↓
 
Home » The Titanic election

The Titanic election

The New Neo Posted on by

Have you noticed that a lot of news aggregate websites are completely consumed by links to articles about this election? That happens every election year to a certain extent, but this year it seems completely out of hand. Remember how, when Trump first announced his candidacy and was campaigning during the summer of 2015, pundits kept writing that he was “sucking the air out of the room”? Well, it’s still happening, only now it’s Trump vs. Hillary that’s sucking the air out of the newsroom.

I think there’s a reason for it. There’s something surpassingly strange about this election, and it’s not just Trump. The basic idea is that nearly everyone detests both candidates, and yet those appear to be our choices because the third party candidates have failed to catch on as well and people don’t want to throw away their votes.

So, why do the country’s voters find themselves at such an impasse? It’s easier to explain the Hillary nomination, I think, because compared to Trump she’s a conventional candidate, despite the fact that she’s a woman (or maybe at this point because of it) and despite her unpopularity.

Before the summer of 2015 the conventional wisdom was that the GOP was on the upswing after 8 years of Obama, ready for the election of nearly any mainstream GOP candidate the party might have nominated, and probably about to keep the House and perhaps keep the Senate as well, and therefore experience a rare few years of power. In addition, the GOP was doing very well at the state governor and legislative level. Hillary was felt to be an example of the moribund nature of the Democrats, its lack of new blood and its reversion to the old guard of the Clinton years. Plus, Hillary as female candidate was seen as a continuation of the winning “trailblazing” formula that helped propel Obama into office as the first black president. Whatever else you can say about Hillary, she would be the first woman president if elected.

The Democrats also had matters well in hand with the superdelegates controlling the convention. A populist anti-Hillary uprising in the unlikely person of Bernie Sanders had no chance to express the will of the people if that will ran counter to the will of the Party to elect her. So Hillary was the choice of the Democratic powers that be, the true “establishment” candidate.

Trump was (and is) different, very very different. And the process that selected him was very different, involving many opponents rather than a couple, and expressing the will of the people because of the relative lack of superdelegates. But the people whose will was being expressed—who were they? First of all, they were not a majority of the party. They were also a combination (as best we can tell) of people who saw themselves as at war with or at the very least angry at a Republican Party that had betrayed them, some nihilists, an undisclosed number of white supremacists, and a smattering (or perhaps more than a smattering; we’ve never really determined) of Democrats and Independents who crossed over to vote in the GOP primary.

The party leaders were aghast but could do nothing or perhaps chose to do nothing as their party was taken over by a nominee who seems antithetical to many of its causes and erratic in his behavior, who has never had a particle of political experience.

So the GOP campaign year, which had set out full of promise, turned into the current mess that threatens not only a GOP presidency but also Congressional control. Although we don’t know for sure, Trump may indeed lose and lose big, and drag the rest down with him. And the GOP leaders seem powerless and paralyzed, unable to do a thing about it.

So that’s what I mean about the Titanic election. It’s Titanic in the sense of being big and seemingly important. It’s Titanic in the sense of the voyage having held great promise at the outset. And it’s Titanic in the sense that we see the iceberg ahead and feel we are on a course to strike it, but can’t seem to turn this huge huge ship of state around in time.

[NOTE: I wonder sometimes whether this year’s disaster was inevitable or avoidable. The Democrats’ decline seems baked in the cake, and the GOP’s internal war has been brewing since at least the middle of the 20th Century. So maybe the answer is “inevitable.” Then again, Trump is so unique that I see him as something of a black swan.]

Comments

The Titanic election — 38 Comments

  1. Trump would be excellent in a reality tv series titled The Black Swan. 😉 This has been and remains a strange election cycle. People who have support both djt and hrc do not inspire confidence that my grandchildren have much of a chance to inherit a republic.

    Thanks for being steady at the tiller neo, please keep doing what you do so well.

  2. …in every sense of the connotation I’m afraid.

    Except for the lifeboats.

    There’s no lifeboats.

  4. The GOP has already hit the iceberg, which is named “Trump”. Now, we’re just waiting for it to sink. Man the lifeboats!

  6. If Trump hadn’t come along, don’t you think current Trump voters would continue to feel disenfranchised? I find it very easy to imagine them replacing Trump with some other out-of-nowhere extremist, had Trump never run.
    In which case, I think “inevitable” is about right.

  7. I would add a fractured electorate that could not and still cannot reach consensus and, that Trump made the clearest assault upon the politically correct memes of the Left.

