Clinton v. Trump: Politics, War and the 2016 Presidential Race – Part II

This post is the second and final part of an essay dealing with the application of power in politics.   

Part I addressed how, in the 1960’s, Lyndon Baines Johnson interpreted the nature of power and of how he used it to push through the Civil Rights Act of 1964, despite almost overwhelming opposition from his own Democratic Party, and of how he unsuccessfully expanded the Vietnam War.

Also, Part II of this essay describes my understanding of how Hillary Rodham Clinton and Donald Trump view the application of power, and of how their insights about it are not dissimilar to the forceful manner by which power was employed by LBJ.

NEARLY SIX DECADES AFTER LBJ, THIS IS WHAT POWER LOOKS LIKE IN THE QUEST FOR THE PRESIDENCY: 

 

There are early signs that the initial preparations being made by advisers for both Clinton and Trump will result in a presidential race that has all of the hallmarks of political warfare similar to that which LBJ employed to get his results.

Hillary Rodham Clinton is anticipating Trump’s no-holds-barred onslaught, but will not likely respond in kind – she will leave that job to her proxies.

Expect that she will attempt to maintain her composure during forthcoming debates, while still pushing back very strongly against Trump’s fierce and fiery language, (if that’s what he chooses to do) – a barrage of words not heard in public at this level during my lifetime. 

      

Nonetheless, Trump is unlikely to change his approach materially, since it is what propelled him to this point in his campaign.

However, his previous strategy may not be effectively sustainable without behavior modification.  He is getting distracted by self-inflicted forays that have nothing to do with his campaign, but are placing him under an unfavorable spotlight, even among some of his high level supporters.

The latest incident was Trump’s comments about Gonzalo Curiel, the Federal Judge currently presiding over the Trump University lawsuit – a completely tangential affair having no direct impact whatsoever on Trump’s presidential hopes, but one that minimizes his judgment and questions his ability to compartmentalize.

He and his advisers need to pay attention to the formidable forces that will be deployed to support Hillary Rodham Clinton by way of a campaign strategy that is beginning to resemble a political pincer movement that will overwhelm Trump, should he and his backers not recognize the impending threat.

On what has evolved into a political field of battle, Trump plans to deploy his forces in anticipation of an early frontal assault against Clinton.

This may happen as early as the beginning of next week when he is anticipated to deliver an address that will highlight Hillary Clinton’s missteps as Secretary of State, and her alleged improprieties with respect to the Clinton Foundation.

But as he marches headlong into the fray, Trump and his backers need to pay attention to another set of potent forces allied with Clinton that may be deployed against him in the form of a classic, military-style pincer movement.

An Obama-Biden-Warren team is being arrayed to attack Trump on one flank with fundraisers, campaign speeches, and ad hominem attacks designed to buttress Clinton’s favorability numbers.

On Trump’s other flank, a combined force including elements of the sympathetic media and Super PACs will simultaneously marshal its own troops – hoping, in toto, to encircle Trump and to overpower him by slowly closing the pincer.

If Trump is to succeed, he needs to acknowledge and to prepare for the fact that this strategy is already in the planning stages and to cancel his expectation that his opponents, real or perceived, need to “treat me nice.”

 

That is a mere fantasy that he can ill afford now that he is entering the real big time.  [Note the violence, thuggery, and mayhem that occurred at many of his latest appearances.]  There will be no quarter given in this presidential race.

The White House prize for dominance is arguably the most-sought-after object of power in U.S. political circles.  The only other factor that may match the scope of the Oval Office are each of the two egos that are struggling to capture it.

Regretfully, it seems that we are done in this country with civilized political discourse from almost any source.

 

After the gradual grinding down of the quality of national discourse within and among American society that has slowly been sullying our culture, should we have expected anything but this?

Thanks for your perseverance in checking in and reading these posts.  The summer is short.  Enjoy it.  We have been lucky to not have had the devastating storms plaguing large swaths of our nation.

OF NOTE: “Men, (and women, may I add) such as they are, very naturally seek money or power; and power because it is as good as money, -- the ‘spoils,’ so called, ‘of office …’”   [An excerpt contained in an address delivered by Ralph Waldo Emerson on August 31, 1837 at Cambridge, Massachusetts before the Phi Beta Kappa Society.]