I know that this is scariest
American election I have ever seen. When I am not distracted by something that
needs my attention, I think about the election all the time. As nearly everyone
has said, this is an extraordinarily nasty campaign that tarnishes everyone in
America, except the tiny number who love and provoke the nastiness.
I know that some of these
provocateurs live among Democrats, work in or for various Democratic campaigns,
not just Hillary Clinton’s. But a video of two such men talking about fomenting
chaos, which never happened, is the worst evidence anyone has found about
Democrats’ role in making this such a nasty campaign.
I know that the nastiness has
mostly come from the Republican side. I don’t blame all of it on Donald Trump.
He is a nasty man in all respects, who can’t help acting like a jerk when he
confronts the daily setbacks of modern life, much less the criticism directed
at Presidential candidates. Trump’s uncontrolled instinct to denigrate
and demean anyone who challenges him meant that this campaign was already
in the gutter during primary season. With only one opponent left and the whole
world watching, Trump has outdone himself in spreading the stink of fear and
the contagion of insult.
But I know Trump was not
alone. More professional, more knowledgeable, and equally unscrupulous men have
latched onto Trump to achieve the biggest audiences of their lives. Trump’s
choice to put his campaign and himself in the hands of Roger Stone and Stephen Bannon
is a testament to his judgment and his preferences.
Roger Stone has been a
campaign dirty trickster for decades. In the service of Trump, he has
repeatedly appeared on a white
nationalist radio show. His idea of campaign
strategy is to claim that Khizr Khan is a terrorist from the Muslim
Brotherhood.
Bannon is Trump’s
campaign CEO. At Breitbart News, Bannon has tried to destroy our system with
misinformation. He told Ronald Radosh of The Daily Beast, “I’m
a Leninist. Lenin wanted to destroy the state, and that’s my goal, too. I
want to bring everything crashing down and destroy all of today’s
establishment.” That’s a Republican campaign
leader?
I know that Hillary Clinton
is not the “most corrupt candidate ever to run for President”, a punch-line
used by Trump,
by conservative
media, and by many other
Republicans. She certainly is not close to the most ethical candidate. But Republicans
have put in decades
of work to smear her reputation, and have largely been successful. But they
have not succeeded in actually proving their case. Benghazi is a perfect
example: Republicans on the campaign trail continue to scream about “criminal
behavior” in connection with Benghazi, but the exhaustive and expensive
800-page report by the Republicans of the House Benghazi Committee released in
June could find no
wrong-doing on her part.
I know that if Hillary
Clinton is elected President, she will face a Republican Party determined to
prevent her from governing. It’s not just Trump and his most excitable
supporters who would make it difficult to govern. They are only the extreme tip
of the much bigger Republican Party monolith that refused to work with
President Obama and appears to be poised to do the same for another 4 years. John
McCain recently said, “I promise you that we will be united against any
Supreme Court nominee that Hillary Clinton, if she were president, would put
up.” I don’t know why: either they are not willing to absorb that they only
represent a minority of Americans or they believe that as a minority all they
can do is block everything.
I know that Trump isn’t as
smart as he thinks. No matter how you interpret his business history, he has
made some colossal financial blunders to go along with his outsized successes.
But in politics at the highest level, success requires calm in constant crisis,
broad knowledge, ability to adapt to unpredictability in front of the national
media. Trump can’t do any of that. His speeches, whether at his rallies or on
Twitter or in formal debates, do not show any more understanding of political
complexities than what he said 10 years ago. He couldn’t stay on one topic for
more than a few moments in the debates, because he quickly exhausted everything
he knew.
I know that one loudmouth who
disdains every aspect of military reality, yet believes himself a military
genius, would not know how to lead a real opposition movement. Trump is the
opposite of a charismatic leader, an egotist who pushes people near him away in
the most brutal manner.
I know that America will
survive this campaign. We have all heard the dire predictions of chaos after
November 8, but I don’t believe in them. Democracies have fallen when clever
demagogues appeared, but not in any of the advanced, long-standing democracies
of the world. In almost every case, deep economic problems lay behind the
weakness of the democratic government. The US has experienced more troubled
times in our past, notably during the 1930s, and today’s situation is nothing
like that. Public life has been getting uncomfortable over many years, and this
may not be worst it gets. But we will survive.
I don’t know whether we will
be a better America after Election Day. The discussions of sexual assault, of
the value of immigration, and of the strength of white racism that this
campaign has opened up will be difficult. The most we can hope for is that the
younger generations learn from our failures.
Steve Hochstadt
Jacksonville IL
Published in the Jacksonville
Journal-Courier, October 25, 2016
No comments:
Post a Comment