southernbeau

Making sense of the non-sensical world of American politics

A Search for Light: Reflections on the Election of 2016

There is always light to be found in the darkness – a nugget of opportunity, a sliver of hope to be clutched and pursued in an otherwise bleak reality. I held fast to this eternal maxim as I watched the election slip hopelessly through the fingers of Hillary Clinton and into the waiting hands of Donald Trump on Tuesday night.

While the pundits and strategists perform the quadrennial political autopsy in a search for answers, I begin a search of my own. I am looking for that light – the proverbial silver lining in the foreboding clouds overhead.  Admittedly, this exercise will not come without its challenges.  I supported Hillary Clinton for president with every fiber of my being and every ounce of my soul.  I believed, and continue to believe, that Secretary Clinton was better qualified, better prepared, more experienced, more nuanced, more decent and more stable to step into the role of president as compared to her opponent.  To my mind, the distance between them on all of these counts was cavernous; it was not even remotely close.

I was hopeful that Hillary would score a resounding victory at the ballot box – a complete and utter repudiation of all that Trump represents, e.g., hatefulness, divisiveness, anger, fear, indecency, inhumanity, vulgarity, lack of humility, machoism, disrespect, ruthlessness, and lack of intellectual curiosity and rigor, to name a few. Instead, these objectionable attributes carried the day.  Still, there must be light hidden in the darkness of these events, I reassure myself, for there always is.  Surprisingly, I have found my answer, and the light, in the painstaking, and often painful, task of exploring the post-mortem polling data.

As I digest the exit polling, and its meaning, I am smacked in the face by something that we all inherently know. Our country is profoundly and deeply divided, along the lines of race, ethnicity, class, gender, geography, religion and education.  We have been living with this stark reality for my entire adult life.  It is nothing new.  But, for some reason, I had not fully processed the depth and severity of our divisions, and the dire consequences should we not seek to heal them.

All Americans should be appalled and saddened that we so often vote in monolithic blocks. White folks vote for one candidate while people of color vote for the other; women largely vote differently from men; there are sharp differences in the voting habits between those with a college degree and those without; city dwellers can be expected to vote contrary to rural voters; Northerners versus Southerners; East and West Coasters compared to the Heartland; and the list goes on.

The politicians for whom we vote tailor their messages to surgically target these disparate groups depending upon the audience. What’s worse, these same politicians pit one group against the other, stoking the anger, hatred and division among them.  Donald Trump performed this task masterfully and mercilessly in this election; and while he did it more brashly than most, almost all our politicians do it, Hillary Clinton included.

It is in this awakening that I have found my light. It took the painful experience of this election, and the light it shed, to drag me, kicking and screaming, to the recognition that it is my duty to do everything in my power to heal and, ultimately, bridge the divide in our country.  A house divided against itself cannot stand.  Abraham Lincoln’s wise words concerning the health our republic over 150 years ago are as relevant today as they were then.

I plan to give President-Elect Trump a chance; he deserves the opportunity to succeed in a way not afforded President Obama by the Republicans. Like Jeckyll and Hyde, I am hopeful that Candidate Trump transforms himself into a President Trump who dignifies the weight of the office.  Donald Trump might be a good president; he might be a bad one.  Either way, if his election shines a light brightly enough on our nation’s divisions that they are fervently and collectively addressed, then the outcome of this election might well have been a blessing in disguise.  To borrow a germane phrase from my girl, Hillary Clinton, we are always stronger together!  We must work hard to make this so.  Otherwise, we will retreat to our respective corners of society, walking through life with only those of like mind, and thereby completely neglecting to engage the wonderful wisdoms, insights and experiences that others have to offer.

To be clear, I am not seeking a world in which we all think and act alike. Our differences are not only healthy, they are beautiful.  The truth is most Americans want the same thing, we just have different views on how to get there.  Divergent opinions argued through robust debate is at the very heart of our democracy.  But, we have to find a way to disagree without being disagreeable.  Otherwise, our divisions are bound to expand, deepen and become more firmly entrenched.  Perhaps, irreversibly so.

