Donald Trump is President, and the latest poll shows that 36% of Americans are happy about that. I don’t know about the rest of the 64%, but I’m really not pleased that the election was taken from Hillary Clinton, in three separate ways.
Two of the three ways that Trump unfairly won the election were due to his own actions. The third was when the head of the FBI, James Comey, announced – just a few days before the election – that he had found new evidence about Clinton’s email case, and that it might be something negative. Clinton’s numbers, which had been going up as the election got closer, did an about-face and fell. Instead of being ahead of Trump by about 4%, she dropped to being ahead by only about 1 or 2% and was still losing altitude.
Right before the election,
the FBI announced that in fact, they had found nothing incriminating in the
latest evidence about Ms. Clinton. But
it was too late; Clinton’s upward momentum had reversed because of the earlier
FBI report, and her popularity was heading south going into Election Day. Clinton beat Trump anyway, by 2.9 million
votes. But as we all know, the President
is elected by the Electoral College, and there Donald Trump’s great campaigning
strategies paid off; Trump beat Clinton, winning the Presidency 304 electoral
votes to 277.
The FBI stole Ms. Clinton’s
Presidency from her; at the very least, a reasonable person understands that
their interference helped cause her late polls decline. And the thing is – it has become clear that
the FBI went against its own rules by interfering the way they did. The FBI specifically does not want sensitive
information coming out during a presidential election, in order to avoid
influencing people’s voting decisions. But
Comey did it anyway. So Ms. Clinton got
robbed by the FBI, made worse by the fact that the FBI was acting contrary to
its own directives!
But the FBI got some help
in taking the election from Ms. Clinton by a lot of very shady things that Donald
Trump and his supporters did. Obviously,
the recent news about Trump’s son eagerly trying to score dirt on Clinton that
was coming from the Russian government is on people’s minds now. There are different opinions about how much –
if at all – the Trump campaign cooperated with the Russians.
But even if Donald Trump
and his team had nothing at all to do with the Russian hacking (which seems improbable
now), the fact is that he benefited from it.
The Russian hacking and releasing of information hurt Clinton’s numbers
and helped Trump’s; no doubt. How
much? This is impossible to determine. But anyone who followed the election felt the
impact of some of the bigger email leaks – they were tough blows for Ms.
Clinton.
So a reasonable person
would be pretty sure that the Russian help, over a period of weeks, was responsible
for dropping Clinton’s numbers. Probably
by something like 2-5 percentage points; maybe more. Wouldn’t you think? Even the low side of that would almost
certainly have won her the needed Electoral College votes, considering one
analysis that concluded a mere 107,000 more votes in three key states would
have done the trick. (Updated note: In May, 2018, PBS reported on James Clapper's claim that the Russians were undoubtedly responsible for Trump winning the White House. As former Director of National Intelligence, Clapper was privy to secret information on the topic that has not been publicly disclosed. (https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/russia-turned-election-for-trump-clapper-believes)
But finally, there is this
huge, diverse category of nasty things – blatant lies and insults, mostly –
that Trump and his people did throughout the entire campaign. They were responsible for a lot of popularity
that Trump had, and they hurt Ms. Clinton’s chances.
Donald Trump would say the
things people wanted to hear. “Hey – that really makes sense! I like what Trump’s saying,” – was a common
reaction from many voters during 2016.
The problem is – and it is an enormous problem – much of what Trump was saying was untrue. Trump would tell small lies, he’d tell big
lies; he might think the lies were actually true, or he might intentionally say
things he knew to be untrue. Actually, evidence
suggests that Trump doesn’t really even care if something is true or not. If it sounds good, if it’s what people want
to hear, then it’s true enough for him – regardless of the facts.
But whatever the case,
Trump would tell lies ALL THE TIME.
Every day. At press conferences, at
meetings, being interviewed for the news, in his many tweets – it doesn’t
matter. Lies all day, all night, all
year, to push people into his camp and keep them there.
