Manipulators v. Educators: Why You Can’t Trust The Lincoln Project
- john raymond
- Jun 6
- 3 min read
In an era where clarity is rare and disinformation rampant, some Americans have clung to unlikely allies. Chief among them: The Lincoln Project. Formed by former Republican strategists and operatives, this group branded itself as a resistance cell from within the conservative elite—never-Trumpers who, in their telling, had finally broken ranks with the monster they helped build. Their ads are viral. Their language is sharp. And for many liberals desperate to see Trump fall, The Lincoln Project seemed like a gift.
But the truth is harder. The Lincoln Project isn’t here to save democracy. They are not educators, nor are they builders. They are manipulators—tactical, self-interested, and deeply compromised. They are not offering the public a road back to civic virtue or institutional restoration. They are offering entertainment. Worse, they are offering a false sense of safety: the illusion that professional cynics can fight fire with fire and somehow not leave everything in ashes.
It must be said: being anti-Trump is not the same as being pro-democracy. Many of the Lincoln Project’s founders—Steve Schmidt, Rick Wilson, John Weaver—spent years crafting the very dog whistles, attack ads, and culture war tactics that hollowed out the GOP long before Trump descended the golden escalator. They ran campaigns that weaponized fear, undermined fact, and shredded norms. And when Trump emerged, they didn’t reject the playbook. They simply resented the player.
When The Lincoln Project goes after Trump, they do it not as defenders of truth but as masters of the same psychological warfare. Their ads aren’t designed to enlighten. They’re designed to provoke, to shame, to manipulate emotionally. The goal is never to educate voters—it’s to humiliate opponents. Their viral media efforts mimic the style of the very demagogues they claim to oppose: shock, ridicule, outrage, spectacle.
We must ask ourselves: what kind of opposition is this? Are we simply trading one flavor of abuse for another? If the goal is to rebuild democratic culture, to foster informed citizens who understand policy, ethics, and civic duty, then The Lincoln Project is not helping. They are, in fact, teaching people that all politics is theater, that all victory comes from mockery, and that truth is secondary to the takedown.
Their defenders will say: "But they’re effective!" To which we must respond: Effective at what? If we are measuring success by how many people retweet a slapdown video of Trump, then sure—they’re great at virality. But if the measure is how many people walk away understanding how authoritarianism erodes democratic systems, how power corrupts institutions, or how civic engagement actually works—then The Lincoln Project is worse than useless. It is corrosive.
We do not need more manipulators. We need educators. We need thinkers, analysts, historians, and security professionals. We need people like Alexander Vindman, Ruth Ben-Ghiat, Fiona Hill—individuals who understand the nature of democratic fragility and the long-term damage of rule-by-spectacle. The Lincoln Project is not part of that ecosystem. They are a media brand built for rage, not reform.
Just because they oppose Trump does not mean they are allies to democracy. Being the enemy of our enemy does not make them our friends. It makes them opportunists in a time of crisis—crisis they helped create.
In the end, if we entrust the future of American democracy to the same men who sold it out for decades, we will not escape the storm. We will simply sail deeper into it, guided by voices who still mistake manipulation for leadership.
What we need now is not another Lincoln Project.We need a reconstruction project—one built on truth, humility, and civic repair.Anything else is just more sleight of hand in a crumbling house of mirrors.
Kommentare