Archive for the ‘Politics’ Category

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Sweden’s politicians protect their independent auditors (and what’s the quid pro quo?)

August 6, 2016

Oh dear!

Dagens Nyheter exposed examples of “crony corruption” within the Swedish National Audit Office last month The Audit Office which is supposed to be an independent audit body monitoring government and government processes is answerable only to the Swedish Parliament via its Constitutional Committee. I have written earlier about the revelations and the calls for all the three Auditors General to resign. One did but the other two – who were also implicated in Dagens Nyheter’s expose – did not.

Yesterday the Constitutional Committee held a hearing with the Auditors and came to the startling conclusions that the transgressions were not serious enough for the Auditors to resign. If that was meant to restore the integrity of the Audit Office, it fails spectacularly. In fact, the clear impression I have now is that there is a very cozy relationship between the politicians of the Constitutional Committee and the Auditors.

It does seem that even in Sweden, which prides itself on the probity of its government and governance, the ruling principle is “I’ll scratch your back if you scratch mine”.

Dagens Nyheter:

The statement by the Constitutional Committee (KU) that there are no grounds for dismissing the Auditors general has upset the experts DN has talked to.

“This announcement is remarkable”, said Inga-Britt Ahlenius, the former head of the National Audit Office. and of the 
UN’s internal audit. She said earlier this summer that all Auditors General should resign after what had emerged. “It is strange that KU did not take the time to reflect on what has emerged during the hearing. I also find it strange that they chose not to inquire any further and question others such as the chairman of the FA (Association of Chartered Accountants)”, she said to DN.

Inga-Britt Ahlenius thinks that KU has obviously failed with its recruitment of Auditors General. “Had the right people been recruited this situation would not have arisen. They acted as if they were the bosses of a private consulting firm. Not the Auditors General of a constitutionally constituted National Audit Office”, she said.  …. 

Auditor general Susanne Accum had previously announced her resignation, but her colleagues Margareta Åberg and Ulf Bengtsson are set to remain. Inga-Britt Ahlenius believes that their situation will become unsustainable. “They have abused their trust of the authorities they are supposed to monitor and also that of the public and among their staff. Had the National Audit Office has been a private company they would have been dismissed long ago”.

Professor Olle Lundin is an expert in administrative law at the Faculty of Law at Uppsala University. He has reacted strongly to DN’s revelations. “If the National Audit completely ignore the basic principles we are in a pretty bad way out there. They should lead by example and be extremely effective, because no one examines them”, he told DN in early June.

 

Tags:, ,
Posted in Ethics, Politics, Sweden | Comments Off on Sweden’s politicians protect their independent auditors (and what’s the quid pro quo?)

“No ransom policy” but Obama paid $400 million cash for release of 4 prisoners from Iran

August 3, 2016

The Obama/Clinton followed by the Obama/Kerry foreign policy legacy will come to be seen as a low point in US history. It has been a foreign policy dominated by their own fears and devoid of courage. Paralysis by analysis.

The much publicised US policy of not paying ransom for the release of US prisoners in foreign countries is not quite all what it seems. It would seem that secretly paid ransoms are OK.

MarketWatch:

The Obama administration secretly organized an airlift of $400 million worth of cash to Iran that coincided with the January release of four Americans detained in Tehran, according to U.S. and European officials and congressional staff briefed on the operation afterward.

Wooden pallets stacked with euros, Swiss francs and other currencies were flown into Iran on an unmarked cargo plane, according to these officials. The U.S. procured the money from the central banks of the Netherlands and Switzerland, they said.

The money represented the first installment of a $1.7 billion settlement the Obama administration reached with Iran to resolve a decades-old dispute over a failed arms deal signed just before the 1979 fall of Iran’s last monarch, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. 

The settlement, which resolved claims before an international tribunal in The Hague, also coincided with the formal implementation that same weekend of the landmark nuclear agreement reached between Tehran, the U.S. and other global powers the summer before.

“With the nuclear deal done, prisoners released, the time was right to resolve this dispute as well,” President Barack Obama said at the White House on Jan. 17 — without disclosing the $400 million cash payment.

Senior U.S. officials denied any link between the payment and the prisoner exchange. They say the way the various strands came together simultaneously was coincidental, not the result of any quid pro quo. ……. But U.S. officials also acknowledge that Iranian negotiators on the prisoner exchange said they wanted the cash to show they had gained something tangible.

