August 30, 2018
Donald
Trump is a bad joke as a President, which raises a fundamental question: how
did we get stuck with him? He was
chosen by our odd, anti-democratic electoral system, having lost the popular
vote by over 2.8 million votes.
However, he drew almost 63 million votes, more than any presidential
candidate other than Barack Obama. Much
of what is known about him now was known in 2016, so why did so many vote for
him? Looking at it from the other side,
why do so many still support him?
Let’s
deal with the electoral system first.
The Constitution provides for the process in Article II, Section 1. Each State has “a Number of Electors, equal
to the whole Number of Senators and
Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress.” As all but two states
[44] award all of their electoral votes to
the popular winner in that state, the system is a hybrid of a popular vote
within a state and a final, weighted, vote by states, the latter element being
a relic of the Eighteenth Century.
Twice in a period of sixteen years we have “elected” the candidate the
people rejected.[45]
The odds of amending the Constitution to
eliminate this procedure are slim. A somewhat
better chance is offered by the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, an
agreement between states to award their electoral votes to the winner of the
national popular vote. It has been
enacted by states possessing 172 of the necessary 270 electoral
votes.[46]
The
popularity question is less easily answered.
The rabid crowds at Trump’s rallies are not a true picture of his
supporters, as they certainly are the most disaffected, least informed and most
easily misled. However, we can’t get
away from the fact that 80% of Republicans state their approval of him in poll
after poll.
Trump
sometimes is described as a populist, an oddity for one who lost the popular
vote, and his agenda clearly is tilted toward the wealthy and powerful, so he’s
not a populist in terms of policy.
Enthusiastic support is understandable from those benefitted by tax cuts
and deregulation, but the reason for support by ordinary folk is less
obvious. One factor is simply party
loyalty, a powerful impulse in a time of polarization, but there is more to it:
a mood of resentment, rebellion and reaction, one facet of which is white
nationalism.
Less than
six years ago we reelected a black semi-liberal by a margin of almost five
million votes; has the electorate changed radically in that time? About eight million more people voted in
2016 than in 2012, but that is only the sixth-highest increase by percentage
between presidential years since 1964, and it isn’t likely that all the new
voters were reactionaries.
There is
an argument, widely accepted, that “Trump Democrats,” those who voted for Obama
but switched to Trump, were his key to success. However, that doesn’t seem to stand up to scrutiny; as Dana
Milbank put it in a recent column, “The number of Obama-to-Trump voters turns
out to be smaller than thought. And
those Obama voters who did switch to Trump were largely Republican voters to
start with. The aberration wasn’t their votes for Trump but their votes for
Obama.”[47]
The theory that it was the working class that
elected Trump founders, at least in part, on the definition of “working class,”
those without a college degree; some very wealthy people lack those degrees.
Income is a more significant index; “approximately three-quarters of Trump
voters were from households earning more than the national median income. . . ." [48]
There
isn’t much doubt that the culture has worsened, so in that sense the people
have changed for the worse. However,
the tie between that and voting patterns isn’t clear and, again, Obama was
reelected in 2012. Whatever change
there may have been in the voting public since then, the more serious problem
is that, in different ways, the parties have changed, not for the better, and
those changes have led to the election of, and support for, Trump.
Democrats
are viewed, with some justice, as wedded to an agenda which is foreign, in a cultural sense, elitist, and more concerned about
minorities than the people in general.
Also, while trending to the left culturally, the Party has, in an odd
exercise in cognitive confusion, become more conservative economically,
becoming so cozy with business and finance as to present little reason to vote
for Democrats on pocketbook issues.
Republicans
have embraced, made peace with, or in some cases unintentionally reenforced the
worst attitudes and arguments on the right.
An example of the last is given in a recent book by a Republican
campaign strategist: “After the 2010
elections, we learned to motivate and activate Tea Party voters. . . .” Unfortunately, they were waiting, not for “a
conservative revolution,” but for ”a
strongman, a caudillo, a Saddam.”[49]
The
Party’s unwillingness to oppose Trump encourages his base to believe he is
doing the right things. If Republicans
refuse to accept facts, such as the evidence of climate change, and attack the
media, it’s not surprising if many people believe nonsense and ignore the
evidence of Trump’s unfitness for office.
Republicans
have claimed, for decades, that Democrats aren’t real Americans. However, now they have help: the
proliferation of right-wing television and internet commentary, spreading
misinformation, recycling absurd conspiracy theories. Fox News has been around since the Nineties, but it has become
more rigidly biased. Before “Hannity,”
there was, until January, 2009, “Hannity and Colmes,” in which the latter made
some attempt to put forth a liberal view.
Now Fox is a Trump echo chamber, and evangelical leaders, abandoning all
concern about personal morals, lend support.
Although the culture is coarsening and people
are less well educated politically, those are long-term trends. The people haven’t undergone a radical,
recent change and there is nothing new about the selfish rich, the bigoted or
the foolish. Properly guided, the
majority can act rationally, but those with influence, political and otherwise,
have led many of them down the wrong path, or have failed to lead at all. The result is Trumpism. The familiar King James version of Proverbs
29:18 tells us: “Where there is no vision, the people perish.” A more apt translation is found in the
American Standard Version: “Where there is no vision, the people cast off
restraint.”
The bad joke is still President, doing harm
while his Party looks the other way and his legions applaud, but some
encouragement might be taken from Proverbs 29:16: “When the wicked are in
authority, transgression increases, but the righteous will look upon their
downfall.”[50]
_________________________
44. Maine and Nebraska award two electoral votes to the statewide winner, and one to each winner in a congressional district.
45. There is a more extended discussion of such elections prior to 2016 in my note of January 14, 2013.
46. https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/
47.https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/theres-no-such-thing-as-a-trump-democrat/2017/08/04/0d5d06bc-7920-11e7-8f39-eeb7d3a2d304_story.html?utm_term=.ab8e5f0d619e
48.http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/blaming_working_class_for_trump_is_myth_that_
suits _ruling_class_20170707
49. Rick Wilson, Everything Trump Touches Dies, p. 104
50. Revised Standard Version; New Revised Standard
No comments:
Post a Comment