Sadly, the debate of ideas (I use that term loosely) surrounding the Election of 2016 was less worthy of a presidential campaign and more closely resembled a playground fight amongst teenagers. In lieu of important policy discussions, Trump’s chief focus was convincing the electorate that Hillary deserves a jail sentence, and Hillary condescendingly referred to a swath of his supporters as “deplorables.”  No segment of American society is deplorable, but the tone of the debate certainly was.  That has to change.

Moreover, I am not in denial that every society from the beginning of time has experienced divisions, often deep fissures. America is no different on this score.  However, we must fight for an America where our divisions are rooted not in hatred and misunderstanding, but instead based on a healthy exchange of ideas.  I do not believe this to be an idealistic dream drowning in naïveté.  To the contrary, I believe it is not only achievable, but quite doable, with hard work – blood, sweat, tears, careful listening, common understanding and a recognition of the other.

So, then, where do we go from here? First, we must demand from our leaders, prospective leaders and each other that there is never another election as, well, deplorable as that of 2016.  Future candidates for office, particularly the presidency, must do far less name calling and do far more in the way of explaining their policy positions.  Referring to your opponent as “crooked” does not add value to the conversation, where expounding on your plans for entitlement reform, immigration reform, tax policy, and so on, certainly would.

I believe that simply improving the tone and tenor through which we debate competing ideas would go a long way in patching the gaping holes of division in our society. It would affirm in the minds of all Americans that, while we may not agree on every (or any) issue, we are all on the same American team.  The good news – the beaming light from this election – is that we do not have to wait for our political leaders to show the way in this regard, lest we might be waiting until the Cubs win another World Series.  Each and every one of us can live this truth in our daily lives.  We can try to be more tolerant of our neighbor’s viewpoint on a particular issue.  We can ask questions to try to better understand their views.  We can make every attempt to put ourselves in their shoes so as to better understand the foundation of their views.  We can listen, and listen hard.  Then, if need be, we can disagree with those same views without being hateful, angry, indignant, reactionary, condescending or divisive.

We can do it, America; we can repair the busted seams of our society. We can stitch the frayed fabric that separates the New York City lawyer from the Upstate farmer; the inner-city Philadelphia school teacher from the coal miner in central Pennsylvania; the biopharmaceutical worker in the Research Triangle Park from the factory worker in western North Carolina; and others who seemingly have few commonalities and shared values.  It is not a lost cause, unless, of course, we want it to be.  Unless we are content to live perpetually in an Election of 2016 world.  I, for one, never want to see the likes of it again.

There is light in this election. It is that we can set aside partisan differences and come together to say never again.  Never again will we be subjected to a thoughtless campaign that tested our patience but never our intellect.  Never again will we accept a campaign based on the lowest common denominator instead of appealing to our highest aspirations and ideals.  Never again will we be divided into disparate groups like political pawns instead of being showered with well-reasoned arguments supported by facts and data in an effort to garner our votes.  Never again will we allow fear and division to be the primary political tool used to win an election at the expense of hope, inspiration and ideas.  Never again will we be made to endure an election so dirty that we feel the need to shower at the top of every hour.  Never again will America’s light be so dimmed by such a vile political campaign.  Never again, America, never again; for we are better than this.

I close with a final word to my fellow Democrats: do not despair or hang your heads for too long. There is light in this election, but it cannot be seen if your eyes are closed.  Do not worry about the next election, whether it be 2018 or 2020.  Rather, let us learn as much as we can about those who did not vote with us.  Let us recognize why we did not appeal to these folks, and understand how we might reach them in the future.  And let us now press forward with the hard work of bridging the deep divisions in our country, so that we are in a position to earn future votes from Americans of all walks of life – every creed, race, religion, gender and socioeconomic status.

If we fight to make this so, America’s light will shine more brightly than ever, and so will our party’s.  Lift up your heads, friends, there is light in the darkness.

Advertisements

November 12, 2016 Posted by | Democratic Party, Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, Politics, Uncategorized | , , , | Leave a comment

Reflections on my Weekend in the Queen City

I went home to spend last weekend with my family in Charlotte. Charlotte has been for some time, and continues to be, a rapidly growing and ever-changing metropolis which hardly resembles the city I left for college in 1998.  I am not oblivious to the changes, for that would be next to impossible.  I see it, but somehow I don’t feel it.  For me, Charlotte remains that place which houses my childhood memories.  It can never change drastically enough to erase those indelible imprints on my soul.  Undoubtedly, it will continue its transformation from a Southern jewel to an international destination, but, for me, it will always be home.  Small.  Quiet.  Unassuming.  Tall pines and Sweet Caroline.

