The Race to the Bottom

Nothing seems inevitable in this crazy presidential election year, even the ultimate victory of Hillary Clinton. The former First Lady and Senator and Secretary of state and long-presumed First Woman President is on a one-for-six skid against the nebbishy self-described socialist Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, with three blow-outs losses coming over the weekend, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation has barely started leaking its case against her. She still leads in the delegate count, with plenty of those mysterious “super delegates” set to come to her rescue, but she doesn’t look any more inevitable than she was back in ’08.
The Democrats are in an anti-establishment mood somewhat similar to the one that’s been driving the Republican race,and much if not most of the party is by now eagerly embracing the self-confessed socialism of Sanders, so it shouldn’t be at all surprising. This time around the media isn’t treating the alternative as some sort of messiah, and her opponent is obligingly ignoring any of the non-Wall Street scandals that might hurt in a general election, and black and Latino portions of the party have been loyal enough provide victories in states where the white flight from the Democrats has reached a critical point, and of course there are all those “super delegates” and the organizational support of the party, but Clinton is such an awful person and awful candidate that such advantages are insufficient.
Ordinarily all that would bode well for the Republicans, but in this crazy presidential year they’re so angry at the Republican party that they’re threatening to nominate the one person in public life even more widely distrusted and disliked than Clinton, self-described billionaire and real-estate-and-gambling-and-reality-show mogul Donald J. Trump. All the polls show Trump losing to Clinton and Sanders, but his supporters remain convinced that only he will be down-and-dirty enough to prevail over Clinton, and that it takes a thrice-married strip joint owner who boasts of his affairs with married women to make an issue of Clinton’s sleazy husband, and that only someone who donated $100,000 to Clinton’s phony baloney found to get her to come to his wedding can make an issue of her blatant influence peddling, which is an interesting theory. Trump’s supporters dismiss all the polls except the one’s showing Trump with a winning plurality in the primary and recall how Ronald Reagan made up an even larger deficit in the 1980 election, which is another interesting theory, but we don’t recall Reagan doing it the same way Trump will attempt.
A recent poll from the National Broadcasting Company and the Wall Street Journal finds 47 percent of Republican women saying they wouldn’t support Trump if he were the party’s nominee, which is a disastrous number that actually understates what we’re hearing from the Republican women of our acquaintance, and as much as the down and dirty stuff satisfies some rhetorical blood lust of Trump’s supporters it isn’t likely to win many of these women to his cause. Nor is it likely to be persuasive to the eye-popping 68 percent who told the Monmouth pollsters that Trump “does not have the right temperament to be president.” Trump’s latest down-and-dirty tactics have included threats to “spill the beans” on pesky rival Texas Sen. Cruz’s wife, and a “tweet” intended to disparage her looks, and the latest polls show it’s not helping his efforts in Wisconsin. His friends at the National Enquirer have unleashed some nasty innuendo about Cruz, and it remains to be seen if that wins any new admirers of his presidential temperament.
All Republicans and an easily winnable majority of independents and even a handful of old-timey Democrats are rightly alarmed at the prospect of Clinton winning the presidency, and now they can also start worrying about Sanders winning, but a majority of the entire country have similar qualms about a President Trump, so once again nothing is inevitable. This could be a crazy enough year to have a race between a self-described socialist such as Sanders and an authentic conservative as Cruz who will make their cases for their starkly different visions and obligingly avoid anything of less importance. Or you can have Clinton and Trump, in which case the mud will fly and get all over the country, and you might even see a serious third party challenge by someone not as awful, which won’t be hard to find.

— Bud Norman

2 responses

  1. The only thing good about this election is how terrible it is. We need to build a better version of our political system (I’m thinking a different way to count votes), so we need people to be irritated at this one. Right now our weak point is that everyone is angry about a different symptom of the problem; we probably need to get our story straight to get anything done.

    But of course everyone thinks their pet symptom is the problem. Trumpites are ticked at the cynicism of politicians. Sandersnistas can’t tolerate the too-big-to-fail corporations and their purchases of politicians. Hillary’s people fear those corporations and politicians will reverse the leftist progress to the 50’s. Cruz is also against corruption, although he’s not very specific about where it is or why it stays there (and that seems like a bad sign for voter enthusiasm).

    I see a common thread behind these, but each faction is fanatically opposed to the others. The founders managed to construct our nation by working toward a common solution despite their disagreements about what the problems were. I think we’re in this mess because we forgot how to do that. I think our voting system needs to mitigate the pathologically divisive effect of being in a large group of people. Bureaucracy is not required for none of us to be as stupid as all of us.

  2. Both parties will come out of this changed. Since I vote Republican my focus is on changing that party; I’ll let the Democrats decide if they want to go full socialist. I think Trump is the best way of breaking the hold that lobbyists and the Chamber-of-Commerce/Jeff Immelt types have on the party that should be the party of the Middle Class. FDR appointed Joe Kennedy to head the SEC because Old Joe knew how the market was being manipulated. Trump knows how politicos are bought and sold, having done his share. I believe that he loves America, unlike so many on the Left. And too many on the Right are in it for the money.

    And in this you are right, Bud. Trump is ruthless enough to win.

Leave a Reply to Moneyrunner Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: