On a recent episode of Bill Maher’s Club Random Podcast, prominent commentator Stephen A. Smith discussed a key aspect of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign his defense against accusations of racism. Smith, known for his no-nonsense analysis and sharp insights on social and political matters, argued that Trump successfully overcame the charge of racism largely due to his long history of public interactions with Black Americans. According to Smith, Trump’s “portfolio of appearances with Black folks” spanning decades played a pivotal role in shielding him from the accusations that dogged his campaign.
The conversation between Smith and Maher centered on the surprising and decisive nature of Trump’s victory in the 2016 presidential election. Racism was, without a doubt, one of the most contentious issues of the election, with critics often pointing to Trump’s rhetoric and past associations as evidence of his bigotry. However, Smith made the case that these accusations ultimately helped Trump more than they hurt him, especially when it came to galvanizing his base of support.Smith dropped a provocative observation during the discussion, claiming that those who labeled Trump as racist actually did him a favor.
“Black people, minorities in this country that called him a racist did him a favor when they did that,” Smith said, drawing a thoughtful response from Maher.
The commentator explained that by branding Trump a racist, his critics played directly into his hands, fueling the anger and resentment of his supporters. “It galvanized his base,” Smith asserted. “They said, ‘We don’t want to hear that. Look at the economy, look at the borders, look at crime in the streets. We don’t want to hear that!’”
According to Smith, Trump’s critics underestimated how powerful the visual evidence of his interactions with Black people over the years would be in undermining the racism allegations. Trump’s extensive public relationships with Black figures, Smith argued, made it difficult for the accusation of racism to stick. “You saw him on camera, very comfortable with minorities. He had decades of appearances with Black folks,” Smith pointed out, referring to Trump’s history of attending events, making deals, and engaging with African American celebrities, athletes, and political figures. “So, when you have that kind of portfolio, how can you suddenly bring up incidents from the 1970s—like the rent control case in 1973?” Smith questioned.
He went on to explain that many of the criticisms aimed at Trump’s past were no longer relevant in the face of these public images. “That’s not going to work,” Smith declared, arguing that the visual evidence of Trump’s long-standing connections to Black Americans made the charges of racism harder to maintain. In this light, Smith suggested that the issue of race simply didn’t hold the weight that critics hoped it would in undermining Trump’s campaign.
Smith also drew comparisons between Trump’s past and that of other political figures, particularly Joe Biden, who was a prominent figure in the 1990s. He pointed out that if Trump’s past associations were going to be scrutinized, then similar attention had to be paid to Biden’s history. Smith brought up Biden’s well-documented relationship with the late Senator Robert Byrd, a former member of the Ku Klux Klan. Byrd’s controversial past was often overshadowed by his later career as a civil rights advocate, yet Smith pointed out that if Trump was being criticized for the actions of his past, Biden’s own associations had to be examined too.
Additionally, Smith referenced the 1994 Crime Bill, which Biden was heavily involved in, and its effects on Black communities. Smith reminded Maher that the Congressional Black Caucus at the time supported the bill, making it a broader issue than just Biden or Clinton. This, Smith argued, added further nuance to the debate, illustrating that many politicians, including Biden, had complex and sometimes contradictory relationships with race issues.
Smith’s comments shed light on the evolving political landscape and the shifting ways in which race and identity are handled in American politics. While the accusations against Trump were loud and pervasive, they were also ultimately ineffective in swaying his base of support. Smith argued that this was because Trump’s image as someone who had consistently interacted with Black Americans, both in public and private, made it difficult for critics to label him a racist in any straightforward way.
Ultimately, Smith’s perspective challenges the conventional wisdom about Trump’s racial politics, suggesting that the mainstream media and political opponents underestimated the power of Trump’s public persona, especially among Black communities. It also raises broader questions about how race is used in political campaigns and how historical relationships and actions are weighed when determining the character of public figures. In this context, Smith believes that Trump’s political strategy succeeded in part because he effectively neutralized the racism charge by emphasizing his long history with minority communities.
As the conversation concluded, it became clear that Smith believed that the strategy of calling Trump a racist—without considering the full scope of his public record—was unlikely to prove effective in the long run. In fact, it may have only strengthened Trump’s appeal to his core supporters, many of whom rejected the racial accusations as baseless and politically motivated.
