Why Context, Reputation, and Perception Matter, Presidential Edition

Here's an unpopular opinion, at least among Democrats currently: President Trump has every right to not concede the election, and to pursue any legal avenues he wants to ensure that any issues with the vote are corrected (short of using the DOJ to do so, which would have the potential effect of influencing the outcome).

So, then, why are more moderate people not supportive of his efforts to do so?

Imagine, if you will, a hypothetical world in which Trump is a reasonable, well balanced, well spoken individual, with a track record of honesty and careful consideration of all perspectives (you may need to imagine someone other than Trump, as this is about as far afield of reality as one could imagine). Let's imagine, the day after the election, after not having claimed victory in an absurdly ridiculous rambling press conference filled with lies (remember, in this hypothetical, Trump is not himself), you give a speech something akin to this:

This is proving to be a very close election, and we want to ensure that all votes are counted, and all checks are conducted, before we conclude the winner. We understand that the news media, in their pursuit of informing the American people as quickly as possible, may "call" the election one way or the other before this time, but please understand that their calls are not the official results, and given how close the result appears to be, we want to make sure we allow all appropriate time for the officials to do their job.

The American people can rest assured that I will accept the results of the election, once they are known and certified, and that there will be a peaceful and orderly transition of power if applicable. In the interim, we will coordinate and share data with the Biden team, so that in the event that he is certified as the President Elect, there will be no delay in the transition process. We ask that everyone have patience, and allow the election officials and courts to do their jobs, and understand that media calls are not the same as certified results. We will do everything possible to ensure the integrity of the election results, and to ensure that the will of the American people is reflected in their government.

Now, I'd guess that type of speech/message would be well-received (in that context), and people would understand the intent, and accept that approach. The thing is, though, that's basically exactly the same thing Trump is doing, ignoring all the peripheral rhetoric and actions. So why is everyone (outside of the right-wing bubble) so convinced that Trump's position is utterly ridiculous and tantamount to an attempted coup, and that he should obviously concede the election?

I contend that the answer to that question is context: the combination or reputation, perception, and general context related to the person involved. If Trump was the type of person as hypothesized above, and phased his position as above, I don't think the majority of people would have an issue with it, Democrat or otherwise. But Trump is not that person; in fact, he's about as far away from that person as is conceivable, in word and in deed. As a result, his actions appear as an attempted coup, and engender fierce push-back, even though the core proposition might be reasonable.

Context, reputation, and perception matter. Trump is perceived as an authoritarian fascist who will attempt to hold on to power at all costs, and his refusal to accept the result of the election are simply reinforcing that perception.