Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

Such a nasty election

Halloween is over and yet the monsters remain. Just one more week until the citizens of the United States go to the polls to elect a new president, some new senators, and a new Congress.
Col-Whitcombe.01_10312016.jpg

Halloween is over and yet the monsters remain.

Just one more week until the citizens of the United States go to the polls to elect a new president, some new senators, and a new Congress. How scary is that?

Actually, only the president will be truly new. Most of the Senate and Congressional positions will default to the incumbent as the recidivism rate for the House is around 95 per cent. Once elected, it is rare for a sitting incumbent to be ousted.

From a Canadian and world point of view, the only race which really seems to matter is the president. The United States vests much of its international image in the head of the executive branch.

Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have to be the two most unlikeable candidates for president ever.

According to the latest polls, both have nearly identical "unfavourability" ratings. Both are viewed as unfit for the office by a majority of the American electorate.

It is hard to imagine a similar scenario in the Canadian context. In part this is due to our leaders having to be likeable enough to actually lead a party. Unpopular politicians don't get past the party faithful, let alone into positions of power and authority.

But as the Donald has demonstrated over and over again, you can win the Republican nomination without actually holding any of the values of the Republican Party.

Heck, you don't have to even be a Republican!

You just need to be willing to stand in front of large audiences and insight people to violence against minorities. It so reminds me of a scene from the movie An American President, in which Michael Douglas playing Alan Shepherd blasts his opponent, Bob Rumson:

"We have serious problems to solve, and we need serious people to solve them. And whatever your particular problem is, I promise you Bob Rumson is not the least bit interested in solving it. He is interested in two things, and two things only: making you afraid of it, and telling you who's to blame for it.

"That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you win elections. You gather a group of middle age, middle class, middle income voters who remember with longing an easier time, and you talk to them about family, and American values and character, and you wave an old photo of the president's girlfriend and you scream about patriotism. You tell them she's to blame for their lot in life. And you go on television and you call her a whore."

The Donald hasn't called anyone "a whore" but he has made a great deal out of the infidelities of Bill Clinton, including a press conference with some of Bill's accusers present. What this has to do with Hillary, I am not sure. How does a philandering husband make her unfit to be president?

Certainly, the Donald has demonstrated over and over again just how unfit he is to be president. He has engaged in a protracted campaign of insults, whether it is calling Mexicans "rapists and drug dealers," his fellow Republican nominees "moronic," former Mayor Michael Bloomberg a "very little guy," or Secretary Clinton "crooked Hillary."

Perhaps more importantly, he has spent the entire campaign harking back to a time of longing and telling people he can make America great again. His speeches lay blame left, right, and centre with equal abandon. He has threatened to throw Hillary in jail and has gone so far as to suggest he will not respect the will of the people - unless he wins.

Very scary, indeed.

On the other hand, Hillary Clinton has been running for president for the past 30 years. It is fairly clear she had a major hand in her husband's presidency. This is not unusual as many first ladies throughout American history have taken on direct and indirect roles. But after Bill's term was over, she ran for and won a Senate seat. She launched an unsuccessful campaign for the Democratic nomination in 2008 but became Secretary of State.

She has positioned herself as a policy wonk and a smooth operator within the power structure of the Washington elite. By any measure, she should be a clear winner - a president-in-waiting. Yet scandals surrounding her use and deletion of emails continue.

Some of the scandals don't even seem to be of her making. It is hard to understand how a staffer's relationship with her ex-husband is somehow Hillary's fault. How is this tied to her campaign? But it is certainly firing up the Donald's narrative that she can not be trusted.

What is missing from this election campaign is an informed and thoughtful discussion on the policies each will bring to the table and that is downright scary.

What comes after the election - regardless of who wins - will likely be even scarier.