  9. “The Democrats’ decline seems baked in the cake.”
    Excuse me?
    They won’t go quietly. They won’t go at all. Venezuela, here we come.

    “some nihilists, an undisclosed number of white supremicists [sic], and a smattering (or perhaps more than a smattering; we’ve never really determined) of Democrats and Independents who crossed over to vote in the GOP primary.”
    Excuse me?
    An undisclosed number of white supremacists? Like Sen. Robert KKK Byrd (D-VA)?
    Independents who “crossed over”?
    From the Independent Party primary, you mean?

    That is all really too much.

  10. “I would add a fractured electorate that could not and still cannot reach consensus and, that Trump made the clearest assault upon the politically correct memes of the Left.” [Geoffrey Britain @ 3:54]

    Trump was recently described as the Uber of the political establishment. IMO that’s not far off.

  11. trump is a unique character already with wide name recognition.

    Whatever one can say about his stances, trump came out swinging on themes that resonated with a segment of voters, by going well past “politically correct” boundaries of discourse.

    There are few people that could replicate that.

    Certainly not regular folks running for office.

    There is a certain inevitability of a character like that coming to the fore. However, it is only when the stars align on the rest that it becomes possible that they get anywhere.
    .

    So, Kanye West in 2020? With Kim K as his VP mate?

    Laugh, but they might well be able to pull off what trump has and be just as “outrageous”.
    .

    I cannot help but think that if trump were running for the Dems (and he conceivably could have, given his history), and said all the same things, those who are even reluctantly supporting trump today would be more emphatic about the downside risk of trump than some of us here who find trump unacceptable.

    Interesting thought experiment that.

  12. Frog:

    You can ignore the fact if you want, but there is no question–none whatsoever—that many white supremacists are Trump supporters, and they’re not even shy about it.

    They constitute a strong contingent of the alt-right, and I’ve written about the phenomenon several times. It exists. It’s real, and extremely distasteful, and not in dispute. The question is how large or small a group it might be, and that’s what I’m alluding to here.

    As for the term “crossed over,” the Democrats crossed over, and Independents cannot vote in many state primaries, so in those states they must cross over to register as Republicans for the purpose of the primaries, whatever their usual party leanings. It is also true that most Independents have party leanings.

  13. “Trump was recently described as the Uber of the political establishment.” T.

    Since almost the entire political establishment on both sides has repeatedly come out in support of; continued unrestricted illegal immigration with no support for deportation and greatly increased Muslim migration, while also supporting our current trade policies… upon what basis do you assert Trump to be the “Uber” of the political establishment?

    In addition, whether Trump is sincere is irrelevant to what his supporters perceive, which is that he has advanced “the clearest assault upon the politically correct memes of the Left”.

  14. Matt_SE:

    I believe a lot of them (although certainly not all) would have gone for Cruz.

    I’ve read several studies/polls that indicate that Trump took much of his support from people who originally supported Cruz. Sites like Breitbart and others, pro-Trump sites, early-on started anti-Cruz messages, because I believe they saw Cruz as Trump’s biggest rival for the disaffected GOP vote.

    That’s just one more reason I see Trump’s candidacy as tragic.

  15. They were also a combination (as best we can tell) of people who saw themselves as at war with or at the very least angry at a Republican Party that had betrayed them, some nihilists, an undisclosed number of white supremicists, and a smattering (or perhaps more than a smattering; we’ve never really determined) of Democrats and Independents who crossed over to vote in the GOP primary.

    Those first and last segments here describe very much of flyover country. I grew up amongst them; I know their frustrations. Despite their flaws, they are some of the very finest people I’m privileged to know.

    A good percentage of them are old-school Democrats (not progressives), and, yes, they probably have crossed over to vote in open primaries where possible.

    Thus, it truly disturbs me to see them lumped in with nihilists and white supremacists. They see this happening too, and they won’t forget it.

    That point made (or, my venting complete)…

    I really do wonder that, had H. Ross Perot never happened, if the third party candidates might have some real traction right about now. The memory of that isn’t entirely lost to history.

  16. steve.c:

    What on earth are you talking about? Why would anyone take offense at a list of the different—and obviously disparate—elements that in fact make up Trump’s support?

    Is reality too painful? Do you think they are being tainted by association? Because at no point did I suggest it. It is clear that each group is different and has different reasons for supporting him. But they are all on the list of his supporters, and that is just the reality.

