In an election largely between two epically bad candidates, the outcome fell in the direction I'd felt would be less bad, but in a way that's worse than I'd expected. I had strongly criticized both Clinton and Trump, but felt that in the balance, Clinton was a more dangerous candidate. Seeing how the chips fell, though, I'm even less confident that this was the preferable outcome. There are two key factors leading me to this conclusion.
First relates to the big-picture politics. For all the disagreement about policy, Clinton really was the centrist candidate, and certainly within the Democratic Party, the strong voice of moderation (at least in domestic policy). Something I failed to consider was that this defeat weakens the voice of moderation, thus making the extremist voices from Sanders and Warren louder. Clinton may be a bad person, but Sanders and Warren represent some really bad ideas, and if this gives those ideas fertile ground to grow in, that's a real problem.
And there's a real possibility of that. The demographics representing Trump's win shows that his grasp on the rust belt manufacturing interests was much greater than previously thought. The thing is, Trump's not a Conservative and never has been. He represents populist ideas that overlap significant with the Sanders and Warren ideas. Politically they're on opposite sides, but ideologically they're quite the same. The election results give that ideology more weight, and Trump can see them realized.
The second relates to Trump's relationship with the rest of his party. Looking back to the summer and the party conventions, there was a clear rift in the GOP, with powerful members barely tolerating Trump, if at all. That was a good thing: it meant that should Trump win, his party would likely keep him in check. But unfortunately (and I do think it's unfortunate) it seems like that rift is healing. And with the GOP retaining control of both houses of Congress, it's dangerous to have so much control in the hands of one party, with Trump at the helm.
So where do we go now? Well, maybe there's a silver lining here. Maybe the prospect of Trump power with both political branches in GOP hands will inspire the Democrats. Maybe they'll re-discover the benefits of limited government, and in particular the boundaries of Presidential power.
Unfortunately I have little hope of that: Obama certainly said all the right things when he was in the Senate and GWB was in the White House, but when he got power himself, all of that restraint went out the window. So let me offer to my Liberal friends this olive branch: I'll be there fighting with you against overreaches from Trump and the GOP, but I hope you'll stay by my side in four years when the tide is likely to turn. And I hope that my Conservative friends who criticized President Obama for overreaches will remain consistent.
The trend toward populism is a thornier problem, and I don't have a satisfactory answer. My best hope is that people will come to their senses. It's intuitive and satisfying to believe things like "the Mexicans are taking all our jobs" or "our trade deficit shows we're losing out to the rest of the world" or "higher minimum wages are necessary to protect those on the lowest rung". Recently the Democrats have tried to market themselves as the party of intelligence and science. When trying to make that case - whether you’re a Democrat or a Republican - please first look to the scientific consensus on those topics.
> And I hope that my Conservative friends who criticized President Obama for overreaches will remain consistent.
Unlikely. A majority of people just want to pick a side and rabidly defend it.
For example, the democrats contesting the Bush-Gore Florida results was just "sour grapes," but conservatives clamouring to see Obama's "long form" birth certificate to prove that he wasn't eligible for office wasn't?
Agreed, and the likely response is "You can't complain, Obama did it!" And the cycle goes back and forth. Just like trying to, say, filibuster the nomination of Supreme Court justices.
First relates to the big-picture politics. For all the disagreement about policy, Clinton really was the centrist candidate, and certainly within the Democratic Party, the strong voice of moderation (at least in domestic policy). Something I failed to consider was that this defeat weakens the voice of moderation, thus making the extremist voices from Sanders and Warren louder. Clinton may be a bad person, but Sanders and Warren represent some really bad ideas, and if this gives those ideas fertile ground to grow in, that's a real problem.
And there's a real possibility of that. The demographics representing Trump's win shows that his grasp on the rust belt manufacturing interests was much greater than previously thought. The thing is, Trump's not a Conservative and never has been. He represents populist ideas that overlap significant with the Sanders and Warren ideas. Politically they're on opposite sides, but ideologically they're quite the same. The election results give that ideology more weight, and Trump can see them realized.
The second relates to Trump's relationship with the rest of his party. Looking back to the summer and the party conventions, there was a clear rift in the GOP, with powerful members barely tolerating Trump, if at all. That was a good thing: it meant that should Trump win, his party would likely keep him in check. But unfortunately (and I do think it's unfortunate) it seems like that rift is healing. And with the GOP retaining control of both houses of Congress, it's dangerous to have so much control in the hands of one party, with Trump at the helm.
So where do we go now? Well, maybe there's a silver lining here. Maybe the prospect of Trump power with both political branches in GOP hands will inspire the Democrats. Maybe they'll re-discover the benefits of limited government, and in particular the boundaries of Presidential power.
Unfortunately I have little hope of that: Obama certainly said all the right things when he was in the Senate and GWB was in the White House, but when he got power himself, all of that restraint went out the window. So let me offer to my Liberal friends this olive branch: I'll be there fighting with you against overreaches from Trump and the GOP, but I hope you'll stay by my side in four years when the tide is likely to turn. And I hope that my Conservative friends who criticized President Obama for overreaches will remain consistent.
The trend toward populism is a thornier problem, and I don't have a satisfactory answer. My best hope is that people will come to their senses. It's intuitive and satisfying to believe things like "the Mexicans are taking all our jobs" or "our trade deficit shows we're losing out to the rest of the world" or "higher minimum wages are necessary to protect those on the lowest rung". Recently the Democrats have tried to market themselves as the party of intelligence and science. When trying to make that case - whether you’re a Democrat or a Republican - please first look to the scientific consensus on those topics.