Sen. Tom Cotton, a Republican from Arkansas and a fierce foe of the Iran nuclear deal, accused President Barack Obama of paying “a $1.7 billion ransom to the ayatollahs for U.S. hostages.”

“This break with longstanding U.S. policy [not to] put a price on the head of Americans, and has led Iran to continue its illegal seizures” of Americans, he said.

Since the cash shipment, the intelligence arm of the Revolutionary Guard has arrested two more Iranian-Americans. Tehran has also detained dual-nationals from France, Canada and the U.K. in recent months.

To claim that it was coincidence is a little ingenuous and there seems little doubt it was a ransom:

IndependentSentinel:  January 22, 2016

Obama Paid Out A Ransom to Iran

The U.S. Treasury Department wired the money to Iran around the same time its theocratic government allowed three American prisoners to fly out of Tehran on Sunday aboard a Dassault Falcon jet owned by the Swiss air force. The prisoner swap also involved freedom for two other Americans held in Iran as well as for seven Iranians charged or convicted by the U.S. and another 21 under investigation.

“Based on an approval of the Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) and the overall interests of the Islamic Republic, four Iranian prisoners with dual-nationality were freed today within the framework of a prisoner swap deal,” the office of the Tehran prosecutor said.

Brigadier General Hassan Naqdi, the head of the Iranian regime’s notorious Basij militia, claimed on Wednesday that Iran had received $1.7 billion from the U.S. in exchange for the release of imprisoned Americans.

kerry-inshallah

image – Independent Sentinel

 

Tags:, ,
Posted in Behaviour, Iran, Politics, US | Comments Off on “No ransom policy” but Obama paid $400 million cash for release of 4 prisoners from Iran

Are Clinton and Trump really the best the US can come up with?

August 1, 2016

The election process will no doubt be entertaining. Trump’s antics and Clinton’s contortions will provide much fodder for fun. But I don’t envy the choice that US electors are facing. Clinton or Trump is not exactly being spoilt for choice. It is not possible to just cry “a plague on both your houses” and abstain. One of them will be the next President. It boils down to a choice between evils.

The US population is now about 320 million.

US voters 2016 - Pew Research

US voters 2016 – Pew Research

In November this year there will be 226 million registered voters (156 million white, 27 million black, 27 million hispanic and 10 million asian). At most there will be a voter turnout of 60% and so the next US President will be declared elected with a vote of around 68 million – which is around 30% of registered voters and just 21% of the US population.

But what is really no great tribute to US democracy in particular, and party democracies in general, is that the voters will have no better choice than to choose between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Is this really the best that 320 million people can come up with? There is increasing interest being shown in a 3rd party candidate, but it is way too little, far too late to have any bearing on the November election.

I am not a US citizen and I don’t have a vote and it shouldn’t really matter to me. But of course the choice of US President affects everybody  – somewhat. US domestic policy affects me primarily through what it means to my friends and relatives living in the US, and through the effect on my own economy (mainly indirectly). US foreign policy will have an undoubted impact on the state of the world and thus – but more tenuously – have some implications for me.

No democracy is perfect. In fact, no democracy anywhere is a “full democracy”. Party democracies really represent party members and are particularly poor at representing the electorate. Even dictators make sure that they are “elected” democratically. All democracies use processes which put in place people who can be “monarchs”, having varying powers, for a time. All ” democratic leaders” are effectively such “monarchs”, elected to exercise their powers, for a time. The closer you get to a “full democracy”, the closer you get to anarchy and the less you have leaders. In many democracies with proportional representation, you no longer have leaders – only followers. You could argue that the current UK government, which is implementing the referendum result for a Brexit, has no need for, and has no, leader. Theresa May is not then a Brexit leader but a Chief Follower.

The democratic nature of political systems, in practice, is established by their process for choosing their “leaders”to stand for election. The long-winded US process for each party choosing a nominee, is more democratic and all-encompassing than most party political processes for choosing representatives. But this process, in the way US democracy works, has thrown up Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. To the dissatisfaction of most.

While I am happy to be entertained by the US election process, I am more than a little disappointed that, no matter what happens, the world is stuck with the fact that one of these unedifying two is going to be the next President.

It is a little bit sad.

 

 

Tags:,
Posted in Behaviour, Politics, US | Comments Off on Are Clinton and Trump really the best the US can come up with?

Will Yuriko Koike crack Tokyo’s glass ceiling?

July 31, 2016

Yuriko Koike – image alchetron.com

UPDATE: Koike won.

