... as the veils of emotional outbursts begin to settle and the waves of rage recede, we need to take a clear and objective look at what got us to where we are, today, what were the drivers and who - collectively, were those responsible. The Media is the first element that springs to mind. For the last 18 months, the main talking channels - Fox News, MSNBC and CNN have inundated our homes with a barrage of dis-information - some would call it opinions, others, just plain trash. Either way it was almost impossible to step away from this. At it's worst, the output was slanted - for the particular party supported, against everything and everyone else. Mattered not that the information was spun and positioned, it poured forward, unceasingly. Stations promoted or ignored candidates based solely on ratings - the bigger the perceived draw, the more often that candidate appeared. That said, Donald Trump rated # 1 and basked in the glory of continual media coverage.
For four (4) years the GOP hammered away at Clinton in a vain attempt to charge her with some wrong doing. Benghazi, having failed to bury President Obama in 2011, was resurrected and launched with all fury at Hillary. E.mails was a sequential outgrowth of the failed Benghazi campaign. Albeit that any reasonable person or group could see no cause for action in the e.mail debacle, the GOP persisted with their smear tactics. Sadly, with the aid of the media, the barrage of negativism prevailed and soon enough, America was convinced that Hillary Clinton could not be trusted, was a criminal and liar. All humans lie - even the Pope; but compared to others, currently running for the office or in previous Administrations, her misdeeds were innocuous. The media enabled the negative GOP propaganda campaign. They provided the pulpit - pose leading questions to carefully selected guests, then allow that person to harangue for minutes on the alleged but clearly non existent misdeeds of Hillary Clinton and/or the Democratic administration.
Sadly, news is no longer what it used to be - clear, concise, objective and as much as was possible, accurate. Rubert Murdock created Fox News. - the greatest immigration disaster ever inflicted by the INA. Walter Cronkite and Dan Rather were replaced with Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly. Point is, too many Americans are simply not up to speed. In the past these people could rely on News reporting to lay out NEWS - not spin, propaganda and twisted versions of the truth. No one told them that the game had changed; Cronkite and Rather are gone and Hannity and O'Reilly are NOT their replacements. Americans absorb the misinformation and create a false mindset.
Sadly, news is no longer what it used to be - clear, concise, objective and as much as was possible, accurate. Rubert Murdock created Fox News. - the greatest immigration disaster ever inflicted by the INA. Walter Cronkite and Dan Rather were replaced with Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly. Point is, too many Americans are simply not up to speed. In the past these people could rely on News reporting to lay out NEWS - not spin, propaganda and twisted versions of the truth. No one told them that the game had changed; Cronkite and Rather are gone and Hannity and O'Reilly are NOT their replacements. Americans absorb the misinformation and create a false mindset.
Where did the Democrats and Hillary Clinton go Wrong:
It is a fairly well established fact that the Democrats simply do not have the structural and organizational skills to launch an aggressive political campaign. This has been proven time and time again over the past 60 years. In this election, three failings are apparent.
Firstly, Hillary allowed the GOP and subsequently all 18 GOP primary candidates to hammer her on the Benghazi and email issues, without offering any reasonable counter argument in her own defense. She remained silent and on the few times she spoke out, the responses was tepid, at best, defensive and froth with "I don't knows" and "maybes" Americans crave strong and dynamic leaders and her responses to these charges were totally lacking in both categories. Over time, the relentless negative out pouring from the GOP slowly took hold of American voters - the number of people who thought Hillary Clinton was untrustworthy and a liar, grew steadily, even though when asked, not one could provide a substantive reason why - other than the Trumped up charges around Benghazi and e.mails. Clinton departed the State Dept in early 2013 with a 70% approval rating nationwide and a "shoo in" for 2016. Clearly this did not resonate well with the GOP and the smear campaign was launched. From that point forward, her approval rating declined, steadily.
Secondly, maintaining a moral high ground position has its consequences - akin to taking a knife into a gunfight. Donald Trump was in the mud, slinging and swinging. He started his campaign in that mode, back in mid 2015 and never gave an inch; no matter what, he stood firm. Hillary elected to stay clean - bad decision. Trump would call her out repeatedly, wrapping negative expletives around her name; she continued to refer to him as "my opponent". Her standing mantra - " when he goes LOW, we go HIGH" was played out to the hilt, So high, in fact, that voters lost sight of what exactly they were supporting. The only really aggressive posture Clinton ever took against Trump was when she called 50% of his supporters "a basket of deplorables"; an accurate statement, however, two days later, under pressure she walked it back - another Trump win! In the movie American President, Michael J Fox chastised Michael Douglas ( the president) for his silence. Fox said - "... people need to hear from their leaders on issues that matter; and if their leaders are not speaking to them, they will listen to anyone..." Words so true but I suspect Hillary did not see this movie.
Thirdly, the debacle that was the Sanders hand off, I think singlehandedly lost the election for Ms Clinton. The inability of the DNC, Clinton and Sanders to coalesce around a strategy that was best for the party was astonishing, to say the least. Sanders, having done an excellent job of corralling young people around his message, suddenly felt he could "win this thing" and forged ahead. Unification at the convention was all together too late. Too many of his supporters felt betrayed and try as he might, Sanders could not loop them back in under Clinton.
Summing up, Hillary Clinton had a much better, more proactive convention than did Donald Trump. She won all three debates, hands down. She had more specifics on strategy and key programs than did he. How could she lose? Her inability to connect with voters, across the board. Trump was able to throw off the criticism - sexual assault , disrespect for women and all other groups, and stand strong for the people that supported him They lapped it up!
It is a fairly well established fact that the Democrats simply do not have the structural and organizational skills to launch an aggressive political campaign. This has been proven time and time again over the past 60 years. In this election, three failings are apparent.
Firstly, Hillary allowed the GOP and subsequently all 18 GOP primary candidates to hammer her on the Benghazi and email issues, without offering any reasonable counter argument in her own defense. She remained silent and on the few times she spoke out, the responses was tepid, at best, defensive and froth with "I don't knows" and "maybes" Americans crave strong and dynamic leaders and her responses to these charges were totally lacking in both categories. Over time, the relentless negative out pouring from the GOP slowly took hold of American voters - the number of people who thought Hillary Clinton was untrustworthy and a liar, grew steadily, even though when asked, not one could provide a substantive reason why - other than the Trumped up charges around Benghazi and e.mails. Clinton departed the State Dept in early 2013 with a 70% approval rating nationwide and a "shoo in" for 2016. Clearly this did not resonate well with the GOP and the smear campaign was launched. From that point forward, her approval rating declined, steadily.
Secondly, maintaining a moral high ground position has its consequences - akin to taking a knife into a gunfight. Donald Trump was in the mud, slinging and swinging. He started his campaign in that mode, back in mid 2015 and never gave an inch; no matter what, he stood firm. Hillary elected to stay clean - bad decision. Trump would call her out repeatedly, wrapping negative expletives around her name; she continued to refer to him as "my opponent". Her standing mantra - " when he goes LOW, we go HIGH" was played out to the hilt, So high, in fact, that voters lost sight of what exactly they were supporting. The only really aggressive posture Clinton ever took against Trump was when she called 50% of his supporters "a basket of deplorables"; an accurate statement, however, two days later, under pressure she walked it back - another Trump win! In the movie American President, Michael J Fox chastised Michael Douglas ( the president) for his silence. Fox said - "... people need to hear from their leaders on issues that matter; and if their leaders are not speaking to them, they will listen to anyone..." Words so true but I suspect Hillary did not see this movie.
Thirdly, the debacle that was the Sanders hand off, I think singlehandedly lost the election for Ms Clinton. The inability of the DNC, Clinton and Sanders to coalesce around a strategy that was best for the party was astonishing, to say the least. Sanders, having done an excellent job of corralling young people around his message, suddenly felt he could "win this thing" and forged ahead. Unification at the convention was all together too late. Too many of his supporters felt betrayed and try as he might, Sanders could not loop them back in under Clinton.
Summing up, Hillary Clinton had a much better, more proactive convention than did Donald Trump. She won all three debates, hands down. She had more specifics on strategy and key programs than did he. How could she lose? Her inability to connect with voters, across the board. Trump was able to throw off the criticism - sexual assault , disrespect for women and all other groups, and stand strong for the people that supported him They lapped it up!
Donald Trump had been plotting to run for President as far back as 2009. He recognized the mood of the country - one he helped to create with his birther rampage and seventeen (17) months ago, launched his campaign. Almost immediately, there was a groundswell of negative comments, splashed across social media, labeling him an idiot, a buffoon - and those were the gentle ones. I cautioned then that the characterization was ill advised and albeit that he was a complete unknown, an idiot he was not. Well, the Donald rolled out his game book and went into action. From the very first poll, taken against the 17 other Presidential hopefuls, Trump grabbed the lead and maintained it to the end. He demolished his primary opponents, using whatever tricks and tools he deemed to be effective. In addition, he did four (4) things consistently and well - a) developed a simple theme and saturated his supporters and anyone listening through every available media outlet; b) carefully found a way to label and/or insult as many public figures and ethnic groups, as possible, thereby keeping his name in the spotlight; c) spoke only in broad, general terms about his plans and last but not least - HE NEVER BACKED DOWN FROM OR APOLOGIZED FOR ANYTHING. This contributed significantly to his final success. His supporters saw him as a Tower of Strength.
