5 September 2016

Sorry to hear that you'll be moving to Australia. I must confess, I am torn. I don't much like your politics, but you do sing beautifully. (Some of those duets with Barry Gibb are to die for.) And I do understand that you are distraught with the prospect of your fellow New Yorker, Donald Trump, as president ... so distraught, in fact, that you have announced your intention to seek residency down under, should he win. OK, go ahead. Move to Australia. I will miss your singing, but I will manage.

As to the larger purpose of your announcement, that it might convince me to vote against Mr. Trump, I do not think that will happen; there's just too much at stake. That's because I believe that our (classical liberal) American democracy is dying and is in desperate need of resuscitation ... thanks, ironically, to the past half century's (illiberal) policies of the progressive left, of their (bought and paid for) allies in the academy, media, and dependency class, and of far too many (go along to get along) RINO Republicans. Yes, I have reservations about Mr. Trump, both stylistic and substantive, but I am increasingly convinced that he represents our one last hope to rescue the nation.

This blog began four years ago during the runup to the 2012 election. At the time, it looked like Mr. Romney might well win and, with Mr. Ryan at his side, might begin to address some of the very significant problems facing the nation and perhaps effect some meaningful longer term changes in the nation's economy and political culture. It did not happen. Instead Mr. Obama was given four more years in which to solidify the left's stranglehold on the nation's institutions.

I have held off commenting on the current political campaign primarily because I have had great difficulty trying to understand why it has developed the way it has. In particular, I am utterly astounded that a candidate who has so clearly struck a chord throughout blue collar middle America is having a problem consolidating his support among those in control of the Republican Party. Apparently, this party does not seem to understand that it has a golden opportunity to win big (and make good on some of those promises that changed the legislative balance in 2010 and 2014), but, incredibly, prefers instead to lose by withholding support from its very own nominee.

No, Mr. Trump is not a perfect candidate. But neither was Mr. Bush, Mr. McCain, or Mr. Romney, all of whom I voted for, despite reservations. And what say two of these ex-candidates (Bush and Romney), in respect to Mr. Trump? They will not vote for him. Along with a significant portion of the conservative punditocracy that I have listened to and respected for so many years. National Review? George Will? Charles Krauthammer? Fox News?

Mr. Ryan, whom I supported for the vice presidency the last time around, is supporting Mr. Trump, albeit tepidly (as is, I believe, Mr. McCain). (As the saying goes, with friends like Ryan, who needs enemies?) Mr. Priebus does seem to have a more realistic attitude. As RNC chairman, he well understands that Republicans need to get behind Mr. Trump.

And what about the other sixteen candidates for the 2016 Republican nomination, most of whom signed a pledge to support the eventual nominee of the party (in a transparent effort to get Mr. Trump to sign the same pledge!)? Some now refuse to support him. Yes, in the quest for the nomination, Mr. Trump has levelled some (possibly) illadvised, (possibly) unfair, comments in the direction of other candidates. And his labelling of other candidates with demeaning nicknames is certainly less than presidential. But he never promised to treat the other candidates with kid gloves. Indeed, he promised to fight back very hard when challenged. Bottomline: he is a fighter, which is (it seems to me) precisely what the current situation demands. For too long, the Republican Party has been fighting its battles with one hand tied behind its back; is it not time, perhaps, to fully engage the other side and land some real punches?

Mr. Bush (JEB), as the favorite of establishment Republicans, you had high expectations going into this campaign. But you lost, and you lost badly. You should recognize that Middle America and much of the Republican base are justifiably upset with the party's failure to live up its promises during the 2010 and 2014 campaigns (in particular, to fight harder to defund Obamacare). And that they do not want their county flooded with illegal immigrants, who take away jobs from other (mostly poor) Americans, drain the nation's resources, and would mostly vote Democrat, given an opportunity to vote (which is why the left wants to create a path to citizenship for these immigrants). (Why should the Republican Party support such a policy?) Yes, Mr. Trump implied that W. might have misrepresented the intelligence concerning weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, a charge which you believe is false and find insulting. But you did promise to support Mr. Trump if he won the nomination, and now you are reneging on that promise.

Mr. Cruz, I am particularly disappointed by your failure to support Mr. Trump. You were, at one time, my choice for the nomination, and I did like your choice of Ms. Fiorina as your running mate. Like Mr. Trump, you fought hard to make a case for taking a harder line towards the progressive opposition. Many hoped you and Mr. Trump would become allies in this fight. Yes, he said some things about your wife and your father that you thought beyond the pale, but is repaying this slight worth enabling a Democrat victory in November? Mr. Trump also graciously gave you an opportunity to speak at the convention. I think that you should have responded by endorsing him (as you promised you would during the debates).