BBQ Is King

Shortly after landing Friday night, we went to the Bar-B-Que King – the same joint that has provided Friday night’s sweet satisfaction in our family for as long as I can remember – to grub on Western North Carolina-style BBQ, coleslaw, hushpuppies and onion rings. While the comfort food is perpetually gratifying, it is the comfort part that still resonates all these years later.  The pulled pork and coleslaw feed my body; the place itself replenishes my soul.  Like the Sirens in Homer’s Odyssey, I wonder if I will ever be able to escape the irrepressible pull of this place.  Better question: why would I want to?

McCrory Is Driving This Car

Upon waking on Saturday morning – still in a hazy, sluggish state from the barbeque and hushpuppies – I grabbed the morning paper as is my unshakable habit. Plastered on the front page screamed the inescapable headline: “HB2 Repeal on the Table if Charlotte Drops Ordinance.”  At first glance, seeing the word “repeal,” I was heartened that this might be a positive development in North Carolina’s interminable fiasco.  Of course, after reading the second half of the headline (and the article), it became painfully apparent that Governor McCrory was only looking to write a new, darker chapter into this already odious melodrama.  In a move dripping with pure political calculation, McCrory is now looking to deflect blame for HB2 to the City of Charlotte as the instigator of the unmitigated mess in which the state currently finds itself.  This is not exactly a profile in courage.  I hope the Mayor of Charlotte, Jennifer Roberts, exhibits hers by standing up to our bully of a governor.

Picture this: there are two people driving along in a car. The passenger is simply talking to the driver when the driver suddenly runs of the road toward a steep cliff.  The driver demands an apology from the passenger before he will steer the car back onto the road and away from the rapidly approaching cliff and impending disaster beyond.  The driver is Governor McCrory.  The car, North Carolina.  Mutually assured destruction is the destination.

Winning Uncomfortably & Loving It

The highlight of the weekend took place at a scorching Bank of America Stadium where Chip Kelly led his undefeated San Francisco 49ers to battle my previously winless Carolina Panthers. Candidly, the Panthers were downright sloppy.  They turned the ball over 4 times, committed several debilitating penalties, had several blown assignments on defense, and made a couple boneheaded mistakes on special teams.  The Panthers also won by 19 points in relatively easy fashion.

While driving home, my dad and I were listening to local sports talk radio when caller after caller whined, complained, bed whetted and generally belly ached about the Panthers’ uneven performance.  As the calls mounted, I grew increasingly ecstatic.  I came to the thrilling realization that Carolina had reached the point at which they could win easily while their fans could simultaneously express frustration with the less than stellar play.  In the early days, we were happy if the Panthers made it out of the tunnel, let alone scored a point.  Now, our fan base thinks we are the 1984 San Francisco 49ers.  The immaculate transformation!  What an enviable and blessed position in which to be?

Who Are These People?

As I meandered through my parents’ neighborhood on my Sunday morning run, I came across a beautiful sight – make that several beautiful sights. These beautiful sights were similar in size, shape and certainly content, and they were situated conspicuously in the same place on the front lawn of each house that I passed.  The beautiful sights to which I refer, of course, are Donald Trump for President yard signs.  This might sound preposterous to those who know that I find Mr. Trump to be repulsive, uniquely unqualified, and a national disgrace (tip of the cap to Colin Powell on the last one).  All of this is no doubt the truth.

But a separate truth of equal significance also revealed itself: I was relieved to find out who these people are that support Donald Trump. Sheltered in progressive New York City, it is easy to ask oneself: who are these people?  Now, I have the answer.  They are hard-working, honorable, philanthropic, kind, generous, patriotic (and mostly sane) Americans.  What’s more, they are my neighbors (or my parents’ neighbors).  It dawned on me that they are only doing what they think is in the best interest of the country – nothing more, nothing less.  Of course, I vehemently disagree with this judgment and determination in the strongest possible terms.  My hope is that these same people do not view me as somehow evil, or worse, in light of my support for Hillary Clinton.

