The Presidential Conundrum, or American Society 101
It’s happening, and those of us not thrilled might as well get used to it. Donald Trump is winning. He may well win the Republican nomination and run against Hillary Clinton for president.
No matter the polls are predicting a Clinton victory in the general election if Mr. Trump is the Republican nominee. If every individual and group offended by Mr. Trump votes against him, along with the liberal Kool-Aid drinkers, he could indeed lose.
Disenchanted conservatives and believers in true personal liberty are determined to believe that Mr. Trump can prevail because they see what the Kool-Aid drinkers don’t. They see their personal liberty eroding in a society drifting rapidly away from a constitutional republic to a politically and socially regulated federal state.
In their fury and desperation, they have allowed Mr. Trump, the financially independent tough guy, to convince them that he is the only one strong enough to do battle with the political establishment and, finally, break it down.
Rolling Stone calls him an excellent con artist. The Republican establishment tosses and turns in their beds every night, sleepless at the thought of ruin for their party, wondering what to do.
Liberal Democrats soldier on, demanding that all follow their social views. They speak movingly of support for diversity, yet demonize those who disagree with them.
If the federal government gives us everything from free health care to free tuition (at state universities, of course), and determines, as well, what moral course we must take in our interactions with others, that government will decide what health care, what schooling, and what morality is good for us.
True diversity, as in states’ rights, will go away, along with many more of our tax dollars, as we fund the “free gifts.”
Where is conservatism in this picture? Unfortunately, adulterated and distracted, as the right joins the left in willingness to impose their social and moral views on the populace.
Supposed conservatives, while emoting about tax cuts and Christianity, have failed to seriously try to cut government spending. They have grandstanded at budget hearings, but failed to do the work of creating reasonable agreements, or making their case to the public in a persuasive way, and risking losses in the next election.
Under the Bush Administration, spending was extremely high. Under the Boehner-led Congress, bills were not brought to the floor of the Congress, but rather tabled in back room discussions in order to avoid losses, either in the Senate or by veto. When Republicans held the minority in Congress, it might have been okay to “just say no,” but, in the interest of transparency, if nothing else, the Republican Congress should have passed legislation, and let the chips fall where they may. This would allow the American people to know who was voting for what.
Liberal Democrats are getting away with imposing their social and moral views upon society, and with creating a regulatory climate that is making big business bigger, while pretending to care for the “little people.”
If conservatives’ core values, including but not limited to maintaining a constitutional republic, fostering genuine diversity with support of states’ rights, limiting federal government functions to those that cannot be performed at the state or local level, zero based budgeting, a flat or fair tax system, and limited federal regulations, then their social and moral issues would be resolved. People would have the personal and financial freedom to choose how to live their lives. Only those who wish to depend for all upon the federal government would be sorry.
We’re now in the midst of a presidential election.
On the right, our choices are an erratic bully, an ideologue, a self-styled conservative who wants to add complexity to the tax system, a lovely, idealistic, constitutionalist physician, and a guy who could possibly do the job well if a cold day in hell comes along and he wins.
On the left we have, possibly, the first female president of the United States, considered to be a liar by 90% of us, holding tightly with one hand to her popular, former president husband, and, with the other, to our current president. The alternative is a cranky socialist, who thinks the American people aren’t capable of figuring out what side of the bed is “out” without assistance from the federal government.
Good luck to us all.