Just a ramble in the wake of the greatest con. I am convinced the future will confirm Trump to be a fantastic con man, skirting the edges of the law to leach assets from others.
Barring something truly bizarre, Trump will be our president for the next 4 years. If you’re like me, this is a sad occasion. We’ve elected a man whose platform was built on his business acumen, yet serious doubt remains about whether he’s built healthy businesses. He could have put all of it to rest by just releasing his taxes, but he didn’t. There are interesting nuggets suggesting strong ties to Russia as well. And he’s just an asshole, demeaning and marginalizing virtually every group that isn’t white, straight and male. Unity seems not to be his strong suit, and caring for people outside his immediate circle seems never to have been on his agenda. He says he will represent all Americans; that we should be united, but he’s shown zero tendency towards that. Ever. To make matters even more dire, the Senate and House remain majority Republican. A variety of economic, political, social and international issues are suddenly very much at risk of drastic change. While change is not inherently bad, the likely changes are more alarming than reassuring. Instead of trying to predict exactly what will happen, it’s better to look at potential broad arcs and consider how to recognize we’re on one and how to respond. The arcs can coexist, and I’ll break them apart into the listed buckets.
Social ramifications
The hallmark progress in the Obama administration was around LGBTQ rights. Marriage equality became federally protected. Same-sex couples could be married and enjoy the same family rights. Planned Parenthood came under vicious, unjust, attack from the right and lost a lot of funding and ability to operate due to regressive laws enacted by heavily red states. This hurts women and their right to choose; it also hurts women and their basic health. Let’s not forget that the vast majority of what Planned Parenthood does is NOT abortions. They fill a gap in low income basic health care that is limited not just to reproductive health, but also cancer screening.
In the meantime Justice Scalia unexpectedly died. Republicans refused to even vote on a compromise candidate offered by Obama despite vast majority agreement a year prior that Garland would be the kind of justice they would easily approve. It was a huge gambit that, now, has paid off. Had Hillary won, most likely an alternate, far more liberal, justice would be nominated. Now Trump gets to pick, and his runaway congress can rubberstamp his choice. Trump has pledged to pick someone who would be on the unfriendly side of choice; such a candidate is also likely to be anti LGBTQ marriage and family rights.
It will be readily apparent if we end up on this path. Unless something incredibly dramatic (like overturning Roe v Wade or outright making abortion illegal) happens, blue states will need to take point on ensuring these rights for their citizens. Democrats need to get their act together and make sure they succeed in electing Democrats in local elections. This will be a common trend, and something Democrats need to do a better job of across the board all the way up to congressional seats. Gerrymandering is an obstacle as well, so perhaps challenging the legality of the districting process is a good place to start?
Economic ramificationsTrump’s economic plan echoes his style: we’re the biggest kid on the block so we can beat trade partners into submission (“renegotiate the bad deals”). Since trading with us is desirable for other countries, they should bend over backwards for the ability to do so and we should profit. Who cares if we piss them off, because America. Fuck yeah. He’s also calling for a tax cut on the rich, which has been shown not to work. He’s spewed protectionist rhetoric as well, but did all these American companies become huge and successful because they were limited in the ways they could engage with the globe? Does manufacturing stuff we import from China lead to more money generated here?
Recognizing this is going to be a little harder. There will be macro-indicators like the health of large indices (Dow, S&P, Nasdaq, … ) and the national GDP, internal indicators like employment and poverty rates. However, all this stuff will take time to sort out. It can either go well, not well, or be a disaster. In the latter two cases, individuals are probably best off pulling out of the stock market. An extreme version would be to liquidate assets and move abroad, or at least move the assets abroad (though that may have some ugly tax tangles).
In the event of an economic downturn, it’s possible that certain parts of the country will hold up better (this has certainly been true, for example in the housing downturn). Sadly this will likely lead to people moving around more and causing even more pronounced separation between rich and poor, red and blue. Score a point against unity.
Political ramifications
This is the one which leaves me with the most hope, but also the most anxiety. In the run-up to the election, unprecedented numbers of heavyweight Republicans (including many members of Congress) did not endorse Trump. While both the Senate and House remain Republican, I predict (or hope at least) that those Republicans will have a hard split. This will create, at least briefly, a sort of 3-party system and prevent a runaway political machine. The numbers are particularly tight in the Senate, only a few Republicans need to cross the aisle or at least not stay in the groupthink. Senators are elected for 6 years, 2/3 of them can either outlast or last through Trump’s presidency. This might give them the courage to act.
Let’s remember that America was built on a system of checks and balances: legislative, executive and judicial can’t act alone, left and right balance each other as well. This is important because it IS how all of America gets representation. When the checks converge on the same side, they disappear. Balance is lost. Even if it were all the side I more agree with, it’d be a bad thing. My hope is that at least some Republicans recognize this and feel it’s their duty to make sure the very basis of the American model is not compromised.
If the party fractures, it will trigger major shifts. The Republican party knew it was in trouble in 2012 and didn’t act. It’s become conservative to the point of impracticality and it needs to change. The issue is not actually that they are hyper-right on all the things, but rather that all the members are aligned on all the things. This is unhealthy; diversity is far more resilient. We’ll see very quickly whether Congress gets in line or not. If they don’t, local elections are the only place to gather resistance until 2018 when we elect the House again and about a third of Senators. Each district and state needs to contribute to diversity to restore the health of the checks and balances.
International ramifications
This is perhaps the most volatile and longest-lasting area and there are so many places for it to go wrong with both allies and adversaries. Trump is on record opposing NATO, the longest, largest, military coexistence in history. Unity, remember? He wants to bomb the hell out of ISIS, which sounds great except that there’s not an ISIS base to bomb; they’re sprinkled throughout populated areas. There’s a lot of smoke around ties and loyalty to Russia, which seems concerning. He’s ignored the advice of non-partisan security experts about Russia’s role in hacking schemes. Why use the united strength of the experts when you can just go with your gut? There’s been some sabre-rattling with China that needs to be handled with care. North Korea is a looney toon; again care has to be taken to neither provoke or be provoked into something awful, or to be seen as stepping on China’s ally. Why take input from the united judgement of highly respected military leaders when you can just go with your gut? Other countries either don’t respect him or will outright look to exploit him.
Other ramifications
Trump repeatedly states that he will hire all the best people. His first announced appointment is slated to be a global warming skeptic to head up the EPA. This will lead to 4 more years of ignoring issues with fossil fuels. America will probably Drill Baby, Drill! We’ll have more oil-related accidents too. And we won’t invest in renewable energy. Depending on where we live, we can choose to invest in solar power and hybrid cars ourselves, but a federally supported program would have way bigger impact. In the meantime, we can look to companies to lead the way in showing that using clean energy or being carbon neutral can be a part of a sustainable, profitable venture. I’m sure there will be lots more questionable appointments.
The state of public discourse
Trump has also has a very sketchy relationship with the truth. Many say the same about Hillary, but I’d draw a serious distinction here. Hillary’s lies (to the degree you believe she’s lying) were mostly self-preserving: they were about keeping herself out of trouble. Trump lies about things that directly impact citizens, about how his policies will help those who support him. He has been given the highest office in the land despite proving nothing about his own competence for the job. Clinton can point to her public service track record which is on public record. We can each go and decide if we like what she’s done. Trump points to a black box and says “trust me, I’m great and do great things.” He’s unwilling to put any facts into the public domain. Is he as rich as he says? Are his businesses healthy and sustainable? Does he have deep personal financial ties to Russia? Or has he just swindled everyone along the way, perhaps on the fringes or legality, and gotten rich at everyone else’s expense. It certainly would be consistent with his attitudes on international trade agreements, penchant for lawsuits and bullying contracted companies into taking less money than agreed upon. All this matters because he’s explicitly used his business acumen to support his credibility as a potential president. He unapologetically lied about everything and it didn’t seem to matter. He’s made it legit to conduct a presidential primary and race in this manner. He’s gone so far outside the bounds of decorum that I’m not sure we get to come back for a while.
Discussion has been reduced to threats, unproven claims and blatant lies. In the end, I think he’ll be revealed as a con man, and con men aren’t usually interested in helping the people they took advantage of along the way. They have no qualms about acting like this as long as they get ahead.
Barring something truly bizarre, Trump will be our president for the next 4 years. If you’re like me, this is a sad occasion. We’ve elected a man whose platform was built on his business acumen, yet serious doubt remains about whether he’s built healthy businesses. He could have put all of it to rest by just releasing his taxes, but he didn’t. There are interesting nuggets suggesting strong ties to Russia as well. And he’s just an asshole, demeaning and marginalizing virtually every group that isn’t white, straight and male. Unity seems not to be his strong suit, and caring for people outside his immediate circle seems never to have been on his agenda. He says he will represent all Americans; that we should be united, but he’s shown zero tendency towards that. Ever. To make matters even more dire, the Senate and House remain majority Republican. A variety of economic, political, social and international issues are suddenly very much at risk of drastic change. While change is not inherently bad, the likely changes are more alarming than reassuring. Instead of trying to predict exactly what will happen, it’s better to look at potential broad arcs and consider how to recognize we’re on one and how to respond. The arcs can coexist, and I’ll break them apart into the listed buckets.
Social ramifications
The hallmark progress in the Obama administration was around LGBTQ rights. Marriage equality became federally protected. Same-sex couples could be married and enjoy the same family rights. Planned Parenthood came under vicious, unjust, attack from the right and lost a lot of funding and ability to operate due to regressive laws enacted by heavily red states. This hurts women and their right to choose; it also hurts women and their basic health. Let’s not forget that the vast majority of what Planned Parenthood does is NOT abortions. They fill a gap in low income basic health care that is limited not just to reproductive health, but also cancer screening.
In the meantime Justice Scalia unexpectedly died. Republicans refused to even vote on a compromise candidate offered by Obama despite vast majority agreement a year prior that Garland would be the kind of justice they would easily approve. It was a huge gambit that, now, has paid off. Had Hillary won, most likely an alternate, far more liberal, justice would be nominated. Now Trump gets to pick, and his runaway congress can rubberstamp his choice. Trump has pledged to pick someone who would be on the unfriendly side of choice; such a candidate is also likely to be anti LGBTQ marriage and family rights.
It will be readily apparent if we end up on this path. Unless something incredibly dramatic (like overturning Roe v Wade or outright making abortion illegal) happens, blue states will need to take point on ensuring these rights for their citizens. Democrats need to get their act together and make sure they succeed in electing Democrats in local elections. This will be a common trend, and something Democrats need to do a better job of across the board all the way up to congressional seats. Gerrymandering is an obstacle as well, so perhaps challenging the legality of the districting process is a good place to start?
Economic ramificationsTrump’s economic plan echoes his style: we’re the biggest kid on the block so we can beat trade partners into submission (“renegotiate the bad deals”). Since trading with us is desirable for other countries, they should bend over backwards for the ability to do so and we should profit. Who cares if we piss them off, because America. Fuck yeah. He’s also calling for a tax cut on the rich, which has been shown not to work. He’s spewed protectionist rhetoric as well, but did all these American companies become huge and successful because they were limited in the ways they could engage with the globe? Does manufacturing stuff we import from China lead to more money generated here?
Recognizing this is going to be a little harder. There will be macro-indicators like the health of large indices (Dow, S&P, Nasdaq, … ) and the national GDP, internal indicators like employment and poverty rates. However, all this stuff will take time to sort out. It can either go well, not well, or be a disaster. In the latter two cases, individuals are probably best off pulling out of the stock market. An extreme version would be to liquidate assets and move abroad, or at least move the assets abroad (though that may have some ugly tax tangles).
In the event of an economic downturn, it’s possible that certain parts of the country will hold up better (this has certainly been true, for example in the housing downturn). Sadly this will likely lead to people moving around more and causing even more pronounced separation between rich and poor, red and blue. Score a point against unity.
Political ramifications
This is the one which leaves me with the most hope, but also the most anxiety. In the run-up to the election, unprecedented numbers of heavyweight Republicans (including many members of Congress) did not endorse Trump. While both the Senate and House remain Republican, I predict (or hope at least) that those Republicans will have a hard split. This will create, at least briefly, a sort of 3-party system and prevent a runaway political machine. The numbers are particularly tight in the Senate, only a few Republicans need to cross the aisle or at least not stay in the groupthink. Senators are elected for 6 years, 2/3 of them can either outlast or last through Trump’s presidency. This might give them the courage to act.
Let’s remember that America was built on a system of checks and balances: legislative, executive and judicial can’t act alone, left and right balance each other as well. This is important because it IS how all of America gets representation. When the checks converge on the same side, they disappear. Balance is lost. Even if it were all the side I more agree with, it’d be a bad thing. My hope is that at least some Republicans recognize this and feel it’s their duty to make sure the very basis of the American model is not compromised.
If the party fractures, it will trigger major shifts. The Republican party knew it was in trouble in 2012 and didn’t act. It’s become conservative to the point of impracticality and it needs to change. The issue is not actually that they are hyper-right on all the things, but rather that all the members are aligned on all the things. This is unhealthy; diversity is far more resilient. We’ll see very quickly whether Congress gets in line or not. If they don’t, local elections are the only place to gather resistance until 2018 when we elect the House again and about a third of Senators. Each district and state needs to contribute to diversity to restore the health of the checks and balances.
International ramifications
This is perhaps the most volatile and longest-lasting area and there are so many places for it to go wrong with both allies and adversaries. Trump is on record opposing NATO, the longest, largest, military coexistence in history. Unity, remember? He wants to bomb the hell out of ISIS, which sounds great except that there’s not an ISIS base to bomb; they’re sprinkled throughout populated areas. There’s a lot of smoke around ties and loyalty to Russia, which seems concerning. He’s ignored the advice of non-partisan security experts about Russia’s role in hacking schemes. Why use the united strength of the experts when you can just go with your gut? There’s been some sabre-rattling with China that needs to be handled with care. North Korea is a looney toon; again care has to be taken to neither provoke or be provoked into something awful, or to be seen as stepping on China’s ally. Why take input from the united judgement of highly respected military leaders when you can just go with your gut? Other countries either don’t respect him or will outright look to exploit him.
Other ramifications
Trump repeatedly states that he will hire all the best people. His first announced appointment is slated to be a global warming skeptic to head up the EPA. This will lead to 4 more years of ignoring issues with fossil fuels. America will probably Drill Baby, Drill! We’ll have more oil-related accidents too. And we won’t invest in renewable energy. Depending on where we live, we can choose to invest in solar power and hybrid cars ourselves, but a federally supported program would have way bigger impact. In the meantime, we can look to companies to lead the way in showing that using clean energy or being carbon neutral can be a part of a sustainable, profitable venture. I’m sure there will be lots more questionable appointments.
The state of public discourse
Trump has also has a very sketchy relationship with the truth. Many say the same about Hillary, but I’d draw a serious distinction here. Hillary’s lies (to the degree you believe she’s lying) were mostly self-preserving: they were about keeping herself out of trouble. Trump lies about things that directly impact citizens, about how his policies will help those who support him. He has been given the highest office in the land despite proving nothing about his own competence for the job. Clinton can point to her public service track record which is on public record. We can each go and decide if we like what she’s done. Trump points to a black box and says “trust me, I’m great and do great things.” He’s unwilling to put any facts into the public domain. Is he as rich as he says? Are his businesses healthy and sustainable? Does he have deep personal financial ties to Russia? Or has he just swindled everyone along the way, perhaps on the fringes or legality, and gotten rich at everyone else’s expense. It certainly would be consistent with his attitudes on international trade agreements, penchant for lawsuits and bullying contracted companies into taking less money than agreed upon. All this matters because he’s explicitly used his business acumen to support his credibility as a potential president. He unapologetically lied about everything and it didn’t seem to matter. He’s made it legit to conduct a presidential primary and race in this manner. He’s gone so far outside the bounds of decorum that I’m not sure we get to come back for a while.
Discussion has been reduced to threats, unproven claims and blatant lies. In the end, I think he’ll be revealed as a con man, and con men aren’t usually interested in helping the people they took advantage of along the way. They have no qualms about acting like this as long as they get ahead.
No comments:
Post a Comment