I understand that politics are emotional, and emotions are personal. This reality notwithstanding, we have to find a way to remove the personal from our politics.  Otherwise, our (already) great country will be lessened in a very profound and ultimately sad way.  In addition to the Trump signs, these folks had a second sign in their yards: a Panthers sign.  For me, it underscored the indisputable truth that there is more that binds than divides us.  Our commonalities far exceed and outweigh our differences.  In the end, we are all in this together whether November brings a President Trump or a President Clinton.

Moving Forward

Last weekend spent in Charlotte with family and friends was truly a blessing. In addition to my mom and dad, I was able to spend time with my sister, my niece (Chloe), my grandmother, tailgate partners Aunt Trena and Uncle Ray, and 80,000 of my nearest and dearest at Panthers Stadium.  It was made all the richer by the disparate, yet equally enlightening experiences described above.  North Carolina is a majestic place, warts and all.  The good thing about warts is that they can be removed.  To be removed, however, they must first come to the surface.  Lord knows they have surfaced.  With our wounds now out in the open for the world to see, it is time to come together to solve our problems and not simply sweep them under the rug.  It is my fervent hope that we North Carolinians, despite our feckless political leadership, have the courage to do just that.

September 21, 2016 Posted by | 2016 Presidential Election, Carolina Panthers, Charlotte, Charlotte Ordinance, Donald Trump, Governor McCrory, HB2, Hillary Clinton, North Carolina, Uncategorized | , , , , | Leave a comment

Fox News Debate: A Presidential Prize Fight

Modern American political debates are too often like heavy weight prize fights; you buy the pay-per-view package and the fight is over before the burgers are off the grill. That is to say, they are underwhelming, disappointing and anti-climactic. More times than not, they most closely parallel Super Bowl XLVIII in 2014 in which Seattle was a mile high ahead of Denver by halftime, and the only thing left to see was Bruno Mars. Surely a Republican presidential debate, hosted by Fox News, with ten surly men crammed onto a stage, would be headed for this same dubious fate. This night, I surmised, was on a one-way fast train for the dustbin of history. Turn out the lights; the party’s over before it starts.

First things first: allow me to make an admission by writing the following phrase which might signal the apocalypse. Fox News produced an organized, engaging, effective and substantive debate which I did not think was possible given the format and Fox’s widely held reputation as being the mouthpiece of the Republican Party. I figured there was no chance that the obnoxious, pernicious pre-debate build up would ultimately be matched by the debate itself. I have not been so wrong since I argued that reigning MVP Steph Curry was too small to be an effective NBA guard. This thing was Holyfield/Tyson good, sans the ear biting (though Rand Paul came close). The three moderators, led by Megyn Kelly, were tough, confident and direct. They demonstrated complete control of the action when, given the sheer numbers and egos involved, the debate could have easily and quickly devolved into utter chaos. Captivated, I watched the debate from start to finish, instantly doubling my previous time spent viewing Fox News combined. Much to my pleasant surprise, I had time for wings, popcorn and dessert (Haagen-Dazs’ rocky road).

The main draw for the debate was the cantankerous and unfiltered Donald Trump; as such, with some regret and revulsion, I will start there. Bluntly, I think Trump damaged himself beyond repair. To his great credit, Mr. Trump stuck to his stylistic guns, spewing invective and vitriol at everyone from Megyn Kelly and Rosie O’Donnell, to his fellow debaters, to President Obama and Hillary Clinton. His vast array of verbal jabs were as impressive as they were numerous. What was not impressive was his display of vocabulary as his use of the word “stupid” would have made for an ideal drinking game. Uninspiring, too, was Trump’s grasp of the issues. Trump’s great hope is that his caustic tongue somehow overshadows his dearth of policy knowledge. Unlike the campaign trail where slick-tongued personal attacks suffice, the debate stage does Trump no favors in this regard. Perhaps inevitably, he was exposed, left naked to engage meekly in the policy discussions with which he was surrounded.

