The Third Man
By Neely Archer
A third party candidate has never won the American presidency. Challengers to the two-party establishment consistently fail. They rarely garner more than 5% of the vote and hardly ever win a state’s electoral votes. Recent exceptions include Ross Perot of Texas who challenged Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996, Governor George Wallace of Alabama in 1968, Senator Strom Thurmond of South Carolina in 1948, and former President Teddy Roosevelt in 1912.
Remarkably, the year 2016 will go down in the history books as the first victory by a third party challenger. Oh, sure, you will challenge that assertion as Donald Trump was the official Republican candidate. Well, never mind that trivial fact.
In the presidential campaign Donald Trump was reviled by the Republican and Democratic Party establishments alike. The most ardent attempts by establishment candidates with robust Republican credentials and distinguished records of elected office to wrest the nomination from him faltered one by one. Not even a last-ditch strategic partnership between Texas Senator Ted Cruz and Ohio Governor John Kasich could derail Donald Trump.
Shrewdly assessing political reality, Donald Trump chose to run as a third party candidate from within the establishment. In capitalizing on support from voters new to the Republican Party, Donald Trump remade the Grand Old Party and fashioned a third party candidacy from within one of the two main political parties.
Vermont’s Bernie Sanders cleverly opted for the identical approach and developed a strong base among young voters. A self-proclaimed independent, Senator Sanders may have been a Democratic candidate but never a Democrat. He remains a self-proclaimed independent member of Congress according to his official Senate web site. Still, he cunningly marshalled a strong rebellion within the Democratic Party.
Nevertheless, the swamp kept Senator Sanders in check. Unlike the Republican Party, the Democrats seated superdelegates at their 2016 convention who were free to vote their choice regardless of their state’s primary vote. This block represented nearly 15% of all delegates and consisted of party functionaries, registered lobbyists, elected officials, and big-money fundraisers. 571 voted for Senator Hillary Clinton and only 45 for Sanders thereby propelling Clinton over the threshold of delegates needed for nomination.
Below the muddy waters of the swamp and out of sight, the Democratic establishment conspired to rein in Senator Sanders. Emails released by WikiLeaks purportedly show that Democratic Party officials mocked Sanders and schemed to undermine him. Senator Sanders rightly complained that the party did not treat him fairly.
Is the swamp now continuing to restrict Senator Sanders’ political influence and potential presidential run in 2020? Consider that the FBI investigation into Sanders’ wife, Jane, began under the Obama Administration. Now that the investigation has been publicly disclosed, Senator Sanders is on the defensive and the swamp’s waters are roiling as adversaries gather. So, why does he not form his own political party now? Well, to run without political cover from one of the two main parties is, clearly, doomed. Just ask Ross Perot and others.
The eventual victor, Donald Trump, has been a member of both the Republican and Democratic Parties, but, make no mistake about it, Donald Trump is neither political party’s standard bearer. You only need to read the daily news from Washington, DC, to ascertain President Trump’s outsider status.
The Democrats revile him. To their discredit, Democrats have abandoned their affirmation of tolerance and compassion. Intent on resisting President Trump, they foment violent protests. As if the vehemence of their words validate the strength of their arguments, they publicly vilify President Trump in harsh, profane language going so far as to threaten to burn the White House and to assassinate a sitting President.
Their so-called Resistance reminds me of the country boys in school ganging up to bully and intimidate the new brash, rich kid whose family just moved from the glamorous city to rural America. It is just plain shameful.
The Republicans are having setbacks in adapting, too. Witness the entertaining dynamics of Republican conservatives battling moderates and, then, reacting with horror at President Trump’s aggressive tweets and threatening proclamations. The bottom line is that Trump’s agenda remains mired in the swamp.
President Trump, the man who has never been a politician, minces no words in lumping Democrat and Republican politicians together in the so-called swamp. In his worldview, politicians of both main parties are the problem. They are far too cozy with each other having constructed election laws that effectively raise high barriers for entry to any new political party. They are seemingly content to trade majority rule periodically and to exert leverage when in the minority. From Trump’s perspective, political leaders trade favors at the expense of national interests, bleed taxpayers for pork to woo voters, and exempt themselves from the very laws they draft.
Now that he is the President, Donald Trump has four years to achieve the seemingly impossible task of draining the swamp while currying support from the swamp. Can a non-politician who rose to power through a third party insurgency now effectively rule? The proof of the pudding is in the eating.