Again, some of Trump’s
lies are unintentional. Not to be mean,
but the fact is that Donald Trump is fairly ignorant about a great many things:
history, political science, government, current affairs, and economics being
among them. Those just happen to be crucial
for a President to know, and Trump definitely does not. Rumor has it that he has read only one book
after finishing college, and that was his autobiography. True or not, we have a very clear idea that
Trump is not an intellectually curious guy, and that he has a great many gaps
in his knowledge.
Example: He stated that
his sister “could make laws” because she was a judge. Our government doesn’t work that way. Another example was when he was asked his
opinion about Brexit a few weeks before the UK’s vote on the matter. Trump didn’t know what Brexit, the most important
European issue of the year, even was; so the reporter had to explain it to him.
So when Trump says things
like bad trade deals are almost solely responsible for the loss of good
American jobs, we’re not sure whether he actually believes that out of
ignorance, or is just lying because that’s what most Americans want to
hear. You see, economists know that only
about 15% of American jobs lost were due to trade agreements; most of the rest were
due to improvements in technology and robotics.
What about his claim that we need to start vetting Muslims coming into
the US? Does he not know that we’ve been
doing that since the 1980s? Or is he
just playing to his base’s anti-Muslim beliefs?
Then there are the
blatant, nasty lies and insults that ingratiated him even more to his base:
those folks being mostly white, mostly under-educated, mostly middle-to-low
income, conservative, anti-big government, Fox News viewers, often
Fundamentalist Christian, often anti-immigrant, often rural. The key demographic for my point is that they
tended to be poorly educated. They held
opinions about economics issues without understanding economics, and about
historical, and political, and current affairs issues the same way. Knowing little or nothing about big issues,
they were easy victims for Trump’ lies, and Fox News’ modus operandi of propaganda masquerading as news. They cast their votes based on issues that
they had no understanding of, trusting Trump and Fox for the truth.
But back to Trump’s blatant, nasty lies. They started with the whole “birther” movement, a denial of Barack Obama’s US citizenship that Trump pushed starting in 2011. This movement, based on a racist lie that Obama proved wrong by releasing the long-form of his birth certificate in that same year, endeared Trump to the millions of people (described above) who hated Obama and desperately wanted an “anti-Obama” to replace him. Trump’s popularity with this conservative, under-educated “base” traces back to this nasty lie about Obama – Trump’s original sin, as it were.
Trump’s blatant lies and
insults stretched on from there. The “thousands
of muslims” in New Jersey who cheered the 9/11 attacks. How he knows more about the war in Iraq “than
all the generals.” That “nobody has more
respect for women” than he does, even as he’s grabbing their pussies. “If I run for President, of course I’ll
release my tax returns.” Megyn Kelly “bleeding
from her wherever.” Ted Cruz’s ugly wife.
Mocking the disabled reporter. On and on.
Feeding his base as the outsider, the tough guy, the “only one who can
get it done!”
Trump’s own lies and
attacks were aided by his supporters who created the REAL fake news operations,
feeding outlandish lies to social media and elsewhere, disguised as real
news. Such as LifeZette.com, run by Trump friend Floyd Brown, and Liftable Media, run by a Kellyanne
Conway associate. They put out crap like
the PizzaGate lies, and the laughable claim that the Pope had endorsed
Trump. I remember that one in
particular, as the Pope had previously made it clear how much he disliked
Trump. And I remember my friends on
Facebook commenting that they believed the story, and how it only made them
want to vote for him more. Ignorant,
ignorant Americans, spoon-fed ridiculous lies by Trump’s machine – and loving
it! Pathetic.
What do you think all of
that was worth to Trump? All of the
lies, the insults, the attacks – on his part, on his supporters’ part, month
after month, all divorced from the truth and aimed at his base’s desires,
prejudices, and above all - gullibility.
Would he have done even half as well without all this which, let’s be
honest – simply cannot be compared to the occasional falsehoods and spin
efforts of all of the other candidates, which were in a totally different
universe from what Trump was doing? I
doubt he would’ve gotten more than 20% of the vote if his campaign had been on
an equivalent level of truthfulness as other candidates.
In a world that was perfectly
fair (and which we all understand is not the case), Trump’s massive lying, the
Russians’ interference, and the FBI’s violation of their own rules would have
negated the results of the election.
