It was clearly a response to this Post article noting that it wasn’t just the tone that had changed, but the focus and rhetoric. Just as his statement on white supremacists on Monday of last week was undercut by his news conference on Tuesday, his speech about Afghanistan this Monday was sharply different from his riffs in Arizona.

There was, though, a theme that ran through all three speeches that we had to wait until Thursday morning to see unraveled. That was the idea that patriotism, as embodied in the military, could forge the sort of unity that Trump has sought since Nov. 9. Or, more specifically, the sort of unity that Trump was talking about in the wake of the violence at Charlottesville. But both this week and last, he went on to show why he’s an imperfect vehicle for that to happen.

AD

AD

At Fort Myer on Monday, Trump began his argument that the military’s cohesion was a shining example of how patriotism can unite us all.

“The men and women of our military operate as one team, with one shared mission and one shared sense of purpose. They transcend every line of race, ethnicity, creed, and color to serve together and sacrifice together in absolutely perfect cohesion. That is because all service members are brothers and sisters. They’re all part of the same family. It’s called the American family. … When we open our hearts to patriotism, there is no room for prejudice, no place for bigotry, and no tolerance for hate. The young men and women we send to fight our wars abroad deserve to return to a country that is not at war with itself at home.”

In Phoenix, in the midst of his inflammatory disparagement of his political opponents and the media, he made a similar case.

“Loyalty to our nation requires loyalty to each other. We all share the same home, the same dreams and the same hopes for a better future. A wound inflicted upon one member of our community is a wound inflicted upon us all. You saw last night. You saw last night. … It’s time for us to follow the example of our brave American soldiers. And I was with a lot of them last night, Fort Myers. No matter where they come from, no matter what faith they practice, they form a single unbreakable team. That’s what we are. We’re a team. As a nation, we’re a team. … It’s time for all of us to remember that we are all on the same team. We are all Americans, and we all believe right now in America first.”

At the American Legion event Wednesday, it came up again.

“We are here to draw inspiration from you as we seek to renew the bonds of loyalty that bind us together as one people and one nation. Those who wear the nation’s uniform come from all different backgrounds and from every single walk of life. But they are all united by shared values and a shared sense of duty. They are all part of one team with only one mission in mind. … Now, our nation must follow that same work ethic, that same devotion to a greater cause to achieve our country’s full potential.”

This isn’t a new argument. The appeal to patriotism as an effort to gloss over schisms in the population has been tried before but hasn’t often been successful. After all, if the schism is predicated on whether America is fulfilling its foundational promises, getting people to agree with one another on the greatness of the country seems like a tough sell.

AD

But Trump’s version of this argument as articulated Monday and Tuesday is more specific: The unity of the armed forces, forged in shared sacrifice for the country, can show us all how to get along. It’s an appeal based on the idea that patriotism can smooth over all differences, as shown by the way in which those who serve in the military get along regardless of origin.

AD

In Thursday’s Wall Street Journal, news broke that the Trump administration would soon send guidance to the Pentagon detailing how to implement a ban on allowing transgender individuals to serve in the military.

This follows Trump’s tweets in July, when he said that allowing transgender people to serve would “burden” the military with medical costs and entail “disruption” in the ranks.

AD

The transgender ban itself undercuts Trump’s argument for the military as an exemplar of unity. If patriotism is enough to smooth over conflict in the country, why isn’t it enough to avoid disruption in the ranks? As we noted at the time, “disruption” was an argument used in opposition to integrating the military racially as well. Trump claims that despite racial divisions, the military is a success to emulate. So it can overcome that “disruption” but not this one? Or is it not the example of unity that he claims?

AD

We’re stumbling into the trap of considering the president’s rhetoric as internally consistent, which is always risky. We should instead take a step back and note another undercurrent to his arguments this week.

Since his election, Trump has hinted at his belief that the presidency should carry with it a broad respect from the American people. When he says “unity,” that’s generally what he means: He means, as he has meant since November, that Americans should unite around his presidency. Just as he did little to foster unity directly in the wake of Charlottesville, he’s done little to engender unity from his political opponents since his surprise win. He expects Americans to simply support and honor him in the way that he expects them to support and honor the flag and the country.

Many do. Some don’t. It has always been this way.