    Lists are lists. For example, if I were to list Hillary’s supporters, I’d list (just off the top of my head): radical leftists, blacks, Hispanics, Jews, liberal Democrats of a more moderate persuasion, Independents and even moderate Republicans who hate Trump, women who only are voting for her because she’s a woman. I’m sure I’m leaving some groups out, but that’s what comes to mind. Are blacks and Jews the same? Are radical leftists and moderate Independents the same, or even similar? Of course not. But if they all vote for Hillary, they are all on the list.

    Some people who support Trump are salt of the earth and extremely well-meaning (and that’s true of some who will be voting for Hillary, by the way). Some are not.

    What kind of logic is it to equate all the people on such a list with each other, or imagine that the person making the list also equates them? No logic at all.

  17. steve.c:

    Interesting point you make about the memory of Perot in 1992 and his effect on the election.

    But I think that memory could go the other way. If you look up the research, the gist of it is that Perot drew as much of Clinton’s vote as he did Bush’s, so the outcome was about the same as if he’d not been in the race. However, I suppose people aren’t aware of that, and the general perception is that he hurt the Republican more.

    Also, Perot got a large percentage of the vote, about 19%. And that was in a time when dissatisfaction with the two main candidates was nowhere near as high as now. So that tells me a decent third-party candidate could (at least arguably) have a better chance than that.

    I agree, though, that the perception of such a candidate is as a spoiler for the GOP nominee.

  18. I voted for Perot. Reluctantly, as Perot had revealed himself to be a flake. At that time I was transitioning away from liberalism. No way could I vote for Clinton, as I smelled a rat early on.

    I was a bit soured on Bush but what sealed it for me was the false TV ‘news’ report that he didn’t know that they even had scanners in supermarkets. The implication was that he was so out of touch that he couldn’t competently lead. Had I not seen that report on Bush, I probably would have voted for him.

  19. I’m on the road the past few days.

    I’ve discovered that McDonald’s wifi censors National Review and Neo, but passes Daily Kos, Vox and other liberal sites straight through, no problem.

    Liberals and progressives really aren’t liberal anymore.

  20. That’s McDonald’s wifi in New Mexico at least. I didn’t have to test California and Arizona.

    ***

    As to Trump, I think he’s a black swan. Yes, the gap between the GOP elite and non-elite has widened and it’s serious.

    But a mega-rich, reality-tv celebrity with the instincts of a professional wrestler who can garner hundreds of millions of dollars of free publicity on the networks inserting himself into the presidential primaries throws all the conventional wisdom out the window.

  21. Why would anyone take offense at a list of the different–and obviously disparate–elements that in fact make up Trump’s support?

    Obviously disparate as far as you and many of us are concerned, yes. To you, this is just a list. I understand, and agree. I’ve read you for a long time, and so, respect and recognize your objectivity.

    Yet, you struck a raw nerve. Why?

    Because, in the course of our “national dialogue” (or, whatever it is), they are very much being tainted by the association, whether incidental or intentional. And they know it. That association has the potential to become an insurmountable divide in our society, after this abomination of an election becomes history.

    Please allow me to be clear: I do not see you making this association whatsoever, it is just a dispassionate slate of factors.

    Outside of this forum, however, it is most definitely being made, with consequences. Thus my frustration.

  22. Neo @5:58pm:However, I suppose people aren’t aware of that, and the general perception is that he hurt the Republican more.

    That’s what I assumed. Since the resulting consequence was the election of WJC, then, GOP voters perceived him as the spoiler, and that memory is persistent even today.

    I’m increasingly seeing this as unfortunate, although, I have a perception that the current Libertarian ticket is really trying to appeal to disaffected Sanders voters. I’m not sure what to make of that.

  23. steve.c:

    All I make of it is that the Libertarians would like to win, or at least make a big dent in both parties (they may not care which one they hurt more).

  24. steve.c:

    Re your comment at 7:02—now I understand what you’re driving at.

    I would go even further and say that, not only are those good people on the list being tainted in many people’s eyes by their support of a man supported by white supremacists, but the conservative movement and all Republicans are also tainted by that association. That’s true even for Republicans and people on the right who don’t support Trump and even detest him. That’s why those who would like to take down the right as a whole cannot believe their good fortune in finding him, and in what he’s done, and in some of the fringe-type groups that support him. The taint spreads far and wide.

  26. GB. Wrt the scanner and Bush. Apparently it was a newer model which is capable of reading damaged codes. He knew about regular scanners, But the journos got to you.
    Wrt “tainted”. Everybody knows that the use of white supremacists is to taint republicans and conservatives. It’s why dems don’t have to repudiate BLM or Robert Byrd. But republicans and conservatives have to repudiate everybody back to Robert E. Lee.

  27. Remember Niven’s Law: no matter how noble the cause, it will still attract fuggheads.

  30. “dems don’t have to repudiate BLM or Robert Byrd. But republicans and conservatives have to repudiate everybody back to Robert E. Lee.” – Richard A

    May be true, but trump is the only GOP POTUS candidate in our lifetimes who has talked in ways that appeal to some of those groups.. Through action and voice, trump has made the left’s caricature of the right somewhat real.

    We have all kept good distance from skunks, but once sprayed by one so prominently, it is hard to get rid of that odor.

  31. May be true, but trump is the only GOP POTUS candidate in our lifetimes who has talked in ways that appeal to some of those groups.. Through action and voice, trump has made the left’s caricature of the right somewhat real.

    Of what strategic benefit is that to the Left though?

    One should think more moves ahead on this topic.

  32. “Of what strategic benefit is that to the Left though?”

    Winning this election?

    Tarring Republicans as racist?

    I know a lot of young people. Many of them firmly believe that Trump is racist and that the Republicans, by extension, are. My own 25 yo daughter, who is a young mom, strong Christian, pro-life, etc, will never vote Republican, maybe ever, because she has a strong antipathy (backed up by lots of research on the subject) toward racial injustice and just doesn’t believe Republicans any more on this subject. She won’t vote for HRC (*probably*) due to HRCs desire to repeal the Hyde amendment and extreme pro-choice stance.

    The GOP is losing an entire generation. I think the party *may* be toast, following a blowout loss this year. It’s on pace to die because instead of selling a compelling conservative vision to minorities and immigrants, it is circling the white wagons and – for the first time perhaps ever – has even attracted a fairly vocal, statistically significant white supremacist wing. This is not a recipe for future success in a society becoming more diverse each day regardless of what we do with immigration laws.

    The GOP should be finding compelling leaders who can communicate the conservative vision in a culturally relevant and just way.

    Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Sorry, I just read that last sentence and figured I needed to laugh or I’d start crying.

    The GOP won’t survive, I fear. But I can’t make predictions.

  33. My own 25 yo daughter, who is a young mom, strong Christian, pro-life, etc, will never vote Republican, maybe ever, because she has a strong antipathy (backed up by lots of research on the subject) toward racial injustice and just doesn’t believe Republicans any more on this subject.

    She ever figure out the Democrat history from 1830 onwards? Or is that “Christian” only in the sense of Southern Baptist Christianity and its histories.

    Tarring Republicans as racist?

    That’s little different from what they’ve been doing this and the previous century. I just don’t see what difference it makes for them to save a little bit of resources on their propaganda. Before, it was 1% true, now it’s 30% true. It doesn’t save them all that much effort. Super majority of the time, they still have to lie and make stuff up as they go along.

    The GOP is losing an entire generation.

    The Leftist alliance started infiltrating teacher positions and unions since 1930s. I think America has so many lost generations now, that people can’t keep count.

  34. “(my daughter) just doesn’t believe Republicans any more on this subject (racism)” – Bill

    Astute point. Credibility has been perhaps mortally wounded, on this and a series of caricatures that the left used to paint the OGP with.

    Some say, the left have been trying to paint the GOP / conservatives for generations. Well, of course.

    The difference was they didn’t have much to point to as evidence from any GOP leader. trump has been way too comfortable playing to those themes. Many of his supporters are only too willing to oblige in providing vocal evidence to their claims. Their numbers are just too big to say it is completely false.

    Not sure if the GOP can both root out that element, while still advocate on those concerns that are legitimate.

  35. “She ever figure out the Democrat history from 1830 onwards? Or is that “Christian” only in the sense of Southern Baptist Christianity and its histories”

    I have to admit, none of your comments make sense to me. I don’t mean that in a mean way, just being honest.

  36. And in re-reading my last comment, I realize that it’s coming across as ungracious. Not meant to be – just not understanding the southern baptist angle, etc…

  37. Without my research notes, the Southern Baptist angle wouldn’t make much sense. You can’t learn a subject by listening to explanations or just reading about it in a day, after all.

    “She ever figure out the Democrat history from 1830 onwards?”

    Which is why you can focus on this line instead.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

↑