Hillary Clinton would belatedly be awarded the presidency, while Trump
and his team would be unceremoniously kicked out of office in disgrace. We know this is something that greatly
worries the President. During all the
months of this Russia mess and increased evidence they interfered with our
election process, Trump never once asked his aides how to counter the Russians. Instead, he has ceaselessly fretted about how
it might delegitimize his November win.
In any case, there is no
way to quantify how many votes Clinton lost to these three modes of unfair
practices, thus no absolute proof that she deserved to win the electoral
college voting. Besides, there is no
absolute proof of Trump’s illegal collusion with the Russians (yet). And while it is shocking beyond belief, the
fact that so many Americans are ignorant and gullible enough to fall for Trump’s
many false narratives isn’t a crime.
But what if it turns out that the Donald Trump and his minions are proven to have colluded with the Russians in the election? Those are extremely serious crimes and could (should) result in Trump’s impeachment, along with possible prison time. Additionally, that would strengthen the case that Clinton was indeed the one who should have been elected – not Trump. The fair thing to do, the thing that represents the will of the majority, would be to let her assume the presidency to which she is clearly entitled, not Pence or any of the rest of Trump’s administration. I’m afraid that is extremely unlikely, however, even if Trump is thrown out for cheating in the election.
I’m not a constitutional
expert, but I don’t think there is any precedent or mechanism for doing such a
thing. Perhaps a bigger problem is the
massive amount of confusion and disarray that switching administrations,
mid-administration, would cause. Can you
imagine telling Hillary Clinton – “OK, you guys are in. Get your team of thousands of people in
place, and quickly,” months after everyone had moved on in their lives and
their careers? Meanwhile, just how much
mischief and mayhem could the current administration create, in retribution,
before they’re all gone? So I don’t think we’d see this, even if it
were the appropriate action given an illegally stolen election.
Another solution for Trump
being found criminally guilty of election tampering would be calling a new
election. This November, or half-way
through his term, or whatever. That
would give Americans the choice between going forward with Pence as President,
assuming he survives any criminal charges, or going with Clinton and her choice
for VP. That seems pretty reasonable,
although I’ve no idea if there is much precedent for doing this sort of thing,
and I imagine it would also be pretty unlikely.
By far the most likely
result is that the Trump administration remains in control, even if Trump
himself gets removed. And that
represents a huge victory for the Republicans and for people like Steve Bannon,
whose stated objective is to “deconstruct” America’s government and
society. One way or another, the
Republicans will have succeeded in stealing the choice of Supreme Court Justice
replacement. As you recall, Antonin Scalia
died in February, 2016, with more than 11 months remaining in Barack Obama’s
presidency. According to the
Constitution, Obama had the right and obligation to name Scalia’s replacement,
subject to the Senate’s approval.
He did; Obama named
Merrick Garland in March, with 10 months remaining in his presidency. But the Republican-controlled Senate refused,
time and again, to give Garland a confirmation hearing. How they were able to thwart the President’s constitutional
right to appoint a Supreme Court Justice, I’ll never understand. But they did, and Garland never even got a
hearing. Then Trump was “elected”, and
the Republicans approved Trump’s nominee, Neil Gorsuch, with little
difficulty.
We’re already seeing the
result in the Court’s most recent decisions, where Gorsuch is turning out to be
the even more conservative than Scalia was.
So instead of a moderate liberal, which was Obama’s constitutional right,
we have a strong conservative, leaving the Court with a 5 to 4 conservative
edge that will color its decisions for years to come. Yet the Court could become even more
conservative. Politically centrist
Justice Kennedy, 80 years old, is expected to retire in the next year or two;
liberal Justice Ginsberg is 84, and also may retire soon.
That would give Trump and the Republicans the chance to name one or two more conservative Justices to the Court, which would change the laws of the land and the way society operates in significant ways for many years to come. This can’t be emphasized too much: Instead of the moderate liberals that Clinton and the majority of Americans want according to a fair election, we’ll have years or decades of laws determined by conservatives that were put in place because of a stolen election. This is huge; a huge win for the right, for Bannon; likely a big loss of personal liberties, and unfair rulings for the rest of us, the majority. For years to come, regardless of who’s in the White House down the road. But there’s more.