Tokyo elects first woman governor

If Yuriko Koike can win today’s election to be Tokyo’s governor , it will be a far more significant event in cracking the glass ceiling in Japan’s male-dominated, endemically misogynistic political system, than Hillary Clinton’s achievement in being the first woman to be nominated for President by a major party. The polls have been vaguely – if ambiguously – encouraging for Koike, but she has been subject to much vilification from the establishment candidate. She has been a member of parliament since 1993 for the LDP and even stood for leadership of the LDP in 2008. She served as Environment Minister and as Minister for Okinawa in Jun’ichirō Koizumi’s government. She even served as Defense Minister in Shinzo Abe’s government but resigned after 2 months due to an internal fight within the LDP.

In the Tokyo gubernatorial elections she is standing as an independent – which has not pleased the LDP. She is one of 21 contenders but the three leading contenders are former Defence Minister Yuriko Koike, politician Hiroya Masuda and journalist Shuntaro Torigoe.

BBC:…. Sunday’s election was called after previous governor Yoichi Masuzoe resigned last month. He faced fierce criticism over allegations he used official funds to pay for holidays, art and comic books for his children. Mr Masuzoe, who won election promising a scandal-free administration, denied breaking the law, but admitted to ethical lapses around his lavish spending.

His predecessor, Naoki Inose also quit over a funding scandal in 2013, soon after Tokyo won the right to host the Olympics. Since then Tokyo’s preparations for the 2020 Summer Olympics have been hit by scandals, overspending, administrative fumbles and construction delays.

One of the new governor’s first duties will be to travel to Rio at the end of the 2016 Olympics in August to accept the Olympic flag as the next host.

The Japan Times writes of the 3 main candidates:

…. Koike, a 64-year-old former TV anchorwoman, speaks fluent English and Arabic — the latter acquired as a student in Cairo — and has also served as environment minister. …

Masuda, also 64 and backed by the ruling coalition — which spurned Koike for not seeking its approval before announcing her candidacy — is a veteran administrator who won plaudits as governor of Iwate for 12 years until 2007.

Also in the running is 76-year-old Torigoe, a liberal journalist widely known for his ubiquitous TV appearances and also as a cancer survivor.

The winner’s term will run until just after the games commence, and how the new governor handles the run-up will be closely watched. A key challenge will be getting a grip on swelling costs, seen as possibly double or triple the reported original forecast of ¥730 billion ($6.92 billion).

Counting begins at 8pm local time which is in a few hours from now.

 

Tags:
Posted in Japan, Politics | Comments Off on Will Yuriko Koike crack Tokyo’s glass ceiling?

Trump dominates even the Democratic convention

July 28, 2016

The DNC convention should have been all about Hillary. Instead it is becoming all about Trump.

Not unexpectedly, it has been Trump-bashing all week both by Democrat politicians and by the – largely – anti-Trump media. Last night Obama came out strongly in Clinton’s corner and criticised Trump. Michael Bloomberg stated that Hillary was “sane and competent” unlike Trump. Somebody else went down the dubious  “all good girls have abortions” line. and attacked Trump. Harry Reid attacked Trump, Martin O’Malley attacked Trump, Joe Biden attacked Trump. Joe Biden went on to say that “America was already great”. Chris Murphy attacked Donald Trump, Tim Kaine attacked Trump. Michelle Obama attacked Trump and said that “America was the greatest”. Bernie Sanders attacked Trump. Bernie Sanders’ supporters were very unhappy with the DNC and Hillary Clinton, but they too attacked Trump.

Everybody in sight and his pet dog attacked Trump.

Many of the attacks are so contrived or so over-the-top that they can only be counter-productive. The Democrats have effectively handed Trump a full week of attention and publicity on a plate. There’s still another day for the DNC convention to run, but it is quite clear that attacking Donald Trump dominates the proceedings – even more than supporting Hillary Clinton. Donald Trump is dominating the media and all attention even at Clinton’s party.

Donald Trump is holding out being “Great Again” as the hope. To counter that by just saying America is “Already Great” could be the strategic blunder of this election.

It has been my theory for over 6 months now that full-frontal attacks on Trump are counter productive. His support feeds and grows on such attacks from the establishment. It is also my theory that to diminish his support requires occupying some of the ground he stands on – not by denying that the ground exists. “Great Again” is what an increasing number of the electorate aspire to. For Michelle Obama to merely claim that “America is the greatest” gives such aspirations no hope at all. Is she really saying to “black live matters” that all is “sweetness and light”? Barack Obama – after 8 years of “where he could but didn’t” – merely asks them to live in hope rather than in fear. For Joe Biden to also say that “America was already great” was a denial of hope for those who live in a depression and keep going only buoyed by their  aspirations for something better.

