Saturday, 8 August 2015

Trump's rise was inevitable

No one doubts that Trump will fail to become President of the United States. The most likely trajectory is that some time between now and November 2016, Trump will begin to perceive both dwindling support and rising expenses and realize that he'd rather remain a billionaire than bet it all on a losing proposition. My guess is that this will happen sometime in February or March of 2016, but it could be much sooner, if polls change.

What Trump needs to maintain his lead is a huge field of Republican candidates. As long as the 75-80% of Americans who don't support him are divided 17 ways, then Trump can triumphantly crow about winning. But eventually some of the smaller candidates, who aren't self-funding, will begin to run out of money. Their donors will pull back and they will read the writing on the wall. Once the field narrows down to a reasonable 7 or 8 candidates, support will move to one or two who will begin to overshadow Trump.

That requires neither great insight nor knowledge. What I think this particular election cycle teaches us is that there is no longer a difference between entertainment and political leadership. When Trump was challenged on his misogynistic comments, he interrupted timed exactly as it would be on a TV game show, drawing the same laughs. Trump played his part. Despite their attempts to challenge Trump (and other candidates) on issues, the Fox media could not escape its main role as entertainment. Trump is ahead right now because he is the only candidate running who has made a career out of being in the spotlight. He is bulletproof because he understands that there is no bad publicity.

Challenged about asking a woman on Celebrity Apprentice to get down on her knees (I thought this was a reference to oral sex, but apparently it was a reference to her begging to keep her job), Trump failed to give what I thought was the obvious answer: "We do things on the TV show to play for ratings, to create a character, you can no more attach those statements to me than you can use lines that Reagan might have said in Bedtime for Bonzo." But I was wrong. There is no line between entertainment and political life any more.

As I write this, I'm still waiting for new polls to reveal how the debates have shifted the standings among GOP candidates, but I'm sure Trump has not gone down. In fact, his presence dampened all other candidates. No one dared take a shot at him. That was left to the moderators, and look how they fared. No one could say out loud, this is a contest for leadership of the United States of America, not Celebrity Apprentice.

Coming from the left, this gives me no glee. Trump, either as an independent, a GOP candidate or merely a failed candidate will help the Democrats hold the White House. But the march of style of substance continues.

How many people on the left rely (relied) on Jon Stewart for their news? What a farce! (And I mean this both literally and metaphorically.) Stewart's whole schtick was to take snippets of news stories and make fun of whoever was involved. He presented no in-depth analysis. He gave no new data. He did not provide reportage of issues ignored by mainstream media. He couldn't. He relied on people having at least a little knowledge of the issue. And then he made you laugh. And he made me laugh. But he didn't teach anything new. All he did was entertain us. And people turn off their TV sets at night believing they are knowledgeable about world affairs but without any new knowledge.

Reading the Gettysburg Address, I don't see any place where Lincoln paused for a joke. I don't see humor in Dr. King's I have a Dream speech. But politicians for the last 30 years have had to show their lighter side. Obama is great at self-deprecating jokes. But democracy has become some kind of sitcom. We need our laugh track along with our ballot boxes. And who gets the biggest laugh wins.

And that's the saddest part of all.

No comments:

Post a Comment