how Trump framed his 2016 political campaign, creating the “Trump Effect”—the idea that Trump’s voter base is more devoted to him than any party or their country. The Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement quickly exacerbated party polarization, with Republicans distrustful of the media and Democrats distrustful of Trump. The “Trump Effect” has had a profound impact on political discourse on social media, spreading the use of Trump’s rhetoric to other party members and politicians. We have seen this decline in political cordiality increasing over the years, fueled by the rise of social media. Each side staunchly defends their own, and with the ability to reach widespread audiences in an instant, can incite a flurry of misinformation that widely targets working class voters.
Donald Trump’s Rise to Power
It came as a shock in 2016 when a reality TV star decided to run for president. His victory came as a greater shock, beating former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, a highly qualified politician.
Trump’s rise to power is partially a result of his unique platform. His “anti-establishment” persona and messaging primarily resonated with midwestern, middle class voters. Those who were fed up with inflation or the job market saw him as a fresh face, and thus, a beacon of hope. He argued that Democrats represent an elitist class, creating a division in the American electorate that repelled many middle class voters from progressive ideas. More importantly, he aimed to distance himself from the GOP—despite running as a republican candidate—highlighting policy initiatives that differed from traditionally Republican platforms, such as restricting foreign trade. He pointed out discrepancies across the political spectrum, targeting voters who felt disillusioned with the current state of politics. Despite Trump growing up with a trust-fund, his base believed he fought for the common man, laying the groundwork for his campaign to flourish.
This loyalty eventually transpired into the MAGA extremism we see today. The media played a significant role in Trump’s victory over Clinton. Most mainstream media and Hollywood superstars were outspoken against Trump—largely over accusations of racism and sexual assault—fueling the narrative Trump has stuck by for the past eight years: the media cannot be trusted, regardless of the legitimacy of their concerns.
On October 16, 2016, Trump tweeted “Election is being rigged by the media, in a coordinated effort with the Clinton campaign, by putting stories that never happened into news!” This and a slew of similar tweets built a disdain for the media among his increasingly loyal supporters, enabling Trump to create his own narrative. The 2016 presidential race saw a shift in campaigning tactics, with Clinton and Trump taking to social media to promote their candidacy, often without a third party media outlet to filter the content. While this could be an effective way to communicate with voters without succumbing to media bias, it instead spread more propaganda at a much faster rate. The constant online battle between Clinton and Trump translated to a debate full of insults and minimal policy discussion, mobilizing voters to take an “all-or-nothing” approach to politics.
This mentality paved the way for a political intolerance that haunts online discourse and family gatherings, but Trump may not be entirely to blame.
The Age of Social Media and Political Immaturity
Global connectivity is at our fingertips, and has become a primary method of communication and absorbing news. This is not necessarily a bad thing—those who otherwise would not have access to a large audience can cultivate widespread attention for charities, protests, and the like.
However, a separate culture has emerged from the rise of social media. One where rumors and hate run rampant and users spread outlandish lies in an attempt to gain fleeting internet fame, or to push a divisive political narrative. The Pizzagate scandal that plagued Clinton’s 2016 campaign began with online rumors implying Clinton and other prominent Democrats were running a trafficking ring in a Washington DC pizza shop. While the FBI confirmed the rumors were false, many members of the public were not convinced. One man even opened fire at the pizza shop. While no one was physically harmed, the violence caused distress at the hands of a conspiracy. What started as whisperings on the internet escalated into a full-fledged rampage due to the spread of misinformation.
Users can purposefully spread disinformation in an attempt to evoke an emotional response. The anonymity of online profiles leaves little to no room for repercussions, creating an environment for political anger to flourish. People take to the internet when they are upset, which can certainly be a useful tool in holding politicians accountable. On the other hand, when people post on social media in a rage, it creates an intolerant environment where users are not looking to have meaningful discourse, but rather argue and place blame on the other side. There is no incentive to find common ground—if a user disagrees with someone else’s opinion, they can press the block button and never think of it again.
It would be a sweeping generalization to blame one man for overwhelming intolerance on the internet. However, the “Trump Effect” fosters a cult-like mentality among his voter base, whom he primarily reaches via social media. Throughout his presidency, Trump took to Twitter any time he disagreed with someone, calling them names and urging his supporters to do the same. So when Trump tweeted that the 2020 election was fraudulent, his followers listened. On December 19th, 2020, Trump tweeted, “Big protest in D.C. on January 6th. Be there, will be wild!” likely aware that the electors from each state were meeting to count the electoral votes that same day.
His words of rage mobilized his loyal followers to commit what some are calling domestic terrorism and a coup on democracy. Thousands of Trump supporters stormed the US Capitol, overtaking Capitol police and breaking into the Senate Chambers. Later, the House of Representatives impeached Trump for inciting the insurrection. Despite federal investigations proving the election results were legitimate, many were more trusting of Trump’s tweets due to their online echo chamber. Even on the 2024 campaign trail, Trump and his running-mate, Senator JD Vance, refused to concede the 2020 election.
Trump does not tolerate constructive criticism, and has conditioned his supporters to do the same. Now, in 2025, conspiracy theorists are distrusting of even the most basic information: that vaccines do not cause autism and immigrants aren’t eating cats and dogs. In the first month of his second term, President Trump condemned Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives, citing them as the cause of a deadly plane crash in Washington DC. He returned to X, formerly Twitter, to garner public disapproval of minorities in the workplace, claiming that they are not qualified for their positions and were only hired due to their gender or the color of their skin.
Trump’s war on diversity has already had catastrophic consequences with the shutdown of agencies such as the U.S. Agency of International Development which provided economic support to those in need across the globe. The White House has claimed the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has been wasting government funds to “advance DEI in Serbia’s workplace… [and] for a transgender opera in Colombia,” among others. The State Department actually approved many of these initiatives associated with USAID with the goal of improving mental health and economic growth to “reflect the values of the United States and friendship between the countries,” Yet, Trump and Elon Musk have made numerous statements and social media posts claiming the inefficiency of the agency, which ultimately led to its dissolution.
While Trump alone didn’t create the culture of online hate that has become so prevalent, he has certainly enabled it. Donald Trump and the MAGA movement have left a lasting legacy online that will continue to impact how we approach political discourse in the real world. Such intolerances have become commonplace in a way that serves to threaten the etiquette of the presidency. Swift actions from the Justice Department and the Democrats are vital to curbing the influence that Trump has over his constituents.
