ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • United States Politics

Trump VS. Clinton--the battle of the extremes

Updated on May 11, 2016

TRUMP VS CLINTON

THE BATTLE OF THE EXTREMES

By Roger Lippman

The parties have yet to hold their conventions but unless a comet lands on either convention hall to prevent it, we will see Hilary and Donald as their parties nominees and all the other parties running like Libertarians, etc. fielding candidates will be of no significance.

While Bernie may still be unofficially “in”, he can’t win and his aim now is to influence the Democratic party platform or he will not support Hillary. Their party is not 100% unified and no matter what, some Democrats who do not like Hillary will not vote for her. Whether they will sit out the race or move to Donald, no one knows. Others who may feel Bernie got a raw deal may do the same. So does the outcome mean the Democratic vote increases, I do not think so unless they somehow attract those who would have voted Republican but for Donald Trump.

On the Republican side, All his bragging aside, Trump must realize he cannot hope to win a general election unless he not only garners the votes of Anti Trump Republicans but also some dissatisfied Democrats or independents.

So what is the thinking in the air for the non politicos and what do we see as motivating the electorate this year? Well, no matter what your political persuasion is, we have to all agree that Donald Trump was a lightening rod this time around for people disgusted with Washington. He brought into the open the huge dissatisfaction with our elected officials. Harry Truman once said of 80th Congees (between 1947-49) that they were the “ Do nothing Congress”. Well that is how people feel about Congress today.

Many feel elected representatives are more interested in protecting their seats and their party then in representing the people. We already know that they spend more time doing phone soliciting to raise more cash then spending in Congress or working on official business.

It seems Congressmen do not go for want with all sorts of special benefits and getting off easy when using funds for other purposes. Congress is first to protect itself and benefit itself. They also appear immune from criticism. More importantly the leaders are too dense to realize the Trump rebellion is real and due to their high handed attitude of doing nothing, getting nowhere with us footing the bill.

Of course our Supreme Court has made matters worse by allowing unlimited funds to be raised from all sources and forcing each election to be a battle of who can get the most money and support. The 5-to-4 decision in 2014 in McCutcheon vs. Federal Election Commission (a case filed by the Republican National Committee and a donor), with the court’s more conservative members in the majority, echoed Citizens United, the 2010 decision that struck down limits on independent campaign spending by corporations and unions, which decision altered campaign finance laws. It now limits how the government can justify laws said to restrict the exercise of First Amendment rights in the form of campaign contributions. So come one, come all and buy an elected official. It’s legal folks! And look at the results.

Making deals that do not benefit the people but only special interests who are the money providers is the name of the game. There is no limit to influence by lobbies and PAC’s and while we all look down at governments overseas that can be bought, the same can legitimately be said for ours as all it takes is a big purse, good lawyers and lots of influence and Congress bends to their will.

Drug Companies are free to charge absorbent fees because we cannot regulate them. Medicare is prohibited from negotiating for lower rates—all to increase drug profits and make us pay more. Military procurement suffers the same fate; so does health care and almost all activities. What is congress doing about this? Nothing of course because they brought it about with the aid of the Supreme Court.

The political bosses are immune from criticism and do not realize they have pushed away all the good will from the man and woman on the street unless they are seeking a hand out or looking for more of the same—and there are many of these who like the status quo and want more—at the expense of all the others.

Congress routinely gets low grades for trust --less than 50% and let’s face it, we do not admire the people in our government. Corrupt, indifferent, self servicing, you name it. They own it!

Add to the mix that Ted Cruz of the Tea party felt shutting down Congress and stopping business was positive and you have another element in the mix that wants to go farther to the right and the hell with everyone else. Compromise is out and the people be dammed.

So, some complain Congress is not effective enough and others say nothing effective can happen in Congress unless there is a political revolution and we all go to the right extreme. They share only one thing: dissatisfaction. Enter Donald Trump.

Where does the person of good will that is pro American and wants a better country go? Left, Right, Democrat, Republican, independent, third party or non voter?

Okay let’s look at the two sides once again and the pitfalls each face:

Hillary is pretty much saying she wants to keep the Obama addenda and advance upon it. More give always and more of the same. Our deficit will increase more and spending will go up. She is all about social issues. Bernie has pushed her to want to increase taxes on wealthy people to pay more towards the social programs and we are left to wonder if that is what we want. Hillary is a person with a record. She distrusts people who do not agree with her; is deeply suspicious of Republicans; and has done questionable things as Secretary of State with her E mails and particularly in Libya with the death of our Ambassador.

In business with Bill, she has had some questionable dealings in Whitewater and even cast suspicion with her first futures trade making 100,000% profit on a $1,000.00 investment buying cattle futures. When out of office, they accumulated massive millions of dollars for their foundation from foreign people including Saudi’s who do not have a 100% record of being on our side. She has taken huge amounts of money from wall street billionaires to speak and her honesty is highly questionable.

She lacks a complete comprehension of the huge international problems we face and prefers to deal with the social issues that will garner her the support of the minorities she needs to win in November.

Donald on the other hand has even more baggage. No one seems to deny that Donald first and foremost markets the Trump name. His “deals” are all about Trump. Trump wants headlines above all and he wants positive ones. If he is criticized, he is quick to threaten and then follow up with a law suit against people and more than one of such lawsuits has been dismissed by courts. However Trump does not care as he is motivated to use legal action as a threat that he will spend endless amounts of money on Law suits if people publicly disagree with him. The only difference between that and what a dictator does is they do not file a suit, they have you killed—or perhaps locked away in some prison.

Then too, he has championed low debt and brags how he has little when all his bankruptcies in the past were caused by too much debt which he was quick to put on. He defends himself saying he never went bankrupt, just a corporation of his which of course is a separate entity but a legal fiction.

He wants to bring business back to America and not use cheap foreign labor, both of which he has done in private business but would argue, he was just gaming the system as it was legal. Hardly admirable though. Can he bring all these businesses back? Doubtful. Can we stop others, sure with the right controls. However if they want to manufacture the product in a third world country because Americans want to pay less and there is competition, it is far more difficult preventing them from moving offshore. Leaving the U.S. for tax purposes alone, yes we can control that. To manufacture, probably not. We do not make TV’s, appliances, most electronics and other things here any more. They are gone as are industries like clothing, shoes, and the others. Americans will not pay more to have them made here. The “Made in America” label does not mean your man on the street will pay more for it.

His promise to build a wall with Mexico and have them pay for it is highly impractical as they will not pay for it and he can huff and puff but it may never be done. Do we need immigration reform, absolutely! Boarder patrol now is arresting even less people coming illegally over the boarder than at any time because they are using their energies to look for people who are from the middle east, not from South Americans.

Since Obama has issued so many restrictions on who can be stopped, at most the illegals are given a sheet telling them to appear at a court house for a hearing, and then let go so none of them appear and disappear into the population. Immigration control is a joke.

What can be done now? Nothing with our do nothing congress as both sides have their heads in the sand and no reasonable agreement can be reached. So how can Donald change all this or at least attempt to do so? No one knows as all we hear are sound bites and no substance.

Is Cruz right that we need more right wing people who will tie legislation up more, refuse to compromise and get nothing done but show their constituents that they have been loyal to their core values? Absolutely not!

We need more representatives who are smart enough to know we need compromise on things because 300 million citizens cannot ever stand together and agree on most issues. If we keep looking for people who want to sit at the end of each political pole and not come to a meeting in the middle, we can do nothing effective.

So, Trump is right. We need our roads, bridges, and all our infrastructure fixed and upgraded. We cannot leave it go as bridges collapse. Our water pipes in cities are collapsing and our electric grid needs repairs. That takes money and without spending it, we kick the can down the road to a date when we have a national crisis. How do you spend it and still lower the debt? Well we could start by cutting out some graft, fix the problems caused by the lobbyists and special interest people but that won’t happen.

However, is Trump the man to get it done? First, his ego stands in the way of educating him where he deficient in a subject. For example, take international matters. Here he is only a tad better than Dr. Ben Carson who was also a candidate for president. Trump did not see Vladimir Putin as essentially being in the wrong on anything. Forget Ukraine, forget Syria and forget his efforts to undermine the U.S., Trump likes Putin and thinks he can “work” with him. I hardly think Russia invaded Ukraine because Putin did not like Obama.

Then his statement he would like Japan, South Korea and even Saudi Arabia to have nuclear arms. Only a naïve person thinks the Saudis, who have been one of the chief architects of all the mess we face in the world, having the Hydrogen bomb would be a move in the right direction.

Add his remark that he would be neutral in any dealings with Israel and the PLO. Forget every settlement deal offered in the past was rejected by only the PLO and that Hamas still is actively fighting Israel. We have only one effective democratic ally in that region. It is Israel. As for Obama, he spent his time showing how Israel could not count on him and issued his famous red line in the sand with Syria only to have it violated and has been generally weak on foreign matters. So he was no hero to those who want to protect America.

Trump however just lacks knowledge, experience and judgment and I am not sure he will be wiling to listen to others with more wisdom given his huge ego and not liking people to disagree with him.

He insulted women, suggesting women getting abortions should be punished (only to retract that shortly thereafter) and insulted all Mexicans and Muslims as well as everyone else including John McCain who was wounded in the war.

Can he get support from people whom he needs to win a general election when he has offended them? I doubt it. I also think a third party run is not going to be effective as the Trump voters, if he does not get the nomination, will then say the party is to be dammed.

He could announce that if elected he will select Christie as attorney general and Ben Caron as secretary of health and welfare and bring back some of the party; his lack of real conservative credentials appears to be a real stumbling block to other. The key is whom he will select as his running mate for Veep. Trump claims he has a short list of 6 or 7 now for Vice President. Also Christie is on it and would be a good choice. While some say he may chose say Rubio for his vice president. Marco has already said “no”. Donald needs a person who will garner the conservatives and also add knowledge in those areas where Donald is surely deficient i.e. foreign affairs. Yet the real secret is to select someone who will also bring in independent voters as he will need more than just Republicans to win.

Carly is not going to work. Cruz is a lightening rod for the far right wing and there is real bad blood between them now. Besides, Cruz would surely alienate as many as he would bring over. Kasich is not going to add strength as he lacked support in any contest in which he ran outside of Ohio.

However is the real issue he faces in his party a lack of being conservative? Actually I think that is a phony issue. Bush was not that conservative on all issues, and certainly not Reagan. I think the Republican establishment despises Trump because of being, well, Trump.

So who adds strength to his run for election: how about John Boehner? He was a much admired (except for Ted Cruz) speaker of the House of Representatives who was a compromiser and resigned on his own after lack of support by Cruz and his followers but I doubt he would accept. He was a deal maker who did not favor what goes on now and very knowledgeable. Then too, Newt Gingrich was also a former speaker of the house but while he would bring along more conservatives, he would not get independents.

The real problem many people see, Trump is a lot of bluster and may treat this all as another game show. He lacks essential knowledge and skills. He is not one to listen and he does not have the temperament to work effectively.

We have many problems now and the Democrats do not see them. They want to concentrate on issues that solve none of the world issues and leave us more insecure as a nation. Republicans (Trump) have big brave plans with no details and a leader who may be his worse enemy.

Trump has insulted guys like Jeb who would certainly add strength as a VP but never accept. He is cozy now with Sarah Palin but those who liked John McCain when he was running until he selected Sarah Palin as his running mate, know her addition is really a negative. So where are we? Trump’s foreign experience centers around making deals for his projects and judging a beauty contest in Russia. This shows when he talks about giving Nukes out or saying he doesn’t see any problem with Putin.

Can he find someone credible with vast international knowledge that will fit the bill and more importantly someone he would listen to and could guide him remains to be seen. So far, he has not seemed to realize he is his own worst enemy and sees his own style getting him this far. Perhaps he thinks this is just another TV show and he controls the production and actors.

My prediction--finally: Hillary will win unless something in this dynamic changes. Four years from now Cruz will lead the ultra conservatives and a third party will emerge, whether of former Trump people or just fed up ones. What will that achieve? Only the end of the Grand Old party.

The one thing we can all agree with is it will be very interesting and dirty general election in November and you do not need to buy seats to see this melodrama played out around the world. Unlike Barnam and Baileys claim of their circus being “the greatest show on earth”, I think the upcoming election will beat it.

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • Shyron E Shenko profile image

      Shyron E Shenko 13 months ago from Texas

      Roger, an interesting hub, but some things I agree with and some I do not, for instance Ted Cruz and Paul Ryan both were bought by Trans-Canada’s Keystone XL Pipeline and both were/are willing to sell our country to the Canadian Company.

      You write about Benghazi, when 4 Americans were murdered. I find it strange that it was never mentioned that there were 13 attacks on our Embassies during GWB’s term as President with 169 killed.

      The debauchery of Donald Trump will be a disaster for America.

    • profile image
      Author

      Roger Lippman 19 months ago from Illinois

      you are so correct. the most the democrats will do is move more to the left to appease the Bernie people but come together. With the Republicans I do not think it is conservative or not conservative. the " in" people do not like Trump because he is a total outsider and berates them. Come together? perhaps but lukewarm. The bigger problem is Trump cannot tell anyone something of substance to get the independents or others wanting to back him and his negatives keep increasing while he is more vocal. I don't like how he and his daughter talk about how he likes to counterpunch when attacked. We don;t want fighting. we want a leader who acts like one, not Mike Tyson.

    • profile image

      ElginBob 19 months ago

      Roger, once again a very nice job. An easy and enjoyable read.

      In the final analysis the Dems are much more politically savy. They will unite because they understand that the end game is to win the election(s). The GOP will continue to argue that so and so is not conservative enough or too ultra right or whatever. As they have done so many times before they will lose sight of the prize. In politics if you don't win--you don't matter.

    • bradmasterOCcal profile image

      bradmasterOCcal 19 months ago from Orange County California

      Ken

      Well said. Even Mark Cuban is backing Trump.

    • Ken Burgess profile image

      Ken Burgess 19 months ago from Florida

      More like the battle of the Establishment VS the Outsider.

      Battle of the 30 year Washington soulless Politician VS the uber-rich Businessman (who owns 550 businesses and is worth Billions) who can't be bought off by Wall St. or other Billionaires like George Soros.

    • profile image

      judy 19 months ago from nj

      I believe the United States needs a Donald Trump right about now! Im all for Trump!! :-)

    • emge profile image

      Madan 19 months ago from Abu Dhabi

      Interesting post and interesting questions raised. Trump and Hillary promises to be a battle royale. But in my view, Trump represents change while Hillary the status quo. Americans will have to decide between these two as there is no other option. None whatsoever. This is sad as a choice is so limited. Hillary as president may well mean that the USA will continue its slide down as a world power, perhaps Trump may be a shade better. In my visits to America, I can sense that camps are bitterly divided. Donald may well spring a surprise as at the end of the day Americans may not want to vote for status quo.

    • bradmasterOCcal profile image

      bradmasterOCcal 19 months ago from Orange County California

      Roger

      Bernie has had a slow start, but he has a string of victories and he is gaining momentum. I wouldn't be surprised if he beats Hillary in California next month.

      The Democrat elites engineered HRC victory by putting Bernie and his socialism, and a couple of dem mice as her competition. Little did they know that Bernie would be the last man standing.

      I think that most of the Bernie supporters will write him in at the election rather than vote for HRC. The difference is too extreme between the two to conciliate.

      Since the 1960s both parties have contributed to the decline of the US, and in this century they have gridlocked the congress, and allowed a president to do their job.

      Congress is treated by the loyal party voters as two home teams, one for each party. Yet, when congress loses, both home teams lose, no matter which one cause the game loss.

      We only have One Congress, and two parties that think it is their congress, rather than the congress of the people.

      The Supreme Court has yet to make a decision that is worth their existence. This is especially true with their 5-4 decisions. A simple majority can never be deemed as resolving the underlying issues before the court. It does become the law of the land, but a bad law.

      The SCOTUS has become more and more Political than a third branch of the government. They have never supported any arguments that affect the revenue of the country, especially regarding Income Tax. While Income Tax per se cannot be unconstitutional. Its statutory implementation, and application can be held outside of the constitution. The constitutionality of the 16th amendment revolved around bypassing the apportionment of income as a source of revenue. Apportionment is the basis of the constitution to not unduly tax commerce moving across the states. Apportionment exists to protect the states, or actually protect us from the states overtaxing.

      The SCOTUS then has held that the 2 lines of the Interstate Commerce Clause is the unlimited power of the federal government to increase their scope and size, at the cost of shrinking the powers left to the states under the 10th Amendment.

      Today, we have a bloated, obese and dysfunctional federal government. The SCOTUS has allowed misinterpretations of the constitution to create a system where Money can win an election. HRC lost in 2008 because she ran out of money, as well as the DNC cut her tracks running her presidential train into a siding.

      The root cause of the impotence of the congress in the last several decades is the result of the mindless loyal party voter that gives the power to their party. The party then gives its power to its wealthy and powerful benefactors. Both parties are ideologically diametrically in opposition to each other. Instead of the democrats and the republicans, they might as well be called the Hatfields and McCoy. For those too young Google it.

      Trump is pushing back on the party loyalty and that is one of the reasons why his supporters back him. The people, at least those that support Bernie, and Donald are tired of the party control, and the dismal performance of congress, and the continued decline of the country.

      Hillary Clinton has zero Accomplishment that qualify her for the presidency. She bailed on NY as senator, to run for the presidency. She spent the last two years as NY senator doing her own thing, and not that of her office.

      She did a bad job as sec of state, and said of Benghazi, what difference does it make, they are dead. She also is defiant and basically admits she is above the law, when she says about criminal prosecution of her email, It ain't going to happen.

      From Arkansas to NY, the Clintons have been in so many questionable situations, and they slicked their way out of them. Bill and Hillary were bankrupt when they left the WH, and today they have three 9 figure assets. Most of it coming from nefarious business dealings. Hillary supports Wall Street, not the average person.

      Both parties support the financial industry, the health industry, and basically any big business. They just come at it in different ways. Neither of the parties support the middle class.

      Donald Trump was a Democrat because that is what it takes to do business in the democratic stronghold of NY, and especially NYC. His venture as a republican candidate is refreshing in that it challenges the control of the party, the control that gridlocks the congress.

      While corporations exist as a separate identity from the people that create it and run it, it is there for a reason. You cannot hold Donald Trump for using the system. At the same time, you should hold the government for being in a continual Virtual Bankruptcy, and today for owing 19 trillion dollars of debt. By definition the US cannot go into bankruptcy, but the debt is there just the same. It weakens the country, and it puts too much power into the hands of the countries that own this debt, like China.

      Hillary probably never even ran a lemonade stand as a child, so how is she going to help the economy? Going around the country pandering to the wealthy is not a business, but is more like pandering, or prostitution.

      As for Donald Trump and the Wall.

      We have become the AmeriCAN'Ts, instead of the CANS. We can't even build a High Speed Rail in California, while China, and Europeans have Hi Speed Rails SYSTEMS.

      Of course the price of the Wall and the HSR budgets keep increasing because Delays cause costs to go up. We could have had both the Wall and the HSR up years ago at a fraction of the cost of today. And today we don't have either, just a budget that keeps inflating.

      Can't do America.

      You put Trump down for International Affairs, but look at the International Scene after decades of politicians, and do you really think that Trump can do worse that what we have today?

      Neither Bush, nor Obama were good with foreign problems. You underestimate Trump about his ability to learn and adapt. That is what he has been doing most of his life, and he is successful, while our country is not.

      You say

      "Trump however just lacks knowledge, experience and judgment "

      What knowledge, experience and judgement have GW Bush, Barack Obama, or HRC shown that has benefited the country or the people.

      Instead, you should look at Trump as a fresh slate that is not burdened by political protocol, or baggage. He didn't mess up the country, so he can make the changes that are needed without worrying about stepping on his own toes.

      You say

      "He insulted women, suggesting women getting abortions should be punished (only to retract that shortly thereafter) and insulted all Mexicans and Muslims as well as everyone else including John McCain who was wounded in the war."

      This is pure emotional hearsay without the context of his statements. The government cannot and hasn't solved social issues. That is not what a democracy does, as social issues are subjective, while laws have to be objective.

      Muslims and Mexicans need to show their allegiance to America not their heritage. Most of the terrorists in the world today, are Muslims. Most of the illegals in this country are Mexicans. Last year, the Illegals protested in the streets of downtown Los Angeles burning the American Flag while flying the flag of Mexico.

      When women demand repeated abortions, that is not their freedom it is a social issue. There are valid reasons for abortions, but abortions shouldn't be an unrestricted freedom of the woman. It takes two to get a baby, and at some point the fetus is life. The closer to the beginning of the first trimester the more feasible is an abortion, after that it gets complicated.

      No Bush has really been a benefit to the country in the executive office. And Jeb Bush shouldn't be considered for any national position.

      As far as your beating on Trump for his game show, you should give it up. Trump is unfiltered and that is a plus, as the experienced politician is a passive aggressive, and can't be trusted.

      Trump doesn't treat his businesses as game shows. He is meticulous, fact driven, and looks at the entire picture. I believe that you can see how it worked for his campaign.

      Contrast that with his losing opp

    • lions44 profile image

      CJ Kelly 19 months ago from Auburn, WA

      Not a fan of either, but when you get down to it, they're both moderates from the same generation. They are much more alike than people even realize. , B will fight each other on the way to the "middle."

      But I disagree with you on the Dems, I think they are unified. I still believe 90% of Bernie supporters will go to HRC, with just a few hold out "Bernie Bros."

      Putting yesterday's polls aside, Hillary will probably start election day with 340 electoral votes. If she pulls in any combo of PA, Fla and North Carolina (trending towards her), she will win easily. Shared.