Ted Cruz’s flickering star has quickly faded into a black hole coinciding with the recent rising fortunes of Donald Trump. There is only enough oxygen in the room for one ornery, hyperbole-prone braggart, leaving Mr. Cruz gasping for air. On this night, he was memorable for being truly forgettable. Until his rather amusing and crafty closing statement, so, too, was Dr. Ben Carson. I kept hoping someone on the stage would pinch Dr. Carson to ensure that he was awake, or at least alive. When he did speak, agonizingly slowly and droningly, he displayed a clear lack of breadth and depth on the issues which should summarily disqualify the good doctor from contention. As for Mike Huckabee, where does one start? Considering some of the filth and non-sense that comes out of his mouth, it is often difficult to remember that he is a man of faith, and one who was once interesting, charming and likable. Now, I can’t imagine enough voters putting their faith in Huckabee to keep his flailing, desperate campaign alive. File him squarely in the category of “also ran….again….why.”

Given their rather comical verbal duel, I will lump Chris Christie and Rand Paul together. If you watched the debate, you will fondly remember the lively exchange between Christie and Paul concerning national security, the federal eavesdropping program, and more generally the collection of personal data. While I thought both scored points with their respective bases, Governor Christie served up several devastating body blows by reminding folks that he was a federal prosecutor on September 11, 2001 charged with prosecuting many of the terrorists involved. Though combative, Mr. Paul came off as defensive, naïve and probably too dovish for much of the Republican primary electorate. Responding to Paul’s assertion that the data should be collected by obtaining a warrant issued by a judge pursuant to the Fourth Amendment, Governor Christie delivered the technical knockout with this little dandy, “Listen senator, when you’re sitting in a subcommittee just blowing hot air about this, you can say things like that.” Score the round for Christie; while Paul is most likely down for the count.

Jeb Bush, or Jeb (as he’s called in Florida), did fine. Unlike several observers, I do not think Jeb was badly hurt by his pedestrian debate performance. It is true that he seemed nervous, uneven and tepid, particularly early in the debate. But I did not expect Bush to be overly assertive and aggressive; it is not his style. I appreciate his composure, cool under fire, and respect for his fellow candidates. Further, I admire that he has not taken the bait to move to the right on immigration, becoming more divisive and ugly in the mold of Trump, Cruz and Huckabee. More than these three, certainly, he looks and feels presidential. Jeb lives to fight another day.

Now to the man who enjoyed the home field advantage: John Kasich. I did not find the governor to be particularly articulate and he did fumble around a bit; but despite this, he communicated his message better than the rest. He used engaging hand gestures, an endearing smile and a folksy delivery to reach out to, and pull in, the audience.   He displayed an impressive grasp of the issues due to his extensive experience in various political offices. But, more than that, Mr. Kasich was able to portray an empathy, warmth and understanding for those with opposing viewpoints and those less fortunate. He came across as a leader; a viable option for president. Above all, he connected. And, lest we forget, his father was a mailman. Skillfully exploiting his Buckeye State advantage, I believe John Kasich had the second best night of all the candidates.

Marco. Rubio. Marco. Rubio. I would peg Florida Senator Marco Rubio as the overall winner of the first Republican debate. In contrast to Trump, Cruz and Huckabee, the baby-faced Rubio was congenial, pleasant and polite while still deftly hammering home his points. The silent assassin, I will dub him going forward. While Trump uses demagoguery to shout loudly and incoherently about immigration, Rubio displayed an impressive command of the facts and actually provided evidence. Responding to Trump, Mr. Rubio explained, “Let me set the record straight on a couple of things. The first is, the evidence is now clear that the majority of people coming across the border are not from Mexico. They’re coming from Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras. Those countries are the source of the people that are now coming in its majority. I also believe we need a fence. The problem is if El Chapo builds a tunnel under the fence, we have to be able to deal with that, too. And that’s why you need an e-verify system and you need an entry-exit tracking system and all sorts of other things to prevent illegal immigration.”

Marco Rubio has an intriguing and compelling personal story, which he cleverly used to his advantage. Smartly setting his sights on the presumptive Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton, Mr. Rubio scolded, “If I’m our nominee, how is Hillary Clinton going to lecture me about living paycheck to paycheck? I was raised paycheck to paycheck. How is she—how is she gonna lecture me—how is she gonna lecture me about student loans? I owed over $100,000 just four years ago.” Not yet finished with Clinton, Rubio landed a solid right hook when he quipped that while the Republicans have fielded several strong candidates for president, the Democrats can’t find one. Given his Hispanic background, personal story, fresh face, cross-over appeal, composed demeanor, and obvious intelligence and firm grasp of the issues, I contend that the Democrats, and Ms. Clinton, ought to fear a Marco Rubio candidacy more than any other. Following Thursday’s debate, that truth has become all the more evident. Marco with the KO.

