“Pittsburgh or Paris?”

My new op-ed, at column syndicator Inside Sources, on why Trump’s “I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris,” is a powerful slogan critics underestimate at their peril. On the objection that the city of Pittsburgh voted heavily against Donald Trump, I write, “it seems to me it is Trump’s speechwriters rather than his critics who are showing the sounder grasp of what ‘elected to represent’ means. It is not supposed to mean ‘elected by one faction of the country to advance its interests as distinct from the interests of the other faction.’ In fact, we specifically shouldn’t want presidents to feel that they have no responsibility to represent the interests and rights of voters or regions that went strongly against them.”

3 Comments

  • As someone who lives near Pittsburgh, the City might have voted against Trump, but, the surrounding areas voted heavily for him.

  • “In fact, we specifically shouldn’t want presidents to feel that they have no responsibility to represent the interests and rights of voters or regions that went strongly against them.”

    One thing is for sure, Donald Trump is not the poster boy for this premise.

  • I really do think that Trump’s statement as some sort of view of only working for or representing a certain group of voters is an overreach.

    I took it at the time and still take it as a point of “America and Americans first” using an alliteration of two cities.

    Nothing more. Nothing less.