The Trump administration
has so far been unable to pass any significant legislation. What it HAS done is screw up the State
Department and a number of others by not filling thousands of positions – part of
their “drain the swamp” and “deconstruction” strategies. Another factor is the unqualified, at times
antagonistic Cabinet department leaders, e.g. Rick Perry, who alternately
wanted to get rid of, and forgot about, the Energy department he heads; or
space-child brain surgeon Dr. Ben Carson leading - HUD?, or EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) head
Scott Pruitt, who wants to eliminate environmental
protections. How easy will it be
reversing the damage done to these departments of our government?
Also accomplished is Trump’s
use of executive powers to rush the deregulation of big banks, carbon-based
energy businesses, pharmaceuticals, firearms, the Internet, and other
areas. Did I mention slashing
environmental protections? These are a
big reason the stock market has soared since Trump’s election; businesses
expect to greatly benefit from deregulations of all types. The trade-off, of course, is that consumers
and the Earth will tend to be the losers from this. How easy will it be to reverse these efforts
at deregulation, which the administration is rushing to implement as quickly as
possible? Say – before anybody gets
kicked out or thrown in jail.
Wall Street has eagerly
been awaiting the flip side of deregulation, which are the promised big tax cuts. Tied up with healthcare changes and the
Russian chaos, Congress so far hasn’t been able to pass those tax changes we’ve
all read about that will hugely benefit businesses and the wealthy, at a big
cost to the rest of us. Chances are –
Congress will get those through, regardless of what ends up happening to Trump et al with the collusion and obstruction
charges he faces. And then they’re the law; how soon could they
be reversed?
Opting out of the Paris
climate accord, pulling out of the TPP trade agreement, and Trump’s other
efforts to generally just piss off our traditional allies (Mexico, Canada, Britain,
France, and Germany), while ingratiating himself with our biggest adversary –
Russia? How long will it take to fix the
damage done, mend those fences, rebuild the trust?
What about all the new
immigrant restrictions, prosecutions, persecutions? Trying to get voters’ personal information,
as part of Trump’s asinine contention that millions voted illegally in
2016? States, courts, and numerous
organizations are fighting against these and other Trump administration actions
that smack of authoritarian government more than democracy. How long will it take to roll these back,
convince needed immigrants that they’re welcome in the US, rebuild our own
citizens’ trust in their government?
To all of the above
questions: Probably a long time. And it may be that a lot of permanent damage
(“deconstruction,” people like Steve Bannon hope) will have been done. Even if Trump were to be removed
tomorrow. Yet we know that in the best
of likely scenarios, it would probably take months to get Trump out of office. How much further damage can he and the
minions cause in that additional time?
So that, finally, may be
the answer to a question that has puzzled me for months: Trump is a lying,
incompetent President. He’s doing
significant damage to the country, things that are likely to backfire in a big
way at some point. So why, then, has Wall Street reacted so positively, sending stock
prices almost straight up? The stock
market, we know, incorporates all of the best information known by the smartest
people; it almost always knows more, understands the situation better, than any
single smartest person. And it likes
what it sees! I just don’t get it. Unless……
The actions taken and
changes made are enough to give business a big edge, for the foreseeable
future. For months, and more likely -
years ahead. In the case of the Supreme
Court and how it can shape business and society – perhaps even for
decades. Is that what Wall Street is
looking at – the really big picture?
That even if Trump is a huge disaster, he and his administration will have
changed the landscape sufficiently, and for a long enough time, that it’s a big
win for business. And maybe it’s the
same from where Steve Bannon sits; maybe enough damage will have been done to
mainstream government and society to make it all worthwhile. Damage that, he hopes, sends us permanently
down another path far enough that coming back will be really difficult.
In that case, then they actually pulled it off. They hijacked the election and our federal government, and Humpty Dumpty-like, putting it back together again may be possible only over many years.
1 comment:
A number of these discoveries are so radical that also scientists don't accept them.
Post a Comment