17 March 2016
Does It Matter?
by J.R.Thomas
Does It Matter?” sounds like a newly discovered Trollope novel. So does the plot of the USA Presidential primaries so far. But “Does it matter?” are the thoughtful words of a Shaw Sheet reader, who is following the excitements across the pond. He does not mean, as the bored shopper in the mall might shrug and say “Does it matter? Whatever…” as they move off to Dunkin Donuts. Our reader means “But does it make any difference?” with thoughtful political analysis covering everything from voting patterns in the Senate to detailed expositions of the intentions of the Founding Fathers in drafting the constitution.
Those wise eighteenth century democrats and lovers of liberty; liberals in an age of liberalism, wrote a set of rules for the United State of America that would protect it from tyranny, monarchy, and anarchy. The political system was carefully designed so that no man or group of men or set of devious fanatics could ever get their hands too firmly on the levers of power. Yet, equally, they did not make it too difficult to make things happen if they needed to happen. They made change possible, but only if it had been thought through, openly discussed, and was agreeable to the people. The powers of Congress, Senate, President, and Supreme Court were simply expressed but wondrously carefully balanced, a remarkable corner stone on which to build a state, and one never bettered. And for two hundred and fifty years it has worked as the Founding Fathers intended, preventing usurpation of power, allowing cautious change, preventing oppression, safeguarding citizens.
Which is why, in a way, the outcome of all these elections creeping their way towards a triumphal march down Pennsylvania Avenue next January do not matter that much. It does not matter, really, if Mr Trump becomes President in November and turns out to be having a joke, or to be fundamentally undemocratic, or just out to further his business empire. Nor does it matter, really, if Mr Sanders becomes President and turns out to be a Trotskyist, hidden for years in Vermont, biding his time to introduce collectivist farming and turn the mansions ofe American rich into children’s homes.
The constitution means that bad Presidents, or even evil ones – there have been a few bad ones, one or two stupid ones, some idle ones but not though, ever, an evil one – can do very little to do harm to the United States or her people. The balances and restraints carefully crafted into the system actually make it quite difficult for even an energetic, well-meaning, popular President to achieve much without some pretty vigorous campaigning and wide spread popular support. Without that general will, nothing much can happen – which is what was intended. There are plenty of Presidents who came to office full of starry eyed idealism – and left it having achieved nothing.
There are two things that a President can do; one as it should be; and one which is a weakness in the checks and balances, though an understandable one. What is rightly his is the opportunity to lead, inspire, provoke, and incubate, to lead the American people to new ideas and fresh possibilities. He can weave a sort of magic in the minds of citizens that will in time lead to change, not quick or wilful change, but in a well-considered evolution. The Roosevelt’s (T and FDR), Reagan, Kennedy, Lincoln were able to convince their fellow citizens of the need to change – if not in their Presidency, then soon after. The chilling weakness in the balance of powers is when it comes to war. It is, metaphorically, but also literally, the power to press that red button, to order troops into action without (almost without) constraint. This is not the place to debate the difficulty of achieving balance between the ability to instantly respond to attack upon the USA (or her interests) but also to prevent misuse. We leave that hanging in mid-air. But it is a weakness in principle, possibly in fact.
Most folk think of Bernie Sanders as a kindly grandfatherly figure with a heart of homespun gold. The other grandfather now front running in the contest is not seen in the same way though. The Donald is seen as dangerous, unstable, emotional, unfocused. Originally nobody thought that he could possibly win the Republican nomination, and the idea of him assuming the office of 45th President was so remote as to be only the stuff of comedy routines.
But a winter has passed, and the primary and caucus results roll in. And they are starting to say it will be Trump versus Clinton. Tuesday’s results are not quite all in at the time of writing (Missouri has Trump and Clinton both ahead – but by less than a percentage point in each case). Subject to that, it looks like a clean sweep for Hillary, who is now less than 900 delegates from having a clear majority of convention delegates. Bernie Sanders is continuing to come a close second in many states, especially in the north, but close second will get him nowhere (except maybe the Vice-Presidency).
The Republican results are pretty much a clean sweep for Trump, a clean sweep that swept away Marco Rubio, one of the briefest lost hopes of all time. On Tuesday he resoundingly lost his home state of Florida to the Donald; as he gave up his Senate seat to fight the presidential contest that is a double disaster for him. Also gone is Ben Carson, who pulled out last week, another shooting star who looked very like a potential winner at the outset, but who has faded away with the pressures of the campaign trail and the wild rhetoric of this astonishing contest. Still there, apart from Ted Cruz, is John Kasich, winner on Tuesday in Ohio, and the only candidate backed by the GOP leadership. So, whether it matters or no, will it be Trump?
Probably, is the carefully considered answer to that one. But…
Trump is at (at time of writing) 621 votes to the 717 of his combined opponents, including the delegates of those who have pulled out (it is a fair bet that most of those will not go to Trump). That is a far from commanding position. And his share of the vote is tending to decline – other than Florida, he seems to be struggling whilst Cruz is catching up. Not a lot, but it is happening. That may be, the Trump camp privately acknowledges, because his local organisation is weak and does not get the vote out – and if your vote is coming from those who are normally outside the politically process, it is difficult but important to get them out on the night. Those who stay home and grumble are not much use to a radical candidate. And with Rubio gone, and with lots of tactical voting already apparent, enough of Rubio’s intending primary voters may move across to Cruz to stop the Donald in forthcoming contests. Mr Trump may yet have very considerable problems getting that clear majority he needs
Trump could be looking at a major problem at the convention if he does not go there with an absolute majority, because the leadership of the Republican Party will try to broker an alternative nominee. Except, as said here before, for one thing – that the only realistic alternative is Ted Cruz – and the Grand Old Boys of the Grand Old Party don’t really want him either. There are rumours of calls between the GOP leadership and the Cruz and Trump camps, but if there are, there is not much sign of rapprochement yet.
It may not matter much to the USA in the long run if Mr Trump wins the Presidency. But it does matter to the Republican leadership. They have lost control of their primary process, they have lost the hearts and souls of their supporters, and they are embarrassed and angered by the vulgarity, populism, and rancour of the Trump candidacy. There is a real feeling that some of the party would prefer Hillary to win rather than Donald. They need to reform their party in the image of the 21st century Republican voter – but before they do that, they need a Presidential candidate to save them from internal civil war. Could Cruz become the prodigal son?
Please click here if you would like a weekly email on publication of the Shaw Sheet
