The circus of
the Republican National Convention is now over; not a picture perfect example
for the man that purports to know how to manage things and that says
confidently “I’m, like, a really smart
person.”
It is perplexing
that America is in pretty good shape relative to the rest of the world; yet there
is so much angst. Many explanations are out there: globalization, income
inequality, lack of mobility, family breakdown, terrorism, moral relativism;
the list goes on. This blog is not meant to get into this very important “why.”
Rather it is to look to the future with a large degree of fear and uncertainty.
I have
written in an earlier blog about “Dangerous Times.” All over the world, inexperienced
populists with illiberal inclinations have been elected as “saviors” against
some villainous “other.” But in the United States, we seem have taken things
one step further. I am distressed for our future.
So using more
of Mr. Trump’s words: “Let me dumb this
down for you so much that it no longer makes sense.” Two big perils have been occupying my mind.
First, there is possibility that
for the first time since 1825, no candidate will receive the now needed 270
electoral votes to become president. Both Hillary and Donald are
not well liked. Pew’s latest poll has only 43% of Democrats “very or fairly happy”
with their candidate; the Republican number is lower at 40%. The majority of Republicans,
50%, are voting for Trump “as a vote against”
Clinton; the Democratic number “as a vote
against” Trump is 55%. The last time these numbers were in this range was
in 1992; think Ross Perot getting 19% of the popular vote.
The Libertarian Party is
fielding credible candidates in Gary Johnson and Bill Weld. With the Green
Party, these alternates are already polling as high as 15%. If Johnson manages
to get into the televised debates, this number may go up further. Remember that
Ralph Nader most likely lost the election for Gore in 2000 with just 3% of the
popular vote.
If we have no winner in the
electoral college; the House votes among the top three candidates; each state
getting one vote. But since many sparsely populated states in the West are
conservative and Republican, it is likely that a close election would go to
Trump. This might happen even if Hillary Clinton got the highest popular vote
by some nontrivial margin. How would this play out with a disgruntled
Democratic plurality? What would our streets look like on Inauguration Day 2017?
We might look back to the turmoil of Bush-Gore “hanging chads” with nostalgia.
Second, Trump may win and what
kind of government transition might we see. In “the Donald” we have a
toxic mix of ego and amateur. Trump has never held a public office, has never
been a serious student of public governance, has shown an astounding ignorance of
public policy detail, jokes about his lack of knowledge of foreign affairs and
has probably insulted more heads of state than Boris Johnson. Many experienced
public figures have already rebuffed his advances; just look at how far down
the roster he had to go to field a vice-presidential running mate. Many of the
brightest will not participate in his administration.
Brexit has given us a taste of
unintended consequences; and its current honeymoon period is a calm before the
storm. The “Economist” has published a slightly tongue in cheek fictional
account of Trump’s “First Hundred Days."
Here is a link to this piece: http://www.economist.com/node/21701933
I urge you to take the time and read it.
As with the
United Kingdom, we have enough problems without self-inflicted wounds. I hope
America can come to its senses and pick the less damaging, less risky candidate,
Hillary Clinton. But I am saddened that this is the dearth of our choice. For me,
Hillary is at worst lacking authenticity and a deeply ingrained moral compass; and
at best, fails by not being able to exhibit them to the voters.
Fear and uncertainty lie ahead of us, which in and of itself will make things worse.