His ability to influence people, whether individually or as a group is a skill he had crafted over the last 30 years. He is so confident of this ability, he has over time lost all respect for just about everyone - considering himself to be supremely superior. He'll insult you from stem to stern then pay you a compliment and expect that all will be forgiven. This is important to understand because this is what drives him forward. An insult is nothing more than a means to an end. Means accomplished? insult is forgotten - never retracted; and he moves on. No individual or group was able to sway this strategy. He continued to connect with, first his base then opened up to include the Alt right - Neo-Nazi's, white supremacy groups and all others who felt they had been set upon by a liberal administration. And the media, inadvertently or otherwise, supported his quest, with continual coverage. Anyone care to guess how many times the name Donald Trump was uttered on a daily basis over the past 17 months? I have no idea, but it's a huge number.
Then there's the dark side. Compulsively, he simply cannot/will not accept criticism of himself at anytime; and he must always WIN. These two factors drive his existence and his behavior. When they are not in his favor, he goes into a rage. We see this acted out over and over in movies and written about in books - the calm, cool, collective, in control individual who loses his grip and becomes a bundle of incoherence, when and if he's put off his "game". The fact that this behavior is compulsive is where the danger lies because he simply is not be able to reign it in, especially if he feels threatened. Starting out, Mr Trump will have the House and the Senate behind him; soon after, the Supreme Court will follow. Folks, don't look now, but that's a 4 card (as opposed to a 5 card) flush - with Trump included. If his influential skills continue to be as sharp as they have been in the past, there's no telling what direction he will take. He could be benevolent, caring and understanding (hardly likely) or he could release a set of draconian policies on the country that would set us back 50 years or more.
Such, therefore, is the independent variable known as Donald Trump. We sit on the edges of our collective seats and wait. Immediately following the announcement of his victory, stock market futures dropped 900 points, driven mainly by international trading markets. However, by 9:30 AM things had recovered and investors went on a robust buying spree, adding over 500 points over the next 3 days, closing at record highs - the best Wall street week in months. Rumored that Carl Icahn dumped $1 billion dollars into the market before the Opening Bell. However, this euphoria was, for the most part, based on pure speculation - Trump supports infra structure development, up went the Industrials; Trump will reverse Obama Care, up went Healthcare and Insurance stocks. This will most likely continue for the remainder of the year. Be ready for uncertainties in 2017, as reality begins to set in.
His ability to influence people, whether individually or as a group is a skill he had crafted over the last 30 years. He is so confident of this ability, he has over time lost all respect for just about everyone - considering himself to be supremely superior. He'll insult you from stem to stern then pay you a compliment and expect that all will be forgiven. This is important to understand because this is what drives him forward. An insult is nothing more than a means to an end. Means accomplished? insult is forgotten - never retracted; and he moves on. No individual or group was able to sway this strategy. He continued to connect with, first his base then opened up to include the Alt right - Neo-Nazi's, white supremacy groups and all others who felt they had been set upon by a liberal administration. And the media, inadvertently or otherwise, supported his quest, with continual coverage. Anyone care to guess how many times the name Donald Trump was uttered on a daily basis over the past 17 months? I have no idea, but it's a huge number.
Then there's the dark side. Compulsively, he simply cannot/will not accept criticism of himself at anytime; and he must always WIN. These two factors drive his existence and his behavior. When they are not in his favor, he goes into a rage. We see this acted out over and over in movies and written about in books - the calm, cool, collective, in control individual who loses his grip and becomes a bundle of incoherence, when and if he's put off his "game". The fact that this behavior is compulsive is where the danger lies because he simply is not be able to reign it in, especially if he feels threatened. Starting out, Mr Trump will have the House and the Senate behind him; soon after, the Supreme Court will follow. Folks, don't look now, but that's a 4 card (as opposed to a 5 card) flush - with Trump included. If his influential skills continue to be as sharp as they have been in the past, there's no telling what direction he will take. He could be benevolent, caring and understanding (hardly likely) or he could release a set of draconian policies on the country that would set us back 50 years or more.
Such, therefore, is the independent variable known as Donald Trump. We sit on the edges of our collective seats and wait. Immediately following the announcement of his victory, stock market futures dropped 900 points, driven mainly by international trading markets. However, by 9:30 AM things had recovered and investors went on a robust buying spree, adding over 500 points over the next 3 days, closing at record highs - the best Wall street week in months. Rumored that Carl Icahn dumped $1 billion dollars into the market before the Opening Bell. However, this euphoria was, for the most part, based on pure speculation - Trump supports infra structure development, up went the Industrials; Trump will reverse Obama Care, up went Healthcare and Insurance stocks. This will most likely continue for the remainder of the year. Be ready for uncertainties in 2017, as reality begins to set in.
Where do we go from here:
On the social front, Trump is unpredictable and that makes him dangerous; he's egotistical and vindictive and that makes it even worse. He has opened up the fringe elements of our society and given them a pass to wonder out onto Main Street. If even one ethnic or racial minority is murdered because of this unveiling, that will be one too many. if Trump makes no overt attempt to rein in the divisiveness that currently grips the nation, we could all be in for a very rough and turbulent ride. We simply have no idea at this time. With respect to the business and economic side, it all depends on how he interacts with Congress - or said differently, how Congress interacts with him. Paul Ryan did an about face in the last week of the election; Ted Cruz, a few weeks prior. Both were staunch detractors of the Trump platform and both flipped, expediently. Mitch McConnell did essentially the same thing. Politicians are known to sell their souls, as the need dictates.
What we need over the next 4 years is coalescence, a collaborative approach between the two parties and the American people, to heal the wounds of war - and make no mistake, it was war. If this occurs we can and will make great strides towards the healing process. However, current events, post election, indicates that Mr Trump is planning to stack his cabinet with some of those deplorabes Hillary mentioned earlier. With Steve Bannon on the table to be Chief Strategy Adviser to DJT, one can only wonder what Alt Right advise he's planning to put forth. We can be optimistic that reasonable and level heads will prevail and that's what we need right now, OPTIMISM.
On the social front, Trump is unpredictable and that makes him dangerous; he's egotistical and vindictive and that makes it even worse. He has opened up the fringe elements of our society and given them a pass to wonder out onto Main Street. If even one ethnic or racial minority is murdered because of this unveiling, that will be one too many. if Trump makes no overt attempt to rein in the divisiveness that currently grips the nation, we could all be in for a very rough and turbulent ride. We simply have no idea at this time. With respect to the business and economic side, it all depends on how he interacts with Congress - or said differently, how Congress interacts with him. Paul Ryan did an about face in the last week of the election; Ted Cruz, a few weeks prior. Both were staunch detractors of the Trump platform and both flipped, expediently. Mitch McConnell did essentially the same thing. Politicians are known to sell their souls, as the need dictates.
What we need over the next 4 years is coalescence, a collaborative approach between the two parties and the American people, to heal the wounds of war - and make no mistake, it was war. If this occurs we can and will make great strides towards the healing process. However, current events, post election, indicates that Mr Trump is planning to stack his cabinet with some of those deplorabes Hillary mentioned earlier. With Steve Bannon on the table to be Chief Strategy Adviser to DJT, one can only wonder what Alt Right advise he's planning to put forth. We can be optimistic that reasonable and level heads will prevail and that's what we need right now, OPTIMISM.
And finally, a word about the Electoral College, a process I support but one that's flawed. Some history - over the past 140 years there has been four (4) elections where Democrats have won the popular vote but failed to gain the required electoral votes. 1876 - Sam Tilden; 1888 Grover Cleveland; 2000 Al Gore; 2016 Hillary Clinton. In 1968 it was initially thought that Hubert Humphrey had won the popular vote but lost to Richard Nixon. It was ultimately determined that Nixon won the pop vote by a margin of .7%; however, his commanding victory gap on the electoral votes indicated then even if Humphrey had won the pop vote, he would still have lost the election. That makes five (5).
The electoral college votes are supposed to mirror image the number of voters/state. Clearly this is not the case. Democrats populate the coastlines of the country - east and west in vast numbers; the center of the country, less so populated and Republican. However, when you match total electoral votes of the blue states with their respective populations and compare the results with a similar exercise for the red states, the results are clear - more people less electorals for the blue; less people, more electorals for the red. This is essentially gerrymandering on a national level. Republicans will never complain and the Democrats? well, they never complain about anything.
There's so much I did not address - Polling and the pollsters and the absolutely horrible job they did; international reactions to Trump and how he will fare in that arena, and more. But it's time to call a halt, at least for now. Thanks for reading
The electoral college votes are supposed to mirror image the number of voters/state. Clearly this is not the case. Democrats populate the coastlines of the country - east and west in vast numbers; the center of the country, less so populated and Republican. However, when you match total electoral votes of the blue states with their respective populations and compare the results with a similar exercise for the red states, the results are clear - more people less electorals for the blue; less people, more electorals for the red. This is essentially gerrymandering on a national level. Republicans will never complain and the Democrats? well, they never complain about anything.
There's so much I did not address - Polling and the pollsters and the absolutely horrible job they did; international reactions to Trump and how he will fare in that arena, and more. But it's time to call a halt, at least for now. Thanks for reading
RSS Feed