It will be fascinating to see the post-debate polling in the coming days, but my conjecture is that Donald Trump’s support will fall precipitously. As John Kasich said during the debate, Donald Trump has tapped into a frustrated and disillusioned artery of the American electorate. For this, he should be commended. Unfortunately for Trump, he was always going to falter once the debates commenced and folks started to pay real attention. Despite the vein he tapped, Americans, at the end of the day, expect their president to be, well, presidential. In the end, Americans do not like, or support, angry presidential candidates. Call Howard Dean for more information; Mr. Trump can give you his cell phone number.

Conversely, I strongly suspect that Governor Kasich will have helped himself in the eyes of the public following the debate. Needless to say, I feel as though Marco Rubio has vaulted himself squarely into contention, and I expect upcoming polls to reflect just that. I did not forget Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin, though it is difficult to remember a moment in which he shined. For this, I imagine that he will begin to fade away just in time for the start of the Green Bay Packers season.

Throughout life, so often our lofty expectations are rudely met with cold disappointment. Given this, it is truly a gift when just the opposite comes to pass. Fox News and the Republican candidates for president gave us such a moment on Thursday night. A muddied picture has become clearer; a crowded race has seemed to thin. Perhaps it wasn’t Lincoln-Douglas, but it was as good as it could have been.  Following the debate, I never could have imagined that this would become the water cooler question: Where were you on Thursday night when the clock tolled nine, the lights came up at Quicken Loans Arena, and Cleveland rocked? I had a front row seat for the fight, chicken wings and all.

August 8, 2015 Posted by | 2016 Presidential Election, Chris Christie, Donald Trump, Dr. Ben Carson, First Republican Presidential Debate, Fox News Debate, Jeb Bush, John Kasich, Marco Rubio, Mike Huckabee, Rand Paul, Scott Walker, Ted Cruz | , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Hillary Rodham Clinton – La Reine Soleil

Hillary Clinton confirmed last week what breathing folks have known since she lost the 2008 Democratic nomination to Barack Obama in spectacularly stunning fashion: she is running for president again in 2016. High drama, this was not. It did not approach the theatrics surrounding another prominent decision – The Decision – Lebron James’ 2010 made-for-television pronouncement that he was bolting his hometown Cleveland Cavaliers to join forces with Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh in the greener (and far warmer) pastures of Miami. To the contrary, the pre-recorded video formally announcing Clinton’s candidacy was notable for its humility and for being remarkably understated, lacking the flair and bravado of her ’08 leap of faith (and certainly that of Lebron’s). The more subdued, and less entitled, approach this time around is ultimately wise, in my view. As was the now famous choice to lunch at Chipotle – particularly the bold move to add guacamole to her chicken burrito bowl (at extra cost, no less) – which must be popular with voters, and many non-voters, given the frustratingly long lines at every store I’ve frequented circa lunch or dinner time.

In this campaign, Hillary – first name sufficing – wields the proverbial double-edged sword: name recognition. Unlike most other candidates, Hillary Clinton does not need an introduction to the American people. We know her, and intimately. We watched as she transformed the role of first lady, for better or worse, during the presidency of her husband. We continued to watch as she represented New Yorkers, a newly-minted resident of the state herself, as their junior senator for 8 years in the United States Congress. We came along for the often bumpy ride as she joined, perhaps surprisingly, President Obama’s “Team of Rivals” cabinet – leading the State Department, and presenting the face of American foreign policy to the world, during the president’s first term. Grass, it’s safe to say, does not grow under Mrs. Clinton’s pumps-clad feet.

I write this column to neither proclaim my support for Mrs. Clinton’s candidacy nor deny it. It is far too early for that, despite the ridiculously premature endorsements she, and others, have already received. I do, however, write in support of her running – whatever the outcome. On its face, this is not a particularly controversial position to take. Since Mrs. Clinton declared her candidacy, however, I have read and heard copious commentary lamenting the fact that there could be, God forbid, another Clinton in the White House. Putting an exclamation point on the hyperbole, one commentator even suggested that we must be living in 18th century France or some other European-style monarchy. As if Hillary is a modern day Louis XIV – our very own la reine soleil.

What comes next, I presume, will be more controversial. It is this: I believe the American people will, or won’t, elect Hillary Clinton the next president of the United States irrespective of the fact that her husband previously served in the same capacity. Further, I submit that Bill’s being president – not Bill himself – will effectively play no vital role in Hillary’s effort to do the same. Let me be clear: Bill Clinton’s acute political acumen, general intelligence and unique ability to communicate policy in layman’s terms – he was, after all, dubbed the Secretary of Explaining Stuff during President Obama’s re-election campaign in 2012 – will be an invaluable asset for Hillary. However, if Hillary Clinton is hauling her vast pant-suit collection to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in January 2017, it will be at the behest of the American electorate. There will have been no coronation. Her surname will not have been relevant. She will have earned the right to live there, and decorate accordingly, on her own merits.

Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton are, obviously, two different people. Though married, I am certain that there are policy differences which exist between them, often dramatically so. My own observations are that Hillary, for example, is more hawkish from a foreign policy standpoint. Moreover, Hillary seems more comfortable addressing foreign policy issues, while Bill seems far more knowledgeable about – and interested in – the nuances and intricacies of economic policy. ’08 Hillary competed with then-Senator Obama in the primary to determine which candidate was more virulently anti-trade, even though President Clinton famously (or infamously, depending upon your point of view) signed NAFTA. Some political observers view Hillary as more ideological, Bill more pragmatic.  The list, I’m sure, goes on.

Coincidentally, or perhaps not so, this same election will see yet another Bush run for the presidency as well. I feel the same way concerning Jeb’s campaign for president as I do Hillary’s. Jeb should not suffer, or gain, from the previous presidencies of his father and brother. Simply put, he is not them. In a recent interview with Politico, George W. Bush candidly surmised that he would pose an obstacle to Jeb’s candidacy. While likely true, he should not be. What is to say that Jeb Bush would not be a far better president than his brother? Or far worse, for that matter?

As Governor of Florida, Jeb was well-known to be intensely interested and involved in the minutia of policymaking. He took great pains to understand the nuances of policy about which he had to make decisions. Nuanced is not a term with which his brother would likely be mistaken. Further, Jeb is widely considered to be more intellectual and serious-minded relative to his brother. Undoubtedly, Jeb’s life experiences are divergent from that of George’s, and certainly those of his father’s. Consequently, it could very well be that his worldview is different as well.

Most Americans identify (read: stigmatize) George W. Bush with his 2003 decision to invade Iraq based largely on the erroneous conclusion that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. But who is to say that Jeb, considering the same objective facts, would have come to the same conclusion? Accordingly, this should not be held as an electoral albatross around Jeb’s neck. Admittedly, I have long been a big fan of Bill Clinton, but this truth would never form the basis for my supporting his wife for president. Nor should the inverse be true. Likewise, I am hopeful that George Bush supporters (junior or senior) do not plan to vote for Jeb based on that reason alone. Or vice versa.

Furthermore, I plainly reject the notion of “two for one” concerning a Hillary Clinton presidency. I do not believe that a First Man Bill Clinton will act as a quasi co-president, nor should he. That being said, I am not naïve enough to believe that Bill would have no influence on a Hillary presidency. Of course, to some degree, he would. Just as George W. and/or George H. W. might have some influence on a Jeb presidency. The effect, though, would be miniscule as compared to the advisers they hire and with which they associate.

In my view, then, instead of fretting over the prospects of another Clinton or Bush occupying the White House, it would be far more useful to focus on Hillary, Jeb, their associates, their advisers, their policies, their qualifications and their experiences. Oh, and their challengers. There is a nasty little rumor that there might be other candidates who dare to join the race – carelessly and rudely jeopardizing our bid for an American monarchy. And our very own la reine soleil.

April 24, 2015 Posted by | 2016 Presidential Election, Bill Clinton, Democratic Party, Democratic Primary, Hillary Clinton, Jeb Bush | , , , , , | Leave a comment