Give Participation Trophies to Hillary and the Dems
By Neely Archer
Lose a soccer game? Smile, accept the outcome with grace, and collect a participation trophy.
Lose a presidential election? Attack the voters as deplorable, blame the director of one of the nation’s most respected law enforcement agencies, resurrect our Cold War foe, and challenge the U.S. Constitution.
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander?! Let’s take a closer look.
In 2012, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney asserted that 47% of American voters did not pay income tax and were dependent on the government. They were, therefore, supporters of President Obama. That hurt Romney’s candidacy. Similarly, it is folly to dismiss Hillary Clinton’s labelling of a large segment of the population as deplorable. It, no doubt, came back to haunt her. Insulted Trump supporters cast their votes on November 8th after remaining silent in order to evade liberal attacks labelling them Islamaphobes, homophobes, xenophobes, sexists, and misogynists.
After lauding FBI Director Comey’s announcement that he would not seek charges against Hillary Clinton, she and her political party switched to demanding his resignation. They would have us believe that Director Comey’s letter to Congress at the end of October upended Hillary’s campaign. However, subsequent voter feedback consistently indicated that Comey’s October letter merely reinforced voters’ decisions without materially swaying voters. Plus, media outlets reminded us that a substantial portion of the electorate had already voted.
Hillary’s argument for Comey’s letter turning her fortunes is based on polls that, in late October, purportedly gave her large, double-digit leads among voters. It is significant to note that these are the very same polls that are now discredited for vastly under-estimating Trump voters. The argument can be made that, counter to prevailing wisdom now known to be based on faulty polling data, Trump had seized the momentum and was challenging for the lead before Comey’s letter.
It is no secret that the Russians are hacking into our public and private computer networks. So are the Chinese and many other nations. It is, also, well known that since the founding of the United States many countries have sought to influence U. S. elections or to take advantage of our political cycles. To ascribe material success in election tampering without proof irresponsibly weakens faith in our government. Moreover, in leaking and politicizing intelligence reports, the democrats risk raising Putin’s stature by embellishing Russian influence.
It is exceptionally troubling that President Obama has, on the record, stated that he was fully aware of Russian hacking long before November. He elected not to take action as he fully expected Hillary to succeed him in the White House. Let us remember that he took no action against the Chinese comparable to the expulsion of Russian diplomats and levying of sanctions when Chinese hacking of millions of American citizens’ records came to light. That is, national security was presumably under attack; yet, the President took no action until it materially affected his legacy and his party’s political fortunes.
Hillary’s supporters tout her plurality of votes and decry the U. S. Constitution’s Electoral College. True, Hillary may have won the popular vote, but, many of those votes are highly concentrated in dense urban areas on both coasts. Never mind that American history records several US Presidents moving to the White House with less than 50% of the popular vote. In addition to winning the electoral vote by a significant margin, Trump won 30 states to include those in the heartland and those with coastlines. With Trump leading the ticket, republicans continue to retain the US Senate and the US House, hold 30 governorships, and preside over two thirds of state legislative chambers. All of this serves to affirm the wisdom of our nation’s founding fathers in establishing the Electoral College.
The bottom line is that Hillary was a weak candidate. The trove of leaked emails reveal collusion with party officials to undermine Bernie Sanders. Hillary’s health was questioned after she collapsed in New York City. She was outhustled by Trump in the campaign’s final weeks to include forgoing campaign stops in Wisconsin. Ironically, as the leader of the political party promulgating gender neutrality, Hillary’s platform was overly based on electing the first female President.
Hillary Clinton’s failed political campaign has the makings of a theatrical tragedy. Hillary has taken her final breath on the political stage seemingly surrounded by a host of deplorable villains and a sinister character lurking in the shadows holding a bloody hammer and sickle. However, as is the case with tragedies, Hillary is the victim of her own character flaws and actions. Anagnorisis and hubris are her ultimate undoing. As the curtains close, let the orchestra play Aaron Copland’s Fanfare for the Common Man as we give a heartfelt thank you to common Americans in our heartland.
Trump assumed the presidency on January 20th. Despite the Democrats’ so-called Resistance, Trump is the legitimate President and they’re not. Time to get over it and think in terms of the nation’s best interests. In the meantime, Hillary and the Dems deserve participation trophies for trying. Perhaps, I have some old ones in my garage that I can dust off and send to them. Then again, an Oscar statuette for acting might be more appropriate.