Journalist Oliver Eagleton begins a recent article in Jacobin by warning us against “sanewashing” Donald Trump. The idea? We shouldn’t attribute any deeper strategy or long-term plan to Trump, because that’s not how he thinks. Rather, short-term gain and perceived self-interest drive him.

Naturally, Eagleton goes on to disregard this warning. We wouldn’t have it any other way.

I’ll say a brief word here about the web Eagleton thinks the Trumpists are spinning.

A Trumpism Class Strategy?

So, what’s the idea?

As Eagleton sees it, the Trump Administration – though not necessarily Trump himself, a distinction Eagleton wisely draws – wants to build a deportation regime in order to harm Democratic leaning sectors of capital and selectively benefit working-class people with short-term increases in wages.

To support this view, he points out that the economic sectors most harmed by deportations are the ones where Democrats work (e.g., information, education and health services, public administration). And he points to likely short-term wage gains by low-skilled workers.

So, what’s the larger strategy? By fusing together a coalition of workers and certain economic sectors, the Trumpists want to put together a long-term electoral majority.

However, while interesting, this is all very thin.

For one, the point about relative harms hardly matters. The fact remains that pretty much every economic sector is harmed by mass deportations. You’re not going to win over voters by harming their part of the economy less than other parts.

They’re still going to be angry that they’ve been harmed.

But just as importantly, low wage, low-skilled workers aren’t a key swing demographic in U.S. elections. Most don’t vote. And while winning over non-voters is a compelling long-term strategy to win elections – one I certainly argue the left should pursue – scattered deportations hardly looks like the way to do it.

While I think Eagleton usefully draws attention to how and why the left lost working-class voters, he does so by the very same “sanewashing” he rightly criticizes.