Yes, the conservative right has grounds for concern with Mr. Trump. In particular, Mr. Trump does not seem to favor social security or medicare entitlement reform. And it's hard to see how we lower our crushing debt without reforming entitlement benefits. On the other hand, Trump recognizes that Obamacare needs to go, and he is certainly very concerned with the debt. As a businessman, he could not but be very concerned about this debt. I can't tell you exactly what he will do, but I think he will attack the debt and deficit problems in a very significant way. And I also think he will involve others in this attack. Conservative Republicans should help plan the attack, not obstruct it.

Another oft repeated charge is that Trump's goal of deporting tens of millions of illegals is wildly unrealistic. But simply repeating this charge over and over again, as if it were obviously so, does not make it so. It may not be easy to deport these illegals, to be sure, but I think it has to be far easier than it was to respond to Pearl Harbor, for example. We somehow managed that. If we set our minds to it, we can also manage our illegal immigration problem. Like Pearl Harbor, illegal immigration is an existential threat to the nation. It is helping progressives transform this nation into something quite different from (and much worse than) the America envisaged by our founders, a genuine semblance of which a majority of Americans wish to preserve.

The key, I think, is to attack the demand side of the problem, to stop extending government benefits designed for American citizens and legal residents to illegals and to get serious about stopping employers from hiring them, the result of which will be that many, if not most, illegals will self deport and voluntarily return home.

One benefit of both illegal immigration and the current (global) trade policies that Donald Trump wants to renegotiate is that Americans, as consumers, are currently paying less for products than they would otherwise pay. (To the extent that these savings increase the national debt, however, future generations will pay for them, plus interest.) Under a Trump presidency, we will likely pay more for fruits and vegetables (previously picked by illegal immigrants, now picked by Americans), we will likely pay more for Japanese, Korean, and European electronics and automobiles, and we will likely pay more for Chinese products. But hopefully this increase in consumer costs will lead to a revival of American industry and to the introduction of new more competetive American products, as a result of which Americans will have more and better jobs with which to earn the money to pay for foreign products and for the new American products.

Yes, Mr. Trump will shake things up. And he will do so in not altogether predictable ways. But things need shaking up. We are in bad shape. We are rapidly going bankrupt (if, indeed, we are not already bankrupt). Government is doing too much. Too many residents are without work and/or dependent upon the public treasury for their sustenance. We are running a significant deficit and trade inbalance. Our economy is sputtering. We don't make things anymore. Our military has been weakened. We face significant external threats in the middle east (ISIS, Al Qaida, and Iran), from a resurgent Russia, and from North Korea and China. The primary reason for the opposition to Trump is not that that he will fail to lead the country in the direction of significant change, but that this change threatens the entrenched power structure, and it threatens a host of allied vested interests. It will take strong and dynamic leadership and massive popular support to overcome these change-resistant forces.

Does Donald Trump have the capacity to provide this leadership and garner this support? I don't know, but I think so. He has not yet won over a substantial majority to his side, but his support is growing, and his ability to attract large enthusiastic crowds to his campaign rallies suggests that he connects with middle America. Moreover, he is holding his own despite overwhelming opposition from the media and from a significant portion of the political establishment (and despite minimal advertising, thus far).

An important qualification for any president is his/her ability to choose wisely the personnel who will help him/her run his/her administration. Trump has demonstrated this ability. In Mike Pence, I think he has the perfect running mate. (Pence is very steady and principled. He actually voted against TARP!) In Stephen Bannon and Kellyanne Conway, Trump has an excellent campaign team, one that is in tune with what he is trying to accomplish, but has the smarts to keep him out of trouble.

One enduring image from one of the Republican campaign debates is that of Trump entering the stage, only to find Ben Carson in the wings, apparently unsure as to whether he should go out on stage. Several other candidates had already passed by Carson to assume their positions at their respective lecterns. Trump did not. He saw that Carson was confused and somewhat embarrassed, so Trump stopped, and the two of them came on stage together. Perhaps I make too much of this simple act of kindness, but to me it speaks volumes. Donald Trump, despite his rough and tumble, often belittling and braggadocio, style, is a caring human being. As a somewhat reserved senior citizen, I am not particularly fond of what I would characterize as Trump's New York attitude, but I'm thinking that, perhaps in him, we have what is needed to shock the country into reversing course, gaining control of its borders and finances, rebuilding its industrial base, confronting external threats, eliminating pay for play corruption, and, hopefully, paring back the welfare state.

The other side of the coin is the Democrat Party and Hillary Clinton. The progressive policies of the Democrat Party (over half a century and more, with help from some elements of the Republican Party) are what have led to the current mess. Hillary Clinton is incompetent (she has achieved nothing), and she is corrupt. Most importantly, she will continue to pursue progressive policies. A Clinton victory means more of the same, more bloated government, more corruption, more dependency, more debt, more coddling and mishandling of significant external threats, and, inevitably, I fear, fiscal collapse.

I don't think we are going to get another chance to fix things. Either Donald Trump wins in November and pursues policies that significantly and quickly turn things around (admittedly not a sure thing, either), or we are done.

I'll take my chances, on this Labor Day, with Trump/Pence 2016.

Cheers,

Russ