“Already Great”  smacks of complacency. It gives no room for aspirations. It is likely to be a bad loser against “Great Again”.  It is not what Democrats would like to hear or to acknowledge but “Great Again” is about hope and “Great Already” is about complacency.

The Democrats are turning Trump into the candidate of hope.

 

Tags:,
Posted in Behaviour, Politics, US | Comments Off on Trump dominates even the Democratic convention

Now it’s the Democrats (and their media) embracing conspiracy theories

July 25, 2016

We had some fun and games at the Republican convention last week. Especially from Ted Cruz who wanted his moment in the sun. Of course there is a scenario in which he can capitalise on his breaking of his “pledge”. That requires a Trump debacle in the November election, and Cruz winning the GOP nomination in 2020 on a “I told you so” platform. But Trump himself did rather better than expected in his final speech.

But the fun and games aren’t over yet. The Democratic convention this week promises to be equally entertaining. This morning the media were full of the Wikileaks release of the DNC e-mails. It is pretty clear that the entire nomination process was heavily rigged in Hillary Clinton’s favour and against Bernie Sanders. She would probably have won the nomination anyway but it does show rather conclusively that the DNC would not have permitted Sanders to be nominated in any circumstances. Even if he had won a majority of delegates, the super-delegates were all already in bed with Clinton.

What I find particularly entertaining is the entire liberal press trying to play down the substance of the emails, but instead floating the conspiracy theory that the Russians and Putin had orchestrated the release of the emails. The Washington Post, the New York Times, and, of course, Huffington Post headlined the Putin conspiracy theory and consigned the content of the emails to much smaller print. facebook went even further and blocked the Wikileaks page before the hue and cry about censorship led them to reverse that. Twitter started removing users who were Trump supporters.

Pots and kettles

What is ironic is that while the DNC and their pet media are ranting about a Trump/Putin conspiracy, they are carefully playing down the real conspiracy against Bernie Sanders.

Pots and kettles.

Black kettles too matter.

 

Tags:, ,
Posted in Politics, US | Comments Off on Now it’s the Democrats (and their media) embracing conspiracy theories

Trump can’t do “issues” and Clinton can’t do “mood”

July 24, 2016

It is my observation and experience that logic and rational arguments on the one hand and emotional arguments on the other are like parallel lines which never meet. If logical argument is pitted against emotions, a meeting of minds is not possible, nobody is persuaded and nobody “wins”. It strikes me that the US Presidential election is going to be between one candidate trying to get the electorate to respond to emotions and the other to argument. But it would be wrong to think that an apparently reasoned argument is always more correct or “better” than an emotional one. Intuition, gut-feelings and hunches are often correct and are all essentially examples of “emotional” decision making. Even economic decisions – which one might expect to be very rational – are nearly always trumped by the “mood” in the markets.

Trump may be exaggerating the gloom and doom but nobody in their right minds would argue that all is sweetness and light. And it would seem from the anger and frustration and powerlessness that is abroad among the US electorate, that there is a revolt against the direction that conventional, correct politics has taken the US. I see no other explanation for the “anti-establishment” wave present, not only in the US, but globally. There is electoral capital to be made – globally – by tapping into this “mood” that the wrong path has been followed for far too long.

Now, the US Presidential election is boiling down to be a fight between evoking a “mood” on the one hand against an argued presentation of “issues”. The contrast between the two candidates is stark. Hillary Clinton’s strength does not lie in appealing to emotions to evoke a mood of sweetness and light to counter Trump’s gloom and doom. Donald Trump, however, is not the best person for presenting a rational, argued position on a complex issue.

For the US electorate I think it is going to be a classic stand-off between heart and head, between impulse buying against a purchase based on a cost-benefit analysis. I don’t think that one is necessarily “better” than the other. I have made some impulse buys which were disasters and others which were inspired. In the corporate world I hardly ever made large purchases which were not based on some form of cost-benefit analysis. But I also remember how assumptions were skewed to cover the “intangibles” so that the analysis eventually matched the “gut feeling”. Apparently “reasoned” decisions were actually emotional ones.

