|
nChrist
|
 |
« on: May 11, 2016, 05:23:01 PM » |
|
________________________________________
The Patriot Post - Alexander's Column 5-11-2016
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________
Trump, Now What?
Buyer Remorse Just Ahead?
By Mark Alexander
May 11, 2016
“No man can well doubt the propriety of placing a president of the United States under the most solemn obligations to preserve, protect, and defend the constitution.” —Justice Joseph Story (1833)
I have written that I will vote for Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton. And I have a sense that many genuine conservatives are, like me, A-B-C voters: Anyone But Clinton. However, allow me to give you some context for the A-B-C rationale.
Jimmy Carter’s first two years as president coincided with my last two years as a college student. It was a difficult decade for our nation, culminating with stagflation — high unemployment combined with high interest rates, indicative of simultaneous decline of GDP and rise of inflation.
On top of his domestic policy failures, Carter fumbled the ball on numerous national security and foreign policy fronts. The most notable of those failures was, of course, in the Middle East, where Iranian Islamists, in Carter’s third year in office, brazenly seized our embassy in Tehran and took 52 American diplomats and citizens hostage. By extension, they took the rest of Carter’s presidency hostage.
In 1980, rising tensions in the region inspired me and other young Patriots to volunteer for military service. However, the Iranian hostage crisis de-escalated immediately after Carter’s successor completed his oath of office on January 20, 1981, and all the hostages were released. Iran, wisely, did not want to test the resolve of Ronald Reagan1.
No individual, other than my father2, has influenced my life more than President Reagan. Despite all the rancorous attacks on Reagan from Leftist quarters, he was elected and re-elected with landslide majorities. Indeed, he met the “gold standard” of what we should seek in a president, as originally established by George Washington3.
If I had to identify one Reagan quote that most characterized his spirit and tenure as president, it would be this summary remark at the 1992 Republican Convention: “America’s best days are yet to come. Our proudest moments are yet to be. Our most glorious achievements are just ahead.”
A few months after that convention, George H.W. Bush squandered his 90% post-Gulf War favorability rating and lost his re-election bid to an unknown young charismatic candidate, Bill Clinton4. Bush assumed incorrectly, as did Mitt Romney5 in 2012, that he had it won.
It was Clinton’s 1996 re-election campaign against the feckless Senator Bob Dole that inspired us to launch The Patriot Post6. We did so with the mission of providing grassroots Patriots7 an unbridled message of Liberty8 using an untested information medium called the World Wide Web. We were able then, as we are now, to flank our leftist opponents and execute an end run around the mainstream media and its stranglehold on public opinion.
We did not, however, launch The Patriot Post out of despair. Instead, we launched it out of our strong belief that “America’s best days are [always] yet to come,” and our strong desire to sustain that vision. Our nation’s Founders understood, as do we, that Tyranny is transient, but Liberty is eternal9.
Our writers and staff are all students of history, policy and politics, steeped in our Founders' advocacy for the unalienable Rights of Man as “Endowed by their Creator10.” We are informed by the history of political debates and debacles, from Federalists versus anti-Federalists and the spirited arguments between Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, to the corrupt Centennial Election of 1876, and so forth.
I mention this bit of personal history, and that of your Patriot staff, by way of providing some insight into our Liberty-focused lens on current events.
In that light, let me declare that I have never witnessed, or even read about, a quadrennial election cycle as surreal as the 2016 campaign. It is a contest without precedent, and it is perilous for our Republic and the future of Liberty.
Most of our presidential elections in the last century were contests between the better of two candidates: Roosevelt v Parker, Coolidge v Davis, Eisenhower v Stevenson, Nixon v Humphrey, and Reagan v Carter. More recently, elections have been decided on who was the slickest and most deceptive of two candidates: Clinton v Bush and Dole, and Obama v McCain and Romney.
But, arguably, the 2016 election will be decided on who is the worst of two candidates — Clinton or Trump, who both appeal to the worst in us as people, unlike Reagan, who appealed to the best in us. In the upcoming election, it’s all a game of negatives, and who has the least of them.
We are approaching the 2016 Republican National Convention on July 18 and a presidential election on November 8. On Election Day, in the only presidential poll that matters, the presumed GOP nominee Donald Trump will face Hillary Clinton11 if she hasn’t been indicted, or the most likely alternative ticket, Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren12.
The outcome of the November election will not only determine our president for the next four years, but also the composition of the Supreme Court for the next quarter-century.
To that end, I have written six in-depth profiles of Donald Trump in the past year.
In July of 2015, I published, “The Trump Card — Ace of Anger Affirmation13.” I highlighted how “establishment Republicans,” particularly former House Speaker John Boehner, had ignored the historic conservative grassroots victories of the 201014 and 201415 midterms, opting instead to maintain the status quo. They rightfully earned the scorn of conservatives nationwide, and Trump was tapping into that anger with a lot of populist rhetoric.
In January, I wrote about “Trump’s New York Values16,” clearly distinguishing between his values and those of grassroots conservatives.
Subsequently, I have written four additional profiles. “If Trump is the Answer17” analyzed a very convoluted question. Next was “The Trump Freight Train18,” highlighting the three things propelling Trump’s support: the “Obama Effect,” the “Fratricidal Field of Contenders” and Trump’s “Media Propulsion.” In “Trump’s Most Taxing Questions19,” I challenged his thin façade. And finally, in “The Math That Matters Most20,” I questioned whether Trump could defeat Clinton.
In addition, I’ve sternly criticized Trump’s crass play of the “9/11 Card21” and the “Veterans Card22,” especially since it seems that these plays occur when he’s short of other rhetoric. As the head of a military family, I remain deeply concerned with Trump’s assertion about illegal military orders23: “They won’t refuse. They’re not going to refuse me. Believe me. … If I say, ‘Do it,’ they’re going to do it. That’s what leadership is all about. … When I say they’ll do as I tell them, they’ll do as I tell them. And that’s very — it’s very simple. It’s very simple.”
All of my Trump analysis has been framed in pursuit of the character24 required for the office of president of the United States. And, I might add, these Trump profiles were written by the author of “Time for a Second Tea Party25,” which I wrote almost 10 years before the 2010 Tea Party movement26. |
