Trump vs Clinton (plus a dark horse?)

[epictetus]

So the Conventions are all done and it's officially The Donald vs Hillary.

The Republican's endorsement of Trump was hardly unanimous, but the Democrats were not entirely comprehensive in their support of Hillary.

America is faced with two candidates who are intensely disliked by an awful lot of people. One is seen as a thug and the other as a crook. This is a terrible indictment of US political culture and its processes.

There is a third candidate, Gary Johnson, former Governor of New Mexico, on the Libertarian ticket. His running mate, Bill Weld, is a former Governor of Massachusetts.

Jill Stein is the perennial Greens candidate.

Johnson has an 11% following at present and, if he can reach 15% he will be able to argue his case in the televised presidential campaign debates. So he might be a dark horse.

In the US voting is voluntary and there are no second preferences, so the presence of the third and fourth party introduces an element of uncertainty. Given that so many people are reluctant to vote for either Clinton or Trump, who might they cast their vote for instead? The Greens don't pull many votes in the US, but this time they might get a few more. Who will they draw votes away from? Clinton, I suppose, as it's hard to see disaffected Republicans voting Green. Johnson, on the other hand, served as a successful two-term Republican governor in a Democrat state, so he would expect to draw votes away from Trump. As an economic success, socially liberal and opposed to US involvement in foreign wars, he could also attract some support from Democrats who can't stomach Hillary. Are there many? Well, Bernie Sanders' supporters hate her guts and there's a lot of them. Would they vote for a laissez-faire libertarian though?

Nate Silver, the American psephologist who correctly predicted results in 49 of the 50 states in 2008 and 2012, had Trump winning yesterday and Clinton today. Things change from one day to the next. He'll provide new data every day from now on.

It's a long road yet to November 8. Apparently the Democrats are going to give Hillary a huge makeover (not literally) to make her more acceptable to people. The Donald could do the same, I guess, but does he want to? Does he care if lots of people hate him? It doesn't seem so. In fact it's worked in his favour, but he has to try and win the middle ground now.

[madametarot]

Err does the hate factor mean more people will vote, I expect so. I would not like to bet on the outcome if the non voters come out and vote.

One of the wild cards could be a run away winner.

This is a non paid political announcement not paid for by Pauline H.

[red750]

[cster]

That biys developing a pet lip that would trip a duck, a Donald Duck.

Pity Nate Silver didn't do the numbers on the wild cards, that might stir up the Americans

[donte]

As a regular reader of 'The Quadrant' I believe this fella has worthwhile observations on the forthcoming American Elections. These problems he recounts could well be ours.......  


                   He Will Fight Them on the Beaches


Lord Halifax might have made a good PM if not for Hitler. As it happened, a man of singular talent, though not to everyone’s taste, was required. Now it's true that Trump is no Churchill, but he's also the only hope in these, our latest, current and unforgiving times


People have strong feeling about political leaders. They love ‘em or hate ‘em, so to speak. I, too, suffer from partisan-political feelings.

Donald Trump isn’t the very model of a modern PC gentleman. Nonetheless, I am inclined to believe that beneath his unrefined exterior he is fundamentally decent. I struggle to see how you can raise such accomplished and loving children if you are an outright jerk. On the other hand, I find Hillary Clinton thoroughly disagreeable. I believe that her actions rank with those of infamous liars, shysters and carpetbaggers of yesteryear.

Do you see what I mean? I am hopelessly compromised. And so are those in the other camp. When it comes to Clinton and Trump the gap between opposing views, as the Donald might say, is huge. I regularly correspond on politics with an American lady I met on a trip to Israel. This is what she wrote in the course of a recent exchange.

I’m simply flummoxed that someone as [over-kind compliment deleted out of modesty] as you would find a bloated, thoughtless, mendacious, self-aggrandizing playground bully “the only candidate for the times… the best candidate by far, not the least worst.”

Here is Jody commenting on QOL on a recent piece of mine:

Trump is a dangerous narcissist of the type the Phillipines people are dealing with right now; he’s every bit as vulgar, offensive and unstable as Duterte.


There will no meeting of minds on the character of the two candidates. There seldom is when it comes to presidential politics, but this time the order of disagreement is on a different scale. Trump is uniquely polarizing. For the sake of the argument let us say that he has some worrisome personality traits. The question is whether his foibles are fatal to being a good president.

I don’t know for sure. No-one knows exactly how a potential leader will perform until they assume leadership. Bill Clinton, for example, had a foible or two and seemed to do OK, particularly after his ‘pivot’ towards the conservative side. What is clear to those paying attention is that the times are crying out for ‘a disrupter’ not someone who offers more of the same.

Dwelling on personality must be put in context of the perilous situation facing America and, by extension, Western civilization. American voters face two starkly different futures. Here is just a taste.

Islam inside and out has to be confronted. Trump will do that. Clinton won’t. Allowing in job lots of tens of thousands of Muslim refugees is a never-ending recipe for bringing the European problem to America. Once done it can’t be undone. It will metastasize and bring misery. No matter what how peaceful you know your Muslim neighbour or workmate to be, the goal of their creed is to take over. If you don’t get that, you don’t get anything — and your granddaughters will get what they don’t deserve.

The Third World’s population is rising rapidly as the West’s is static or declining. Strong and secure borders are required to keep out hordes of political and economic refugees. Trump will build strong borders. Clinton won’t. Don’t get that? Then face being inundated by welfare recipients and seeing neighborhoods change in ways that you won’t like. Keep your daughters indoors after that.

The US economy is in a mess, as are most Western economies. Even without a moment’s study of economics, or even with the dubious benefit of a course of study delivered by some left-wing economics hack, do you really believe that raising taxes and doubling down on environmental regulations will rescue the economy? Lowering business taxes and reducing regulatory obstacles, including on fossil fuel development, are the only effective tools left in the locker. Trump will use them. Clinton can’t. Don’t get that? Then you will see more industrial wastelands, more unemployment, more inner-city disenchantment and violence.

America’s military is depleted and depleting. Trump will build it up again. Clinton can’t and won’t. Think Russia and Eastern Europe, China and the South China Sea, Iran and nuclear weapons, North Korea and nuclear weapons, North Africa and Islamic terrorism, Afghanistan and Islamic terrorism, the Middle East and Islamic terrorism. Without a strong America mayhem awaits. Make the wrong choice and it might be advisable to build a well-stocked bunker.

Think the social fabric that made America great is unraveling? You ain’t seen nothing yet. Just wait a year or two after Clinton has refashioned the Supreme Court.

Periodically, history throws up unforgiving times. The year 1940 was an unforgiving time. Lord Halifax might have made a good British PM in 1940 if not for Hitler. As it happened, a man of singular talent, though not to everyone’s taste, was required. We live again in unforgiving times.

Some people say we can’t take a chance on Trump. I say we can’t take a chance on dumping Trump. Trump is no Churchill, but he is made for these times. No one else I can think of would be out there unashamedly, and rightly, prosecuting the case for coal, oil and gas, for building a wall, and for stopping Muslim immigration.

A final thought, apropos many white tertiary-educated women and others, including precious conservatives, whose sensibilities that ‘awful ruffian’ so upsets. Wake up in the morning with Clinton in the White House. Feel somewhat flat and resigned to Washington politics as usual? Well, if it happens, you helped make it so. Enjoy!



Peter Smith, a frequent Quadrant Online contributor, is the author of Bad Economics

[red750]

A totally unpleasant choice. Like having to choose between kissing a camel or a pig.

[cster]

Boy how closely aligned are the threats to our way and theirs, by the same means and all. Tisk.
Still no headstones do we have over the parliments that annoy us.