28043467
If you’re looking for a consensus in America these days, it’s that a good many Democrats and Republicans dislike their leading candidates for President. We have known for a long time that Hillary Clinton is disliked by a significant number of white males and not as popular as we once thought with white female voters either. Indeed, if not for the loyalty of African-Americans in these primaries, Clinton would be losing the nomination to a 74-year-old self-styled Democratic Socialist named Bernie Sanders.
While Sanders has been an earnest and energetic campaigner, his “revolutionary” agenda is almost a banal duplicate that is trotted out every four years by the American Left. It is no wonder then that Bernie’s base consists of many youthful voters. At least the wish list is new to them. I would hazard a guess the promise of free tuition at public universities and forgiveness of their college loans is the bauble that mostly grabs them. With Hillary, she is an example of the candidate who has been on the public scene too long and carries the baggage not only of her own tenure as Secretary of State, but that of her husband’s presidency, where, as Christopher Hitchens once put it, he turned the White House into a “massage parlor.” It seems Clinton is perpetually under investigation, and it leaves some Democratic voters wondering whether simultaneously with winning the nomination, she will also be indicted. Perhaps that is what fuels Sanders hopes as he promises to ride this horse all the way to the Democratic Convention.
It was Barack Obama who contemptuously told Hillary during one of their debates in 2008, “you’re likeable enough.” Despite her flaws, Hillary leads by a wide margin as we slog through the endless primary season because she is arguably the most experienced and knowledgeable of the five remaining candidates. It may also be a sign that we as voters have matured and no longer feel the need to choose our president by whether we would like to share a beer (or a white wine spritzer) with him or her. No doubt among her shifting positions she has made mistakes in the past during her political career (Hillary’s political career must, in any fair account, include her tenure as First Lady when she was in charge of developing a national health care system that failed to get through Congress). However, if we have matured as an electorate, the presence of Donald Trump as the leading contender for the Republican nomination surely belies that hope.
He, like Hillary (perhaps the only time that you will ever read that phrase in a sentence), is disliked by a disproportionate share of his own Republican Party. Trump, through the shallowness of his own candidacy, has also proved the shallowness of his supporters. He is truly an example of a person who doesn’t know what he doesn’t know. The Republican establishment, asleep for the months that Trump built his lead in delegates, now scurries around like the crew on the Titanic to try to stop him. It seems at this moment as if their attempts will end with them all playing Leonardo DiCaprio being tossed into the sea. At least Leonardo had Kate Winslet to mourn him. Conservatives act as if end times is upon them, as if they have found a moth hole in their Harris Tweeds. Meanwhile, evangelicals flock to Trump while still believing Obama is the anti-Christ. An astonishing 61 percent of Trump’s supporters still believe Obama is a Muslim. Trump’s rallies turn into fascist displays of violence visited upon protesters, the sucker punch being the weapon of choice.
It’s not as if Republican voters didn’t have a choice for lack of candidates. Imagine starting out with 17 candidates, which included members of Congress and a couple of governors, and having Donald Trump emerge as the nominee. It’s a bit like dining at Le Bernardin and choosing chopped steak off the menu.
Talk of a free-wheeling brokered convention still seems the result of the overworked imaginations of cable news anchors. More likely, voters will face a choice of Clinton versus Trump in November. What will those voters who dislike both candidates do on Election Day? There is talk of a third-party candidate, but rules in many states heavily favor the two-party system and make it difficult for any others to get on the ballot as the days dwindle down to November. And no matter what establishment politicians say, they know putting a third party in play dooms their own party’s chances of winning the White House. Most politicians would rather slice off a limb than give up presidential power for four to eight years. There is a mitigating factor. The rest of the party’s ticket is in jeopardy. Lose those closely contested elections, and your rivals not only win the White House, they also win Congress. So the party faithful try to decide the once unthinkable – is it better to lose the White House in order to save the ticket?
In truth, the national Republican Party is a chaotic mess. During my lifetime, the only parallel is when the Democrats disintegrated in 1968 and then capped their undoing in 1972 when George McGovern won one state. At least back then, the Democrats didn’t have Tommy Manville as their candidate. ■