Trump can’t do issues – but he can do “mood”. “We should have gone to Mars and not to the Middle East” is all about evoking a mood. “Make America safe again/ proud again / great again” is a naked appeal to return to “the good old days” which only ever exist in the rosy fog of nostalgia. In trying to evoke “mood”, Trump can ignore getting bogged down in policy details at which he is not particularly adept. Clinton on the other hand, may try occasionally to evoke emotions, but that always seems very contrived and could be counter-productive. She will probably be far better off to stick to reasoned argument.

In November it is going to be mood versus issues. Trump can’t do “issues” and Clinton can’t do “mood”. For the US voter it is, I think,  going to be the emotional choice between a high-risk, high-gain Trump or the reasoned choice of a low-risk, low-gain Clinton. Things have crystallised but not changed much since I wrote 3 months ago:

After 8 years of a lack-lustre and indecisive, risk-averse Barack Obama who promised much only to deceive, Hillary Clinton offers “more of the same”. She is as “establishment” as it is possible to be. She represents the safe choice. There is no chance of any kind of greatness, only of a slight improvement or a gentle decline. She removes the possibility of a “high gain” scenario.

But I see two possible outcomes with Donald Trump. The first is that he will be the unmitigated disaster that the media and the politically correct expect. In this scenario, the US will become a harder, more bigoted country, less tolerant of minorities and less compassionate. It will become divisive in domestic affairs and inept and dangerous in its foreign policy. It will become a sin to remain poor. …. The second scenario is that US domestic and foreign policy will become entirely “trade” oriented. International friendships and alliances will have to have a cost-benefit analysis. Public spending and government jobs will be drastically down-sized. Bureaucrats will be subject to performance indicators. It will not be a sin to be rich. The ideological shift will be to “people as they deserve” rather than to “people as they desire”.

Trump versus Clinton

High-risk, high-gain Trump or low-risk, low-gain Clinton

 

Tags:, ,
Posted in Behaviour, Politics, US | 1 Comment »

Back to basics with an all-white US presidential election

July 23, 2016

The line-up is now Hillary Clinton /Tim Kaine versus Donald Trump/Mike Pence.

The US has persisted with its “diversity” experiment with Barack Obama across two terms and 8 years. That experiment has not worked all that well and the US is now returning to an all-white, all-Christians election. Not a minority in sight.

Back to basics.

all white election

  • one woman, three men
  • all white
  • all from relatively privileged backgrounds
  • all with good college educations. Clinton attended Wellesley and Yale; Trump graduated from Wharton; Kaine went to University of Missouri and Harvard; Pence was at Hanover College and Indiana University
  • all from Christian households. Clinton is a Methodist, Kaine a Catholic, Trump is Presbyterian and Pence is a Catholic turned Evangelical
  • Trump is 6’3″, Clinton is 5’5″ (but her PR claims 5’7″), Pence is 5’11” and Tim Kaine is 5’10”.
  • Trump is 70, Clinton is 69, Kaine is 58 and Pence is 57 years old.

Not all WASPs, but not very much “diversity” either. Of course, if Hillary Clinton wins, she will be the first woman to be President (though women really cannot be considered a minority in the US with 97 males for every 100 females). The Trump team is 11″ taller than the Clinton team. Both teams add up to the same age. Trump is the only one with a non-politician background. Three lawyers and one real-estate developer. All straight. No giants, no dwarves. No blacks, no Latinos, no Asian-Americans, no blue-collar experience, no military service. No Muslims, no atheists, no Buddhists and no Hindus.

The US has no need for a “white-supremacist” movement.

 

Tags:,
Posted in Politics, US | Comments Off on Back to basics with an all-white US presidential election

The wolf of Perdana Putra (aka “Malaysian Official 1”)

July 21, 2016

Perdana Putra

Office of The Prime Minister of Malaysia, Main Block, Perdana Putra Building, Federal Government Administrative Centre, 62502 Putrajaya, MALAYSIA

1MDB rolls on and it is probably getting quite warm in Perdana Putra. But whether Najib Razak is feeling the heat is not so certain.

Wall Street Journal: U.S. prosecutors have linked the prime minister of Malaysia, a key American ally in Asia, to hundreds of millions of dollars allegedly siphoned from one of the country’s economic development funds, according to a civil lawsuit seeking the seizure of more than $1 billion of assets from other people connected to him.

The Justice Department filed lawsuits Wednesday to seize assets that it said were the result of $3.5 billion that was misappropriated from 1Malaysia Development Bhd., or 1MDB, a fund set up by Prime Minister Najib Razak in 2009 to boost the Malaysian economy. …. Among the Justice Department’s assertions: That some $1 billion originating with 1MDB was plowed into hotels; luxury real estate in Manhattan, Beverly Hills and London; fine art; a private jet and the 2013 film “The Wolf of Wall Street.” Among those behind the spending, the lawsuit alleges, was Riza Aziz, stepson of Mr. Najib.

BBC: Malaysian PM Najib Razak is facing pressure internationally and at home amid US allegations of massive fraud at state investment fund 1MDB. The fund was set up by Mr Najib in 2009 with the stated aim of boosting the Malaysian economy.

But US Attorney General Loretta Lynch said evidence showed it had defrauded Malaysians “on an enormous scale”. On Wednesday, US authorities moved to seize more than $1bn (£761m) in assets related to the fund. Mr Najib is not named in the papers and has consistently denied wrongdoing.

But he is identifiable as “Malaysian Official 1”, whose account allegedly received millions in funds originating from 1MDB. The $1bn the US hopes to seize would make up only a proportion of the more than $3.5bn (£2.6bn) allegedly diverted.

I haven’t heard – yet – that Leonardo DiCaprio is being investigated.

 

Tags:,
Posted in Behaviour, Malaysia, Politics | Comments Off on The wolf of Perdana Putra (aka “Malaysian Official 1”)

Trump nominated, as the clown trounces the media

July 20, 2016

I never thought he would actually get this far. I took him for a clown to begin with. Later, I remembered that clowns can have hidden depths. There are times in any show when it is time for the clown to come on, and when only a clown will do. He reminded me, from my own experiences, of my first impressions of Laloo Prasad Yadav and my later realisation of the shrewdness and native cunning that Laloo had (still has I suppose). I remembered that Trump was born rich but had indeed made himself much richer. Donald Trump hit a nerve and was perfectly placed – but not I think by design –  to catch and ride an anti-establishment wave. The wave is turning out to be a global phenomenon and may turn into a tsunami.

For 12 months now, he has faced the massed opposition and vilification of the media not only in the US, but globally. The media have been scathing and openly slanderous about Trump. The liberal-left media have been frothing at the mouth in their indignation and have been hard put to find the words to describe their revulsion and disgust (Washington Post, Boston Globe, Huff Post, The Guardian, Der Spiegel …..). The New York Times has been openly hostile but has tried to keep one foot on the fence. Some of the right-wing media have been vitriolic in their opposition (Fox, Red State) while others have pointedly refrained from total opposition and remained neutral (Drudge, Washington Times). Every TV channel in the US has been opposed to Trump.

media vs trump

And yet, Donald Trump is now the official Republican candidate for the Presidency of the US. He was expected to be the first hopeful to drop out. Instead the rivals he has trounced (Bush, Kasich, Carson, Rubio, Cruz, ….) were the cream of the establishment, Republican, heavyweights. Two years ago I though it would be a Clinton-Bush fight. But Jeb Bush was pulverised early on in the competition (and the Bush family are still sulking). It has been a remarkable triumph for Trump considering the unprecedented level of opposition from the media and the political establishment (including the Republican establishment). I have never in my lifetime seen the media so united in their opposition to a candidate. And yet, they have all failed, and failed quite miserably, in their objective to “stop Trump”. The dismal failure of the media is all the more pronounced considering their almost unanimous opposition. Trump has reached and touched and ridden something above and beyond the control of the media. perhaps even beyond their understanding. He has connected with support which actually feeds and grows on the media opposition to him. Every time an establishment figure has castigated Trump, his support has grown. He backtracks on previous statements but never apologises. He makes gaffes which are quickly forgotten. He makes outrageous statements about ridiculous policies and his support does not desert him. It is mood – not issues – that seems to be controlling.

Those who have been particularly outspoken against him are now realising that it might not be such a good idea to completely alienate somebody who could be President in November. President Trump? It still sounds like a fantasy.

The wrong person? Or another Reagan? A catastrophe? Or an inspired choice? But, in the unfolding drama that is the US, it does begin to look like he could be the right clown with the right mood, for the right audience, in the right place, at the right time.

Quick, send in the clowns.
Don’t bother, they’re here.

 

 

Tags:
Posted in Behaviour, Media, Politics, US | Comments Off on Trump nominated, as the clown trounces the media

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »