Posts Tagged ‘Donald Trump’

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

“Democrats for Trump” is not just fantasy

January 10, 2016

The conventional wisdom is that if Donald Trump wins the Republican nomination, Hillary Clinton will wipe the floor with him. But a few weeks ago I thought that, like the Democrats for Reagan, we might see a similar phenomenon of Democrats for Trump.   I saw immigration in the US and the consequent fears of many white Democrats together with the dynamics between different minority groups as being the possible driver for generating these cross-over voters. I wrote then:

Latinos are incensed at Trump’s comments about immigration, but quite like his hard line about Islamic terrorists. East European immigrants are also attracted to this hard line about both Mexican illegal immigrants and Muslim terrorists. Asian immigrants can be split generally into two groups; Muslims mainly from Islamic countries and non-Muslims. Many of the non-Muslims feel threatened by the Islamisation of their communities and the insidious, creeping encroachment of – and perceived silent surrender to – Sharia Law. A large portion of the Asian communities are not comfortable with the influx of illegal, Latino immigrants. ………. Even the black Muslims feel under threat from all the “new Muslims”, since they come quite low down in the hierarchy of “true Muslims”. Normally the bulk of the immigrant population in the US would be Democratic supporters, but Trump is tapping into some of their greatest fears of other immigrant groups. There is also – I think – a large section of the white, middle-class Democratic support which is inhibited from expressing its fears of immigration and Islamisation and are suddenly quite glad that these fears are being expressed by somebody – even if it is only a Trump.

A new survey suggests that such a scenario is not entirely fantasy and there may well be substance to the existence of a “Democrats for Trump”. The poll indicates that 20% of Democratic voters could cross-over to Trump. If my memory serves many of the Democrats for Reagan were “secret” and never actually admitted that they would vote for Reagan. I suspect that the “secret” Democrats for Trump could be a larger proportion even than for Reagan. And I suspect that Trump is not as unacceptable for well-established minority groups as the media assume.

US News:

So if Donald Trump proved the political universe wrong and won the Republican presidential nomination, he would be creamed by Hillary Clinton, correct? A new survey of likely voters might at least raise momentary dyspepsia for Democrats since it suggests why it wouldn’t be a cakewalk.

The survey by Washington-based Mercury Analytics is a combination online questionnaire and “dial-test” of Trump’s first big campaign ad among 916 self-proclaimed “likely voters” ……. Nearly 20 percent of likely Democratic voters say they’d cross sides and vote for Trump, while a small number, or 14 percent, of Republicans claim they’d vote for Clinton. When those groups were further broken down, a far higher percentage of the crossover Democrats contend they are “100 percent sure” of switching than the Republicans.

Tied in a statistical dead heat: Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. REUTERS combo

That Trump is not quite the pariah with Democratic voters as the media seek to portray is also shown by this Reuters/IPSOS poll which has Trump matching Clinton if they were to be pitted against each other

Reuters: In a hypothetical head-to-head race, the real-estate tycoon and TV personality would be supported by 39 percent of likely general election voters, compared with 40 percent for Clinton, according to the latest 5-day average from Friday’s Reuters/Ipsos tracking poll.

The driving issue is likely to be immigration all through 2016. The recent New Years eve rampage of male, “refugee”, Muslim youths in Germany, the politically correct silence by the media about it until forced, and similar behaviour in Finland and the UK and in Scandinavia, only play into Trump’s narrative. Every atrocity committed by ISIS begs the question as to why the male, unaccompanied youths who are seeking refugee status in Europe or North America, are not fighting against ISIS in their own countries?

Tags:, ,
Posted in Behaviour, Politics | Comments Off on “Democrats for Trump” is not just fantasy

Time running out to stop Trump

December 23, 2015

The US Presidential election beats the new Star Wars for plot and entertainment.

The latest Reuter’s rolling poll shows Carson and Cruz fading and Trump consolidating his position. Clinton-Trump match-ups are meaningless for the moment since the currently secret Democrats for Trump will start coming out of the woodwork only after he has won the nomination – and that will not be till July 2016. Trump’s support is now three times larger than that of his nearest rival.

Reuters Rolling Poll Republicans 22nd December 2015

Reuters Rolling Poll Republicans 22nd December 2015

The primaries start in February and there is little time left for the Republican establishment to stop Trump. I suspect that they will fall in behind Trump if he maintains this lead till March.

Republican primary schedule

Republican primary schedule

I have a theory – which is a little far-fetched – that if it becomes a Trump – Clinton battle, the Democrats for Trump could include large chunks of traditional white, middle-class, liberals who are running a little scared of the demographic changes taking place. It might be thought that the immigrant communities would all be strongly Democratic, but Trump will play successfully to the entrepreneurial instincts that are so strong among many of them. In this scenario, a large section of these “immigrants” would prefer a lively Trump to a jaded Clinton. So, in my theory, Donald Trump could well split the white, liberal vote and even the “immigrant” vote while the Democrats will retain the bulk of the black vote and of the less enterprising immigrant community.

It’s just a theory, of course, but I expect an eventual Trump-Clinton fight to be much more favourable to Trump than the conventional wisdom allows. In any event, it could be a vastly entertaining election.

Tags:,
Posted in Behaviour, Politics, US | Comments Off on Time running out to stop Trump

Do many Democrats secretly support Trump?

December 12, 2015

The US Presidential election is at a fascinating stage. Clarity may come in a few months, but it could still develop into something of a thriller. Talking to some of my American friends, I have been surprised to find that under the vocal indignation about Donald Trump’s clowning and his outrageous comments, there is an undercurrent of admiration for his “stating of things as they really are”. Much of the criticism of Trump, it seems, is because it is expected of them.

The US Presidential election in 2016 is clearly going to be dominated by the issue of immigration. (This holds also for every election that will be held in any country in Europe and for the regional elections in France tomorrow). Economy and taxes and health care will all, I think, trail immigration by a large margin. And that puts Trump in a rather peculiar but unique position. It may well be that Trump is a “figure of this time”; that he is in the right place at the right time. Immigration, itself, is not a single issue and consists of a number of differentiated issues, such as:

  • “illegals” and their regularisation,
  • citizenship and the commitments to acquire citizenship
  • must all (meaning Muslim) immigrants explicitly assert the supremacy of the law of the land over religious Laws (meaning Sharia),
  • prevention of future illegal entry,
  • the entry rules for the relatives of immigrants who are not citizens
  • screening of would be entrants.

It is politically incorrect for any Democrat to admit to any liking for any Republican and – at the present time – quite unthinkable to consider Donald Trump as anything but a pariah. But I sense a thread of support for Donald Trump from the more centrist Democrats and even some immigrants, which will remain hidden and may only show up next November – assuming, of course, that he gets to be a candidate, either for the Republicans or as an Independent.

I am old enough to remember the Reagan elections and I see a parallel between Trump and Reagan. Just as the Reagan Democrats appeared suddenly in droves, I suspect there could be a significant number of secret Trump Democrats who will not (dare not) surface until the real Presidential election. It is worth remembering, that on many issues Trump is remarkably closer to Democratic dogma rather than traditional Republican positions. I remember how incredulous many commentators were at the idea of Reagan, a not very good B-movie, cinema actor, becoming President. There is a similar kind of incredulity about Trump as a serious contender at the present time.

The Atlantic: Like Reagan, Trump is a former Democrat and a one-time TV star, whom the media initially dismissed as having little chance of reaching the White House. But there is a more significant parallel that has gone unnoticed: Trump is running on essentially the same message as Reagan. Reagan insisted that America’s problems were not as complicated or intractable as everyone seemed to think. “For many years now, you and I have been shushed like children and told there are no simple answers to the complex problems which are beyond our comprehension,” Reagan said at his 1967 inauguration as governor of California. “Well, the truth is, there are simple answers—there are not easy ones.”

And of course that is a very powerful message – perhaps an insight. There is always a simple answer which always provides a clear direction. Ways and means for implementing an answer may be difficult but the direction remains clear. It makes a change from politicians who feel it necessary to justify their lack of achievement by over-complicating issues.

Trump does not fit into the normal, standard shape of a conventional Democrat or a Republican. Many minority and immigrant groups also find him difficult to easily classify. Immigrants, especially newly arrived immigrants, have mixed feelings about further immigration and and how it affects their own insecurities. Latinos are incensed at Trump’s comments about immigration, but quite like his hard line about Islamic terrorists. East European immigrants are also attracted to this hard line about both Mexican illegal immigrants and Muslim terrorists. Asian immigrants can be split generally into two groups; Muslims mainly from Islamic countries and non-Muslims. Many of the non-Muslims feel threatened by the Islamisation of their communities and the insidious, creeping encroachment of – and perceived silent surrender to – Sharia Law. A large portion of the Asian communities are not comfortable with the influx of illegal, Latino immigrants. The black community, in my perception, detests the influx of Asians and their perceived economic successes. Asians themselves consider themselves superior, especially academically, intellectually and in business, to the black community. Even the black Muslims feel under threat from all the “new Muslims”, since they come quite low down in the hierarchy of “true Muslims”. Normally the bulk of the immigrant population in the US would be Democratic supporters, but Trump is tapping into some of their greatest fears of other immigrant groups. There is also – I think – a large section of the white, middle-class Democratic support which is inhibited from expressing its fears of immigration and Islamisation and are suddenly quite glad that these fears are being expressed by somebody – even if it is only a Trump.

Of course any support for Trump from the usually Democratic voters is a moot point unless he manages to get on the ballot next November. It occurs to me that many of them would be more likely to vote for Trump if he was labelled an Independent rather than a Republican. So one possible scenario is that Trump will be so far ahead in the Republican race that the GOP establishment decide to have a brokered convention and choose someone other than Trump. That would cause Trump to jump the Republican ship and go Independent – but as late as possible, and in as damaging a way as possible for the Republicans. The conventional wisdom is that an Independent Trump would lose too many votes to even a weak Republican, and that it would be a complete walk-over for Hillary Clinton.

Conventional wisdom, though, is not proving to be very reliable or very prophetic.

 

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

Trump is changing the field of play as he prepares for an arbitration

December 9, 2015

There isn’t a single paper or TV station, or Democrat that isn’t enraged by Trump’s call to ban all Muslim entries to the US temporarily. The column miles that are being written by the pundits vie to each present a more vicious and indignant rejection of his views than the previous one. Trump is being called all kinds of things. In fact, some of the hyperbole applied and the invective is worse than anything Trump ever came up with. He is labelled a clown, a fool, a racist, an opportunist and even a fascist. Most often he is labelled a demagogue, compared to Mussolini, and even, but a little more circumspectly, to Hitler (for fear of Godwin’s Law). He has got more publicity and column-miles and TV exposure than all the other candidates, Democrat and Republican, together. The consensus wisdom is that if he wins the Republican nomination – which is said to be highly unlikely – then it will be a walk-over for Clinton.

But I wonder.

Let me use an analogy from the business world, not least because that’s where Trump comes from. Let’s suppose that the American election is an arbitration process between two parties in conflict. First, each party prepares its initial submission. This is a litany of the most extreme positions and a collection of the most outrageous claims against the other party that can possibly be imagined. Such a submission, from my experience, fails the test if our own lawyers do not themselves cringe from the extravagance of the claims. The initial submission often contains embarrassingly tenuous and far-fetched claims, ignores any semblance of rational thought and just baldly asserts the claims. In my analogy then the nomination process is this preparation of the initial submission. Trump and Clinton are the lawyers hoping to be engaged and are preparing the submissions they propose to begin with. The Presidential election itself is then the arbitration hearing with the American electorate as the arbitrator. In such hearings the arbitrators are primarily interested in seeing which claims fall away and can be put aside. That depends on how well each party presents each outrageous claim and how effective the other party is in nullifying it. Ultimately the arbitrators rule, based – not on abstract notions of natural justice – but on a practical, prevailing “centre of gravity” position, from among the surviving claims. Arbitrators are concerned with the best justifiable result rather than with justness or fairness. Invariably, an arbitration result favours that party which can protect its own outlandish claims while destroying the opponents claims.

Arbitration Result

Arbitration Result where Clinton is Party 1 and Trump is Party 2

We always used specialist lawyers, rather than our usual contract lawyers, for arbitration cases during my working career. They were the experts at stretching claims. Initially, I used to cringe at some of the shameless and barely justifiable claims that were introduced into our initial submissions. But it soon became clear to me that the critical step was in establishing the shape and the width of the field of play, by extending its area way beyond our desired final result. An arbitration was then a negotiation of claims – under special rules – on the playing field so established. A party comes closest to its desired result by expanding the area of its claims such that the desired result becomes – for the arbitrator – the centre of gravity position of the claims surviving the negotiation.

I see something similar in the way Trump is proceeding. I begin to wonder if Trump does not actually see himself as being in an arbitration in front of the US electorate as the final arbitrator. His over-the-top comments about illegal immigration and “the wall” and now his outrageous proposals about temporarily keeping all Muslims out, are actually defining the boundaries of his playing field. His outlandish claims have to be shot down but the new field of play is established. But just shooting down the claims is not enough. Unless the Democrats are equally outrageous, the field of play remains the one he has defined.

I think the media and the Democrats are missing that the playing field itself is being skewed by Trump’s apparently insane assertions. Every crazy position he has taken is now on the table and part of the discourse. He has been declared dead so many times by the pundits that I no longer take any obituary at face value. And the Democrats will have to shift the playing field if Trump does win the GOP nomination. Merely attacking Trump on his own playing field could prove to be quite ineffective.

Trump is playing a different game to his Republican rivals and to the Democrats. He is not preparing for an election. He is preparing his case for arbitration next November. On his field of play. My expectation is that at some time Trump will go Independent and change the game again.

Tags:,
Posted in Behaviour, Politics, US | Comments Off on Trump is changing the field of play as he prepares for an arbitration

Trump’s got his music right and his words don’t matter

November 25, 2015

Trump has got his music right and as long as the beguilement of the music holds, his words don’t matter.

How else to explain Trump’s position? He seems to be immune to the rational consequences of what he says.

The only conclusion I come to is that it is the mood he evokes that people are responding to rather than what he actually says. It is the almost abstract notions of being for less government rather than more, for common sense rather than political correctness, for pragmatism rather than high ideology and for being untarnished by “sponsors” or the establishment which are keeping Trump going.

It is becoming difficult to see how anybody else could overtake him now to the GOP nomination. And that is not something that was even worthy of contemplation 6 months ago.

Trump 25Nov2015 RCP Poll of Polls

Trump 25Nov2015 RCP Poll of Polls

So far, Trump is not penetrating much beyond disaffected Republicans. But he is capturing a mood and riding feelings and emotions in a way not seen since Obama’s first campaign against Hillary Clinton. But Obama had the words too. (It’s just that Obama has not been able to match his actions to the mood he evoked).

If now Trump can get his words right and continues to sustain the right music, then who knows what happens next November.

Tags:
Posted in Behaviour, Politics, US | Comments Off on Trump’s got his music right and his words don’t matter

Clinton, Trump, Sanders & Carson – not really spoilt for choice

October 22, 2015

So Biden is not running.

This leaves the US electorate now with the less than enviable prospect of having to vote in one of the motley group of Trump, Clinton, Carson or Sanders as their next President. Not the most inspiring group of names. If leadership is the criterion then Donald Trump is the only one who qualifies. If “politicking” and manipulating the political establishment is what is required then Hillary Clinton is best suited. Ben Carson will come into his own when lobotomising sections of the government or in excising unwanted parts of the bureaucracy. Bernie Sanders could count as the “intellectual” in this group but he is best at opposing and blocking others rather than taking his own initiatives.

The choice is one of firsts. Either the first non-politician, or the first woman, or the first (real) black, or the first socialist as President. It could be the dullest election ever. The only glint of some entertainment in the process is provided by Trump. Of course the criteria for winning the election are different to the qualities needed for being President for 4 years. Of the four I don’t see that Carson or Sanders have what it takes to be even a reasonably successful President.

So I would expect Carson to lose handily to Clinton and Sanders to Trump. But a Carson versus Sanders election could be a bizarre battle to see who was worse. It could be difficult to forecast the contest to lose. Paradoxically it is the bizarreness of such a contest which could inject some interest. The prospect of having an incompetent incumbent in the White House will bring some despair to friendly countries.

That leaves a Clinton versus Trump contest which could actually be a close and fascinating fight. It would pit stability versus volatility and political manipulation against a leader charging in where angels fear to tread. It would be Big government set against Small. Both would be extremely pragmatic though Clinton may be swayed by ideology a little more. Trump will protect the bottom line while Clinton will tend to protect the spending level. Trump’s foreign policy will be openly focused on short-term advantages to the US whereas Clinton’s will be all about long-term geopolitical machinations.

The more I consider a Trump versus Clinton battle, the more difficult I find it to predict how the American voters may decide. But Trump has a real chance of winning even if he does start as the underdog.

That Trump could be the GOP candidate was unthinkable just 3 months ago. It seems the most likely outcome now. That Trump could win the election still seems a little far-fetched, but it has now to be considered more than just a theoretical possibility.

If a not very good actor could become a State Governor and one of the more successful US Presidents, I suppose there is no reason why a real estate mogul could not also make it. 2016 could be the year of the clowns. And the US and the world may just need a clown in the flagging global play.

But with just these 4 names in the hat, the US electorate is not really spoilt for choice.

Tags:,
Posted in Politics, US | Comments Off on Clinton, Trump, Sanders & Carson – not really spoilt for choice

Now, suppose it was President Donald Trump…

September 27, 2015

With even Jeremy Corbyn “elected” as leader of the UK Labour Party, it is quite within the realm of possibility that Donald Trump could be the 45th President of the United States.

Of course, he may not even be the Republican candidate. But, just suppose, by some quirk of fate and a “perfect electoral storm”, he did become President.

It might, in fact, be just what the US needs (and maybe also what the voters deserve). The pendulum between “establishment politics” at one end needs to swing back towards individualism and leadership. “Establishment politics” where the party machinery dominates gives followers not leaders – and not just in the US. Ultimately, Barack Obama cannot be blamed for non-achievement – it is the voters who put him there who perceived a substance under the flattering surface which just wasn’t there. Trump may not be in the same “academically intellectual” class as Obama, but he may have a lot more substance under his unflattering exterior than Obama has. Even a clown like Trump could be more of a leader than an Obama “paralysed by analysis”. Trump’s only real claim to fame – or track record – is the money he has made. A non-politician in the White House who breaks the stranglehold that “party politics” has on government might be more than just refreshing. He might – for a time – actually be more successful.

No more apologies, no preaching, no more moralistic and sanctimonious pronouncements, no “ideologies” to pay lip-service to, no ambition to save the world from imaginary dangers, just a supreme pragmatism to serve the bottom line. The US could well do with looking at its bottom line  – for at least one presidential term.

His loyalty to his cabinet members would only stretch as far as their performance. On domestic policy (and he doesn’t have one at the moment), he would probably spend half a term in “fire-fighting” (immigration, health care, employment) and then focus on downsizing government (and public expenditure) and tax revisions. He might actually increase taxes at the highest end while reducing taxes for middle-income entrepreneurs. The banks and the finance houses could see some drastic curtailment of their privileges and tax-breaks. There could be a welcome shift in social and welfare matters away from “what you need” to “what you deserve”. Every government agency would be held to Key Performance Indicators.

Foreign policy (and he doesn’t have one at the moment) would be fascinating. It would be entirely pragmatic and the “politically correct” requirement of being sanctimonious would be removed. The double standards normally required in conventional diplomacy (supporting Saudi Arabia militarily while pretending to condemn their human rights, for example), would be thrown out of the window. Trade and geopolitical needs, untrammelled by any need to “demonstrate” a morally superior position, would dominate. Even the US military might find that their cosy, protected and privileged existence is suddenly shaken up by “performance reviews”. The US diplomatic corps would need to start looking at their “deliverables”.

One term of a CEO – rather than a “seasoned” politician – being President of the US could be just what the US, and US politics, needs.

Tags:
Posted in Behaviour, Politics, US | Comments Off on Now, suppose it was President Donald Trump…

By the numbers – Trump plus Carson could be formidable

September 12, 2015

Trump-CarsonProbably unthinkable, but from the outside looking in, the numbers suggest to me that a Trump + Carson ticket could overwhelm all the other Republican candidates. One Republican candidate has left the race (Rick Perry). Huckabee and Santorum will probably be the next to leave. And the Trump bubble is not imploding as all expected. In fact, the polls suggest that Trump is still gaining strength.

From RCP:

trump plus carson

GOP polls on 12th September 2015 — Real Clear Politics

The Republican establishment has proven to be a most ineffectual opposition to a weak indecisive President. They have not been able to use their strength in the house to actually do anything except to try and block Obama. Trump and Carson could ride an anti-establishment wave (tsunami?).

Against the Democrats, it is then difficult to see what permutation or combination of Clinton, Sanders, Biden and anybody else could withstand a Trump + Carson ticket.

The entertainment continues.

Tags:,
Posted in Behaviour, Politics, US | Comments Off on By the numbers – Trump plus Carson could be formidable

Clinton – artificial, Trump – genuine?

September 8, 2015

Sanders has now gone ahead of Clinton in one poll. Donald Trump maintains his lead.

The New York Times reports that Hillary Clinton’s strategists will now ensure that she shows “more humour and heart” and I wondered if this was not one of the key differences of perception between Trump and Clinton (and all other “conventional” politicians). Clinton and other politicians have strategists and aides who analyse and create an artificial persona that their principal is then supposed to put on show. The perception then is that whatever they say or do is then in support of this artificial persona, which has been calculated as being the most likely to gain voter support. With Trump however the perception is that you get to see the real Trump – warts and all. Real beats artificial.

Add to this the perception that Trump needs no funding from sponsors – looking for their pound of flesh – and is beholden to no one. I begin to think that what is driving the support for Trump is the voter fatigue with conventional politicians who are calculatedly artificial and who are in hock to their donors. Trump’s convictions are perceived to be real while those of others are seen to be “bought” and artificial.

Nobody doubts, even when Trump displays his ignorance in some areas – especially of foreign affairs – that he can always surround himself with knowledgeable people. And nobody doubts either that if he picks the wrong people, he knows how to fire them. It is his real track record being pitted against the implied erudition of others.

I see also that Paul Krugman is generally scornful of the economic policies of all the GOP candidates and especially those of Bush. In his latest column he puts Trump as the best of a bad lot. But one look at Trump’s real billions render all Krugman’s jargon and all his (failed) theories utterly toothless. In one phrase, Krugman basically stands for increased public spending. In fact, in a battle for minds between Trump’s real billions and Krugman’s artificial theories, the real billions on the bottom line carry much more credibility. Krugman stands for debt while Trump stands for real wealth.

