Pro-Palestinian college protests could help elect Trump

Pro-Palestinian protests that have rocked college campuses across America over the past two weeks have recently escalated. Protesters at Columbia University vandalized and occupied an administration building — followed by mass arrests — and violence between protesters and counterprotesters broke out at the University of California at Los Angeles. Whether any of this turmoil will help accomplish the protesters’ ostensible goal of ending Israel’s war in Gaza is highly doubtful. But many observers fear, as others hope, that it may accomplish something entirely different: help elect Donald Trump in November.

A number of commentators — particularly anti-Trump conservatives — have invoked 1968, when turbulent student protests against the war in Vietnam, which included a takeover of the same building at Columbia, helped ensure Richard Nixon’s victory.

Similarities include the fact that in both cases, the protests have exhibited what seems to be a general anti-American animus. At City College of New York, protesters raised a Palestinian flag in place of the American flag; the police took it down and put the Stars and Stripes back in place. Similar incidents have happened at other schools. Consistently, the protests have featured rhetoric widely regarded as crossing the line from criticism of Israel into antisemitism.

Many on the right have tried to link the protests to Democrats. In fact, the protesters are vociferously critical of President Joe Biden for his pro-Israel position, and more broadly of the Democratic Party’s support for Israel.

But this may not keep the protests from becoming an electoral problem for Biden. In 1968, the incumbent vice president and Democratic presidential candidate, Hubert Humphrey, was a moderate who repudiated the anti-war movement. But the turmoil still helped Nixon, who was seen as the tougher law-and-order candidate. Likewise, Trump is likely to use hard-line rhetoric and portray himself as the candidate willing to crack down on the rowdy protesters by deploying the National Guard or encouraging police brutality. He has already slammed Biden for failing to speak out against the campus violence.

On Thursday, the president did speak out, affirming that while Americans have the right to peacefully assemble, there is no “right to cause chaos.” While he has rejected calling up the National Guard, he said that “order must prevail” and that not only violence but trespassing, disruption of graduation ceremonies, vandalism, intimidation and antisemitic hate speech are unacceptable.

The message is good. But Biden remains in a difficult bind: Condemning the protesters will alienate many progressive voters, some of whom frankly state that they’re prepared to see Trump win to punish pro-Israel Democrats. Being too soft on disorderly and violent protesters will almost certainly alienate more moderate voters.

Of course, 2024 is not 1968, when the nation was beset by far worse turmoil — including the assassination of two major political figures, Robert F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr., and race riots following King’s murder. It’s also worth noting that the racial justice protests — and riots — of 2020 did not propel Trump to reelection, as many thought they would. Even so, in a polarized environment in which the election promises to be very close, the protests could make a difference, and the tightrope Biden must walk makes his reelection a tougher challenge.

Opinions expressed by Cathy Young, a writer for The Bulwark, are her own.

By Cathy Young

Cathy Young is a writer for The Bulwark.