Steve's back on the tortured acceptance of Donald Trump by the GOP establishment...
It has been a year in which most observers of our political
landscape have been rendered breathless by the apparent role-reversal of the
two major parties, with the usually orderly Republicans flying in a protracted cluster formation, and the normatively
unruly Democrats seeming for a few precious moments to be accepting the idea
that they should simply anoint their highly qualified front runner.
Ah, but DNA cannot be sublimated in perpetuity; one’s
essential nature cannot be denied. It lies dormant but dangerously incubates.
This past week was when nature erupted over nurture for both parties.
In today’s column we assess the stunningly rapid alignment
of the lemmings on the Republican side. In our next installment, we’ll get to
the innate instinct for self-destruction in the Democratic Party.
Buyer’s remorse for the Donald? Think again. According to a
New York Times/CBS News poll, 80% of Republicans now believe that the party and
its leaders should get behind Donald Trump for President.
Now, 80% is a hyoooge
number. Like, perhaps ten-fold the impression you have of Trump supporters as a
segment of undereducated aging white guys in trailer parks in the rural south.
To make this a bit less notional, this means that eight out
of ten of your Republican neighbors on the soccer sidelines in Darien,
Winnetka, Shaker Heights, Edina, and Sausalito now want Donald Trump to be the
next President of the United States. That dinner at Sleepy Hollow with the five
couples the other night? Think about it.
Trump acceptance has now broken beyond rural cells that
were ripe for a message of economic xenophobia.
It is now riding the Metro North, the SEPTA, and the Sounder to the wealthy
suburbs.
What’s most interesting about the Republican commute from “Are you f’ing kidding me?” to “well, he won the nomination of my party fair
and square” is the seeming acceptance of passenger Trump but the reluctance to take his baggage on
board.
Here’s a parlor game of sorts to play with Republican
friends and colleagues: ask them whether they agree with Trump’s position on
the following issues. See if they will publicly acknowledge total agreement
with a single one of them, or can identify
a rationale for why they can acquiesce to the ones they reluctantly accept. Count the times they vehemently disagree – if
any -- with their own candidate.
Q. So, when you say that you support Trump, do you mean banning all
non-citizen Muslims?
A. Well, not really, but hey, even Trump
backed off that one in the meeting with Ryan last week. Now he’s saying it was
just a “suggestion.”
Q. Oh, ok… got it. And deporting eleven million undocumented aliens? How
about that?
A. Hey, he’s just making a
point, you know? Like, nobody was even talking about illegal aliens before
Trump, and now we’re talking about it. So that’s a good thing.
Q. And the wall? 50 feet tall, the length of the border?
A. Dude, I think you are being
really, like, literal. The point is
that we have to fix the problem of illegals coming across the border and
stealing jobs, man!!
Q. But I thought the wall was because you think Mexicans are rapists and
drug lords?
A. No, I don’t think that! And that’s not the reason for the wall. The
wall is to keep Mexicans from taking our jobs.
Q. But that’s not what Donald Trump said…
A. That’s not the point. It’s
not that they are all rapists; he was saying that for shock value to get
attention, and sure enough, he did. So his ends justified the means.
Q. Let’s move on. How about the
idea of the 45% tariffs on trading partners? Do you think that is a good idea,
or not?
A. He’s a negotiator, man.
That’s how he’s going to get China to back down on their currency manipulation.
He won’t need to slap tariffs on, cause the Chinese will back down.
Q. Punishment
for women who have abortions?
A. Hey, he walked that one
back already. His staff immediately retracted that one.
Q. Got
any issues with the accusations of misogyny? The insults about Carly Fiorina’s
face and Megan Kelly’s menstrual cycle? Unwavering support for his campaign
manager who was arrested for physically accosting a woman reporter? The way he
treated Heidi Cruz, ridiculing her appearance and saying he was going to “spill
the beans” on her?
A. Yeah, well that slanted
piece in the New York Times also said that he hired women in very senior
positions at his company, so I think he has a strong record on working well
with women.
Q. Any
concerns about the foreign policy stuff? Stepping back from NATO? Bomb the shit
out of ISIS? Nuclear Japan and Korea? Fair ball to go after the families of
terrorists? Assassinate Kim Jong-un?
A. Fine. He has some learning
to do on the global stuff. Any candidate for President does.
Q.
But, uh, that’s really not true. Hillary Clinton does know “global stuff…”
A. Oh, yeah? Well, I have one
word for you: Benghazi.
Q. Any
discomfort with the way Trump changes his positions? On planned parenthood, gun
control, Israel?
A. He’s not flip-flopping. He points
out that the most successful business executives are always open to new input
and constantly refine and modify their positions.
Q. Any
qualms that he provides little by way of specifics on his proposals? Like, how
is he going to repeal Obamacare but then provide health insurance to every
citizen?
A. Great leaders cast a
vision, man. Leave it to the wonks to figure out the implementation.
Q.
Don’t you think he should release his taxes like every other presidential
candidate has in the past fifty years?
A. He says he will release
them as soon as the audit is done, and that’s good enough for me.
Q. Any
worries at all about the truly strange level of self-aggrandizement? How the
“Hispanics love me,” the “Blacks love me,” the “women love me.” That the “Art
of the Deal” is only second to the Bible among the world’s great books? That
weird thing of pretending he was his own press agent to talk about how many
women want to date him?
A. All politicians have
out-of-control egos.
Q. How ‘bout just the flat-out lying and exaggeration? “I saw thousands of
Muslims cheering in New Jersey when the World Trade Center came down.” “Most of
the world’s Muslims hate the United States.” “I’ve heard that real unemployment
is 42%.” “81 percent of white murder victims are killed by blacks.” “Hillary
Clinton wants to take away your guns.” “Ted Cruz’s father was involved in the
Kennedy assassination.”
A. Every one of those things
is something that he actually did read in a magazine or on the Internet, so he
was just saying that he had heard about it. Which was true… he had “heard about it.”
Q. How
about just the crassness of it all? The insults, the bullying, the imitating
people with disabilities? “John McCain is not a war hero,” “Little Marco,
Lyin’ Ted, Low energy Jeb.” “Our leaders are stupid people.”
A. Hey, you heard him. He
knows that he’s got to start acting more Presidential.
Q. Ok,
look… it seems like you really don’t agree with your candidate on too many
things. What am I missing? Is there something he is advocating that you believe
in strongly that I am missing?
A. Well, uh, yeah. I mean, the
guy tells it like it is. There’s none of that political correctness BS, you
know? He speaks his mind, and that resonates with a lot of people.
Q.
Well, o.k., but it appears that when he speaks his mind, you don’t really agree
with him on many – gee, any -- of the positions that he has taken that
we have discussed here. So can you tell me in one sentence why have you decided
to support him?
A. Like, duh, man. My only
other choice is Hillary Clinton, and I will never vote for her.
There you have it, folks.
That secret special thing that Donald Trump possesses is
actually something that I possess, you possess, and, indeed, every single human being on the planet earth
possesses… except, of course, Hillary Clinton. What the rest of humankind
has in common is not being Hillary
Clinton, which is apparently the single and only lingering criteria Republicans
actually are using to justify falling in line behind Donald Trump. On the
substance of the issues, they either do not know exactly where he stands, or
think that the stances he is taking either cannot or will not actually be executed.
This would imply that they are banking the future of the United States on blind
faith in his judgment and the hope that he cannot or will not actually do what
he has publicly committed to doing.
Let’s call it a bad case of Patty Hearst Syndrome. You’ll recall the famous heiress of Citizen
Kane fame, who was abducted from her dorm room at the age of nineteen by the
Symbionese Liberation Army, led by an earlier “the Donald,” Donald “Cinque”
DeFreeze.
Two months later, Patty Hearst re-appeared, re-christened
with the SLA name “Tania.” Having been supposedly “converted” to the beliefs of
the radical group, she was famously photographed brandishing an automatic
weapon in apparent willing participation in a bank robbery.
“Patty Hearst Syndrome” is now used interchangeably with
the original term for her psychosis, “Stockholm Syndrome,” which Wikipedia
neatly summarizes as “capture-bonding
… a psychological
phenomenon … in which hostages express empathy
and sympathy
and have positive feelings toward their captors, sometimes to the point of
defending and identifying with the captors.”
Take comfort in the fact that the utter lack of logic in
the responses to the questions posed above has been diagnosed.
Republicans have fallen in love with their captor. Call it Grand Old Patty Hearst Syndrome.
Donald Trump has now conquered the Republican Party, and he
is now the only thing standing between Hillary Clinton and the Oval Office. This has become ample reason enough for
Republicans to rapidly fall in line behind him. Exceptionally bright people -- capable
of crunching the numbers on a biotech takeover, aggressively scrutinizing
rental agreements in the Hamptons, and extracting heavy quid pro quo in a
charity fundraiser – are putting their analytic skills on dimmer when
assessing the Republican candidate for President. There appears to be little by
way of examination of the implications of being “for” Donald Trump; only a
self-assured certainty of the wisdom of being “against” Hillary Clinton.
Ironically, these are the very people who, when faced with
a choice of evils, are most likely to default to “the devil you know.” They are the people who would only very
reluctantly hire an outsider for a crucial corporate role, who demand six
personal letters of endorsement to join their clubs, and who drive Suburbans that
serve as mobile resumes, with decals of brand names that ooze hard-earned
establishment acceptance.
Hey, have some fun. It’s just a game. If you meet a Trump
supporter, ask the same questions listed here.
See how much scrutiny you hear; how much vetting has taken
place. Whether or not they really have a firm grip on exactly what their
candidate believes and exactly what their candidate will do.
But in truth, the odds are that if you start down the path
with these questions at a cocktail party, a polite hostess will swoop down, playfully
scold you, and eagerly change the subject to the weather, the charity ball, or
the successful lacrosse season. After
nearly a year of non-stop gab about politics, suddenly it is no longer cool to
bring up politics over dinner at Jean-Georges; it is now frowned upon, as
yesterday as chatty gossip about whether Leo will finally get his Oscar.
Because it is now two months until the Republican
convention.
Two months for the ritual indoctrination; two months for
the reprogramming.
Two months in hiding before re-emerging in Cleveland, now
ready to go out in the public; perhaps now under the name of “Tania.”
There’s no reason for buyer’s remorse if you don’t have a
clue what you bought.
There’s no way to question if you’ve been taken hostage.
And if you’ve fallen in love with your captor, you give
yourself up to join his battle.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Leave a comment