If a perception that being “real” is what trumps being “artificial” is the theme now driving US voters, then Trump is going to be around for a long time yet. Conventional, artificial politicians (GOP and Democrat) are going to have a tough time against people fed-up with being sold made-up story lines.

NYT:  ……. In extensive interviews by telephone and at their Brooklyn headquarters last week, Mrs. Clinton’s strategists acknowledged missteps — such as their slow response to questions about her email practices — and promised that this fall the public would see the sides of Mrs. Clinton that are often obscured by the noise and distractions of modern campaigning. 

They want to show her humor. The self-effacing kind (“The hair is real, the color isn’t,” she said of her blond bob recently, taking note of Mr. Trump) has played better than her sarcastic retorts, such as when she asked if wiping a computer server was done “with a cloth.” …

They want to show her heart, like the time she comforted former drug addicts in a school meeting room in New Hampshire.

But the widespread presumption of Hillary Clinton as being untrustworthy, cold, calculating and not very effective (Libya) is firmly ingrained. To now try and show her as being a warm, funny, “nice” but efficient person is not going to fly.

Perhaps the paradigm shift in the 2016 election will be that “real” trumps “artificial”.

Tags:,
Posted in Behaviour, Economy, Politics, US | Comments Off on Clinton – artificial, Trump – genuine?

Trump’s real appeal is that he is beholden to no one

August 26, 2015

The more people he upsets, the stronger becomes Donald Trump’s showing in the polls. He probably would not even deny that he is playing the role of “clown” in the political circus of the US Presidential election. Trying to analyse his appeal is confounding most of the pundits and the main-stream media are torn between wanting to ridicule him but knowing that his appeal feeds on being ridiculed by the “establishment”.

But I was struck by this analysis in Politico of liberals who see some good in Trump. The idea of Trump being influenced by campaign contributions is patently laughable. No one even thinks about criticising Trump for being beholden to anyone. Perhaps that is the real secret of his inexplicable appeal. He may be a clown but …… He says it like he sees it. He pays no attention to political correctness. He does not apologise. He cannot be bought. And, above all, he is beholden to no one.

Politico: Meet the Liberals who love Trump

It’s become fashionable on the left to sneer at the very sound of Donald Trump’s name; Bernie Sanders more or less captured the mood when he dismissed Trump as “an embarrassment” in a recent interview. But there is one contingent of liberals who take a very different view. They believe, cheerfully, that Trump is nothing less than the second coming—of campaign finance reform. …..

…. As pundits search for the source of Trump’s resilient appeal, reformers say they’ve long known the answer: the constant emphasis on how his staggering wealth immunizes him from insider influence. It has arguably now become the campaign’s most salient theme. “I don’t need anybody’s money. I’m using my own money,”  ………. Then came the debates, where Trump cleverly positioned satellite candidates around Planet Donald by recounting how he had purchased their fealty. “You know, most of the people on this stage I’ve given … a lot of money,” Trump said, adding, “I was a businessman. I give to everybody. When they call, I give. And you know what? When I need something from them, two years later, three years later, I call them, and they are there for me. And that’s a broken system.”

……… “That explains why there’s so much amazing support for Trump,” added Lessig (Harvard Law School professor Lawrence Lessig). “Americans are willing to put up with his outrageous views because they look at this guy and say, Holy crap. Here it is. A politician not beholden to these crony funders. That’s the gift.”

The Republican nomination battle is already providing much more entertainment than I would have expected. And it is entirely due to Trump. Part of the appeal is that Trump is not even beholden to the Republican establishment. It is not inconceivable that he could dump them. I also see the Democrats regretting that they are stuck with the old, staid and boring figures of Clinton, Sanders and possibly Biden and Gore. They have nobody who compares in terms of outrageous charisma. Almost as if they are looking backwards while Trump charges towards some unknown, possibly dangerous, but brand new, playing field.

Tags:
Posted in Behaviour, Politics, US | Comments Off on Trump’s real appeal is that he is beholden to no one

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »