What really surprises me, and almost everyone that I meet, is that there is any doubt about who may be President-elect of the USA tomorrow. It seems almost incomprehensible that anyone would choose to vote for Donald Trump. He is a vain, racist, bullying, misogynistic, ignorant liar who has run a campaign that has been devoid of coherent policy and has eschewed any form of evidenced opinion and yet he will run Hilary Clinton a close second for president, and could even still win.
The real question to ask is how is that? How did we reach the point where, just as people were willing to present lies as truth in the Brexit poll and people suspended their disbelief to vote for those delivering the untruths, in the States people are so disenchanted with a conventionally competent, but unappealing, candidate that they will vote for a charlatan instead?
It's clearly not just a Clinton factor. I am not wowed by her for many good reasons but would have no choice who to vote for. It's also not entirely misogyny, although I am sure it is a factor. There is something much deeper, and that is protest.
It's easy to use to say. The consequence, as the UK is seeing, is deeply destructive. Putting those bereft of real ideas in charge is already proving to be no solution to anything. But even if that might lead to regret (and I think it will) that does not mean that the sentiment that drove the protest was unreal.
People will only tolerate being ignored for so long.
People cannot be told they must live off debt forever.
In a world where material aspiration is sold as if it is the only true religion then people will both eventually be taken in, and be aggrieved that they are denied the opprtunity to partake.
And when people also intrinsically realise that the values being promoted are hollow and that what is really of value to them, from community, to education, to housing, to well-being, is being sacrificed to the material accumulation of a tiny minority at expense to themselves then they will protest.
This was what drove the Sanders phenomenon. In the UK it was not done so well. In both cases the lies of the Right have so far prevailed. But I am not going to write that another good crisis has gone to waste, or any such triteness: that is to descend to the Right's sloganeering level, and that is not an adequate response in any way.
The only adequate response is coherent policy. I have reiterated my belief in the Green New Deal, which I co-authored. It remains a rare, internally consistent, policy rich, people focussed, sustainable and financially deliverable plan for the UK which is focussed on addressing and actually meeting real human needs as opposed to manufactured wants.
It cannot, surely though, be the only such plan? If it is that is reason alone to suggest why people have resorted to the banter of fools as if it is political narrative: too many have not been given another option. Too many politicians are too frightened to even think an alternative is possible.
But an alternative is what is needed. Trump is not the alternative that the world needs tomorrow. That is very clear. But equally, nor is Clinton. That is why her election, if it happens will be greeted with relief but not enthusiasm. She is at best a candidate who should be the last of her neoliberal breed.
We do need a new era of politics that only Bernie Sander's came close to in the States and which is way beyond the Labour offering (such as it is) in the UK right now. And we should realise that if we do not get that new politics then Brexit and Trump are the warning shots of a new, more brutal (in every way) world to come.
There will be no winner by tomorrow morning. There may just be a chance to plan better for next time, here, in the US, and elsewhere.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
How about this:
Clinton is a corrupt elitist warmonger,
She will extend and escalate the conflicts the US is involved in,
She will entrench the stranglehold Wall St and the the other ghouls of hyper capitalism have over ordinary people,
She will further erode the last shreds of democracy the US possesses and will screw us all in the process
So yes, sure, Trump is an unpredictable nightmare candidate, but really, it’s time to open your eyes about the kind of person and Presidency Clinton will provide
Please note what I said and stop writing incendiary nonsense
I agree with much of your description of Clinton, but I’m struggling to see how you could possibly have a less credible candidate than Trump, really. He makes Alan Partridge look like a credible and respectable leadership candidate by comparison.
He will literally say and do anything. There is not even a semblance of logic or coherence to any of his arguments and constantly contradicts himself. He is dangerous.
Quite.
His behaviour has been so obnoxious that it seems deliberate – part of some kind of show. He is a showman to his boots, happy to be cast as a villain.
He is goading the metropolitan elites to insult middle America and therefore to create division. He has had some success at doing that, but I am not sure it will be enough for him to win.
Having said that, as Richard suggests, he has tapped into real grievances that will still be there tomorrow.
Richard, I have to congratulate you on your ability to articulate new ideas. Thank God that this so necessary skill has not been entirely lost.
Obviously, in the world of ideas, we are well placed, where we are not well placed is in the realm of inspired leadership. Who should we be encouraging to stand up to this particular plate?
I wish I could answer that
I agree with nearly all of the above. I lived in the US in 79/80 during the crucial Carter/Regan election. I and pretty much all my American friends and colleagues thought it the pivotal election of our generation and were convinced that the election of that Snake Oil Salesman Regan would be a disaster economically. I have not seen so much anxiety in any election since; until this one. The rest is contested history. In my view Regan set the American economy in a disastrous direction and also politically used dirty tricks like the Southern Strategy to appeal to the right-wing uneducated tranche of society who yearn for simplistic solutions and a strong man.
The United States is a complex country and there are value related issues which are dog whistle calls to certain republicans.
1) Abortion. Coming from Ireland I know how passionately people feel about this. It is a major polarizing issue in the US, where competing rights of the mother and unborn child meet a clash of world views. Many Evangelical Christians in particular come down hard on the anti-abortion side and Trump has pressed all the right buttons here. (I believe Trump has no strong views and will do what it takes to get Republican votes).
2) Keeping control of the Supreme Court. There is a dream for example of overturning the Roe vs Wade case https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade amoungst many Christians. The big corporations also will want this as the Supreme Court has put big business before people.
3) The Gun Lobby. This is almost incomprehensible to people on this side of Atlantic, but the right to pick up an AK47 with a packet of cornflakes is a fundamental American Right which will be curtailed by the dastardly Clinton
4) People are singular uninformed. The advent of the WWW has enabled a silo mentality. I’m sure this has always been the case and believe people read newspapers to refuel their own prejudices. There is however so much total garbage on the internet and so much vitriol and lies about crooked Hillary that is easy to find. Climate Change is another prime example where there are many seemingly kosher web sites peddling doubt about its existence (funded by millions of petrochemical dollars). People believe what they want to believe. It has one advantage that the press is far more balanced. I’m not a great fan of the number one newspaper (The Wall Street Journal) but the number 2 newspaper The New York Times is a great newspaper as indeed is the Washington Post.
5) America had superb advantages after the war. The near 30 yeas from 1945-1973 were truly a golden era. Nostalgia played a part in Brexit (much of it misplaced), but if you were a white christian, the golden period really existed and the nostalgia is a very powerful force. The fact that it came about by the New Deal, FDR, Keynesian economics etc. seems to be lost on most people.
6) America is in a mess. Neoliberalism has had decimating consequences. Falling apart infrastructure, wealth inequality on a staggering scale. Tranches of the rust belt ignored – I could go on. It is a country that seems to be headed in totally the wrong direction. There are good reason for millions to be genuinely annoyed or even despairing.
7) American politics is polarized and gridlocked. The behaviour of the Republicans has been obstructionist to say the least and deliberately designed to ensure Washington can do as little as possible. Shrinking Government to the size of a bathtub I think is the phrase.
8) There is an attraction to a strongman by people of Authoritarian mindset. To me Trump is almost a cartoon character but the appeal of a dictator is strong. It was interesting that channel 4 news spent some time in Moscow last night and the Russians were overwhelmingly for Trump on a nonscientific street poll.
I agreed with Richard when he said Brexit will happen. I don’t however think Trump will win. I hope not largely because of his Climate Change policy. It is possible that Trump will mobilise large tranches of the sort of people from disadvantaged areas from the UK who voted for Brexit. I think however it will be counterbalanced by Latinos voting for Clinton in unprecedented numbers. If Clinton takes Florida game over for Trump.
Thanks
I think it likely Trump will win
But it will still leave questions to answer
The bottom line for me is who do you want to have their finger on the nuclear button, the rational Clinton or the irrational Trump?
I agree entirely with Smiths description of Hillary Clinton. She is calculated evil. She is the the bankers candidate and will push for war. She scares the life out of me.
I agree with Benz0 and Richard’s descriptions of trump. The man’s an unpredictable lunatic. A misogynist and all the rest that has been said. I wonder about the type of people that vote for him.
I also wonder about why there was 1% support for the Green Party candidate, Senator Jill Stein. if any country could do with some green policies, it’s America. I can’t believe hardly any Americans agree with this. I can’t understand why, with so much information available on the Internet, Americans still seem so insular. They are like a voluntary North Korea, that is also blind to global climate change. I would like to think this is only perception, I am wrong and under the surface there are many Americans who would like their system to change.
Fingers crossed that whoever is the next US president, they won’t do anything too rash.
Respectfully, I do not see this in Clinton
So, she made a stupid comment in Libya. It was absurd
But so is your reaction
Richard,
Do you mean that you do not see Clinton as pro-war and paid for by Wall St.? She has a proven track record of supporting foreign interventions and has received the most money from Wall St of any of the candidates on this campaign.
Or do you mean that you do not perceive her as evil? You may be right. (I would say at best she is corrupt, compromised and callous.) But in any case, evil or not, her beliefs and attitudes and past behaviour make it likely that she would use military force to further the geo-political ends of her (financial) supporters. Surely this precludes her from being a suitable candidate for President?
I make no pretence she is great
But compared to Trump/Bush/Reagan? Come on!
If Clinton wins I’ll be relieved only when I know that someone (anyone) has talked her out of her ludicrously reckless intention (stated on more than one occasion in the campaign) to impose a ‘no fly zone’ over Syria.
Even she has admitted that this will kill lots of Syrians and those who would have to enforce it know how stupid it would be as it would likely mean direct military confrontation with Russia (who her campaign has been happy to blame for all sorts of things recently.
The reason why this worries me so greatly now are the simmering (and I think wholly justified) concerns about impeachment over the seemingly monstrously corrupt Clinton Foundation.
When Bill was impeached on far more trivial grounds (and with a hugely more positive favourability rating than Hillary) he used a couple of tactical ‘foreign interventions’ to rally his troops (in Yugoslavia and, most cynically on the Al Shifa pharmaceutical plant in Sudan – an atrocity that resulted in many thousands of deaths what with it being the only producer of antibiotics in the country).
I really would not put it past her to do something similar (not least as she’s boasted in her memoir of pressuring Bill to do so when he was president).
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/25/hillary-clinton-syria-no-fly-zones-russia-us-war
I have to say I do not share your dismal view of humanity
Actually Richard, I’ve got a rather optimistic view of humanity – I’d be voting Jill Stein if I were a US citizen. I just have a very dismal view of the Clintons.
I am not excited by them
But really do not believe your view
Surely you mean “unlikely”? Check out Nate Silver, the most accurate of modern pollsters, who has Clinton at 72% and Trump at 28% as likely to win.
I accept
I recognised the possibility
One in four is significant
I always try to get into the minds of those I disagree with. My best understanding is:
– They see Clinton as an establishment politician. All establishment politicians are sophisticated liars who never say what they mean. Therefore, they disregard what she says.
– They believe private enterprise is what makes America great. They believe Trump is a successful businessman (and that, since he is still going, his business failures were not personal failures).
– They don’t see his unsophisticated lies as real lies. He’s just prepared to voice what he is thinking. Incoherence is acceptable, indeed it is a sign of honesty.
– Attacks on Trumps demeanour/incoherence are classic ways in which the establishment stop ‘the people’ actually getting their voice heard.
Sometimes I go over this to the extent that I begin to believe some of it.
My wife and I were in Manhattan a few weeks ago, and were having our regular breakfast in a local deli/cafe. New Yorkers are talkative and friendly and we were joined this particular morning by an elderly Jewish woman and a young engineer. The election came up in conversation , and both young and older were less than impressed with the choice they had for president. When I asked them about Sanders, they both thought that he was ‘a token to give the impression that there was a leftish alternative’, which there wasn’t.
The young man said he would not bother vote, as both candidates (and parties) were – corporately owned. The delightful Jewish woman, said in her best New Joisey accent ‘ I ask you you Brits sincerely… can you think of a woist choice we could have… well can you?’ No we couldn’t. She would not vote either, but she was optimistic that the old system was dying, but that as yet, a new one was unborn.
When we left, nearby there was a street beggar with a placard who was was drawing attention. The placard said ‘if you don’t give me a dollar then I will vote for Trump’. Business was brisk, we were uplifted. LOL
🙂
Thanks to the MSM, we (me included) probably spend far too much time obsessing over isssues over which we have absolutely no control. This is not good for our blood pressure! For an alternative view of the election – and a guide to retaining some personal sanity – here’s a positive suggestion: Don’t Panic About Politics – Realize Where Your True Power Lies Instead – http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2016/11/08/dont-panic-politics.aspx.
Thanks Richard.
I’ve been most disappointed that climate change has not featured in any of the televised debates yet the UN regards it as the world’s No.1 threat.
It appears that the Paris agreement is already out of date regarding temperature rise and I can’t see an improving situation with the runners for POTUS.
Trump believes it’s all a Chinese conspiracy.
Clinton does believe in climate change, yet is still takes millions in corporate dollars from Wall Street to the fossil fuel industry and supports their lobbying activities to veto any new climate regulation.
I honestly don’t know which position is worse.
On Climate Change – it’s not just Trump. Republican President Senate, House of Representatives and Supreme court.
This will get enacted http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2016/07/republican-platform-environment-cleveland
Hello Richard
I agree with your thoughts on this subject, given the age of the two candidates what is your view on their deputies?
Roy D
Both weak
I fear that we are underestimating the effectiveness of voter suppression and electronic ballot fraud.
I hope that I am wrong.
In the long term, the Republican right is being undermined my demographics: the last election they could reasonably hope to win without appealing to voters across social and racial boundaries was at least a decade ago. If the GOP cannot reform itself – from top to bottom, not just their nomination process – then they are finished as a force in national politics.
Or worse: they might ‘succeed’ and see their nominee elected, and bitterly regret it: either today, or with a future candidate with rather more intelligence than Trump, and even more dangerous flaws.
A hint: I fear Pence, Trump’s the running mate for VP, more than I fear Trump himself.
It might never happen, and the dice are rolling as I write this.
Meanwhile, we’ve seen the politics of division and deceit can win a referendum, poison the polity and shift existing governments into authoritarian populism that panders to the worst the media can do.
There is more damage to be done, and there are people eager to do it.
I’m not going to comment on Clinton or Trump – everything has been said, except perhaps to say that the US ballot form should have a “none of the above” option (as should ours).
I’m more interested in why Sanders (after a lot of promise), ultimately failed.
People may know that his elder brother is a member of the Green Party in the UK, stood as a Green councillor for many years, and stood in the 2015 G. election in Oxford for the Greens, and in the Witney by-election just gone. Both brothers have said that their political views are pretty much interchangeable. Bernie Sanders is not a Democrat in any real sense, and that’s probably the main reason he didn’t get the nomination.
He probably should have stood as a Green, and rumour (perhaps more than rumour) has it that Jill Stein offered to stand aside for him if he wanted. I think many Bernie supporters will have voted for Jill Stein, and in the future, the only hope for America is the building of a genuine third party, or an alliance of “third parties”, to get away from the Republican vs Republican-lite scenario that they currently face.
Not that we’ve been any more successful here in getting way from Tory vs Tory-lite. The best suggestion I’ve seen so far (can’t remember where…perhaps in the Guardian), would be for Blairite members of the Labour party to join the Tory party, and try to drag it back from its rightward drift, and allow the Labour Party to be truly a part of the left, perhaps with Green Party support helping to “green” Labour. Not quite sure where that leaves the LibDems. They’d probably be happy in a more left-wing Tory party (such as the one we used to have in the 1950s, perhaps). (Or maybe this idea came from you, Richard, in which case apologies for the lack of recognition! 🙂 ).
The Orange Nook LDs could crossover
Some could not
Well read the Podest emails,
Sanders was eliminated by the Democratic Party and the mainstream media
He never stood a chance
An interesting post and I agree with a lot of comments here.
I think that people are angry – they are seeing their lives stalling (low wages, less work) and want answers and too many of the wrong answers have been provided on both sides of the Atlantic whether in the US presidential election or the EU vote in the UK.
I can understand why someone would vote for Trump because that vote is based on anger and frustration. That is why I can also understand those who are angry at the EU here in the UK and voted to leave. The rhetoric is of blame and finger pointing in both cases. The press and media in both countries have failed the public in the most abominable way.
I do think that Trump could win (although as Channel 4 News pointed out, the Latino part of the vote is very low and may mean he loses).
But I do hope that Clinton escapes the shadow of her rather dim husband (a Rhodes Scholar no less) who was so easily led by ex-Goldman Sachs illumini in the US Treasury at the time and tries to be her own woman instead.
I’m very worried about those who will not vote because this could be sigificant – this could be lot of the potential black vote out there – totally turned off by the percieved failure of Obama having one hand (both hands?) tied behind his back because of republican domination of the HoR. How much trouble might they give Clinton if she gets in and the Republican dominance remains?
As for Saunders, I’ve been aware of him for a long time and his relegation by the Democratic Party to a back seat role in support of Clinton will come back to haunt them for a long time. And rightly so.
Sorry for posting again. An interesting perspective from Scientist for the EU. It is fronted by Mike as usual who did the “Deluxe Brexit with Mega Control” video a few weeks ago. The Trump part is towards the end. Not sure how to pull it out of Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/scientistsforeu/videos/894273060674704/
Yes Richard, I did slightly misread your post and my comment was not well focused,
But to call it ‘incendiary nonsense’ was a bit, well, incendiary
What I meant to question was your disbelief that it could be a close call between the candidates,
Hillary Clinton is a deeply hated figure in America,
That’s why this election that should be no brainer is so bafflingly close
Huge sections of the US population have got materially or psychologically poorer and she represents the elites that are blamed,
I have really been disappointed by how much is being made of her gender, I mean really, did it make any substantive difference to African Americans that they got their first black President
I recently finished Mary Beards book on Rome, SPQR, and in it she makes a good case that although many have pondered the characters of Romes Emporers, they made very little difference to the way Rome acted as a machine with its own logic and momentum,
America today is analogous – was Obama really any different to Bush or Clinton
Trump would be pulled into line quickly enough, they’d just show him the video that Bill Hicks jokingly described of the Kennedy assanination from an angle Trump had never seen before, “any questions?” they would say …
Please don’t waste my time again