Trump and America’s Winter of Discontent
His decisive win in the New Hampshire primary election brought businessman and television celebrity Donald Trump one step closer to becoming the 45th president of the United States. He now commands a substantial lead in most national and state polls for the Republican presidential nomination—with other contenders trailing far behind. At this stage of the presidential race, only Texas Senator Ted Cruz seems to have much prospect of overtaking him, although five other Republican candidates remain in race, including the early favorite, former Florida Governor Jeb Bush. And thus far, Trump’s instincts for political battle have clearly outshined those of his most likely opponent in the general election in November, Hillary Clinton, who is struggling to deal with Senator Bernie Sanders’ unexpected challenge for the Democratic nomination.
The source of Trump’s surprising appeal is the broad dissatisfaction of the American people with their government, their political and economic leaders, and much else about the United States today as well. Voters are angrier and more and frustrated than at any time in recent memory. They are also increasingly fearful about their families’ security and economic futures, and dismayed by what looks like the fading stature of the US on the world stage. The disgruntled mood of the electorate explains the enthusiasm, even adulation, for the most intemperate, uncompromising candidates in both parties—not only for the ideological polyglot Trump, but also for Bernie Sanders, the only declared socialist in the US Congress, and Ted Cruz, the Senate’s hardest line conservative. They are the ones most loudly clamoring for radical changes in the politics, economics, and even culture of the United States. All three assert that the US has lost much of whatever once made it a special nation, and that, if not urgently recovered, will be gone forever. Trump’s plan is to “make America great again.” Cruz demands that we “get America back” to where it was. Sanders wants to revive the “American dream.”
The disgruntled mood of the electorate explains the enthusiasm, even adulation, for the most intemperate, uncompromising candidates in both parties.
Even though the US today boasts one of the world’s strongest economies, many Americans have good reason to be upset. The earnings of low and middle income families have stagnated for several decades. Some of the most vulnerable have lost ground. Good jobs are still in short supply. For the first time ever, a majority of parents worry that their children will slip backwards and end up worse off than previous generations. Many young adults are swamped with debt for costly college diplomas that have not led to a firm career path.
Republicans are most agitated by what they perceive as the mushrooming size of government, and by the high taxes and massive debt that are needed to pay for it. Aside from their younger cohorts, many Republicans are also upset by rapid changes in the social, cultural, and ethical foundations of their country. They are confused by and uncomfortable with the legalization of gay marriage and recreational marijuana, and are apprehensive about immigration and demographic shifts that are turning a white, English-speaking, largely Christian nation into a multi-cultural, multi-colored, multi-lingual society. Democrats are especially roused by the unbridled influence of banks and corporations that are “too big to fail,” but are ready to flee overseas for cheaper labor and lower taxes. Partisans on both sides resent the unresponsiveness of the country’s institutions, public and private, to the needs of ordinary citizens.
Events across the globe are making Americans more concerned than ever about their own security. The bombing of the Twin Towers in 2001, followed by the loss of two expensive and prolonged wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, have left the US population feeling vulnerable, at grave risk, even on its own soil. The emergence of new, more dangerous threats like ISIS and the increasing numbers of terrorist attacks worldwide have set off fresh alarms. Moreover, potentially hostile countries like China, Russia, and Iran no longer seem to fear US power. They have become more assertive, while the US looks weaker. Recent surveys show that Americans feel more insecure than at any time since 9/11.
None of the candidates captures, reflects, and reinforces the anger and fear of US voters more than Donald Trump—and none offers more brazen prescriptions for America’s multiple ills. Trump’s diagnoses of the problems is often simplistic or just plain wrong. His solutions are mostly incoherent and unworkable. But the presidential election this year may be more about temperament and style than about policies, programs, or ideologies. What people most admire about Trump is his lack of restraint, his brashness—even rudeness, his supreme self-confidence, and his showmanship. Note, his style is almost the exact opposite of the methodical, agonizing, professorial approach of Obama.
What has been the most surprising, and most important, lesson for all contenders is the foul mood of the country--the high level of anger and frustration across the United States with established leaders and institutions, with customary ways of doing things.
By now, Trump has demonstrated his campaign skills—his ability to frame, voice, and target his messages, to spot and exploit the weaknesses of opponents, to command attention and generate enthusiasm. He has dominated the media and defined the terms of debate, while the other candidates are left to react to him. Hillary Clinton, for example, has not yet found her message at all. Is she a candidate of change or continuity? She is certainly not sparking enthusiasm nor has she found a way to take advantage of her strengths or Sanders’ failings. On the contrary, Sanders has shaped the debate on the Democratic side, while Clinton remains off balance, on the defensive. Her wobbly start against a previously barely known, self-declared socialist raises questions about the prospects of her success against the harder driving, high energy, celebrity entrepreneur. Sanders does have a forceful message highlighting the great inequalities—of income, wealth, and power—throughout American society and politics. As witnessed in Iowa and New Hampshire, that message resonates strongly with many Democrats, particularly the young, but it is probably too narrow to snatch the nomination from Clinton, let alone the general election from Trump.
The Democratic candidates have other problems as well. They may have difficulty in holding the support of labor union members, who regularly vote overwhelming for Democratic presidential contenders. This year, however, there is anxiety among union leaders about Trump’s appeal to their workers, who are attracted to his combative rhetoric, particularly on illegal immigration and against the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). By this time, the Democrats should also know that Trump is never fully wedded to any of his positions or statements. He is prepared to reverse his stance whenever it suits him, and is usually able to do so at little or no cost. Indeed, on many of the key issues, he has expressed views that drastically differ from his current statements.
The US presidential campaign, since it began, has been full of surprises. No one predicted that Trump or Sanders would provide much of a challenge to candidates like Clinton or Jeb Bush. And there is sure to be new shocks in the coming ten months leading to the elections in November. What has been the most surprising, and most important, lesson for all contenders is the foul mood of the country--the high level of anger and frustration across the United States with established leaders and institutions, with customary ways of doing things. So far that lesson has been best captured by Trump. But whoever wins the election will only succeed as president if he or she understands and is able to respond to the discontent that now pervades the American electorate.