October 4, 2016

*The Intellectual Case for Donald Trump*

By Brett Graham Fawcett
<http://www.americanthinker.com/author/brett_graham_fawcett/>

Right-wing wunderkind Ross Douthat has recently claimed
<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/02/opinion/sunday/trump-and-the-intellectuals.html>
that all "intellectual" arguments for Trump fail because of the man's
ungovernable personality and temperament.  We have no idea what he really
believes, or what he might do, cerebral and academic apologia to the
contrary.

May I suggest a few daring points in response?  Trump is not nearly as
unpredictable as some of his opponents (and apologists) claim, and a basic
overall consistency can be detected in his history.  That being said, he is
not an expert in policy matters, but that needn't worry us because he will
have a good team advising him.  Finally, as a salesman (not an
administrator, though clearly already a consummate politician), his current
policies and even his personal presentation must be understood as part of
an ongoing pitch, not as a settled set of proposals.

First, his basic consistency: Trump was once a Democrat at a time when the
"conservative Democrat" was not such an endangered species, but his
consideration of a presidential run for the Reform Party in the year 2000
proves that he held the same convictions about national policy as he holds
now.  (The Reform Party's actual candidate in 2000 was former Republican
candidate Pat Buchanan, who has dubbed Trump his political successor
<http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/06/01/pat-buchanan-donald-trump-is-running-as-me.html>
.)

What is more interesting than his Democratic past is the Democratic
present.  In the first debate, Hillary Clinton barely went after Trump's
policies, instead attacking him for not paying income tax (despite this being
perfectly legal <http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/02/news/economy/trump-taxes>
if one uses the loopholes shrewdly) and for profiting off the 2008 housing
crisis.  (A recent Oscar-winning movie, *The Big Short*, celebrated several
analysts who also made money off the meltdown, and no one seems to have
taken a moral issue with *them*.)  Part of this is because many of Trump's
more controversial policies are also *her* policies: she, too, favors punishing
foreign countries
<http://www.marketwatch.com/story/clinton-says-shell-fight-currency-manipulation-with-tariffs-2016-03-04>
that engage in currency manipulation with tariffs, and not only does she
also want to increase border security
<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/nov/10/hillary-clinton-we-need-to-secure-our-borders/>,
but she actually voted for a wall along the border of the U.S. and Mexico
in 2006.  Yet Trump presents his own espousal of these policies in his
typical excessive style, and since Clinton is building her case against him
primarily on his personality, she is forced to keep her agreement with him
on these points a secret – thus ceding these positions to him in the public
forum.  It is hard not to see a salesman's intuitive artistry in Trump's
strategy here.

And if that's the case, it suggests that – to some extent – the mercurial,
extremist Trump we see on stage is something of an act.  Slavoj Žižek
<https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/apr/28/slavoj-zizek-donald-trump-is-really-a-centrist-liberal>
has suggested that Trump's offensive style is a way of concealing how
moderate and reasonable he really is.  But it is also part of his current
strategy of negotiating, the art of war combined with the art of the deal.
Because the public is frustrated and angry, he matches their feelings as
part of his "pitch" – "pacing," as Scott Adams put it
<http://blog.dilbert.com/post/150919416661/why-i-switched-my-endorsement-from-clinton-to>.
Like any effective salesman, he is "pitching" his policies, but he is in
the process of negotiating them, based not so much on public reaction as on
the qualified feedback he receives.

Consider his tax policy, the only noteworthy thing Clinton went after him
for during the debate.  Yes, some independent studies said his policy would
greatly increase the debt (though the same studies Clinton's fact-checkers
cited contradicted her claim
<http://time.com/4503404/donald-trump-national-debt-trillion/> that her own
policies wouldn't add "a dime" to the debt), but he has revised his tax
policy since the campaign began, and I expect that it will be revised
again.  Already such luminaries as Arthur Laffer
<http://thehill.com/policy/finance/trade/284253-economist-defends-trump-on-trade>,
founder of supply-side economics, and Lawrence Kudlow
<http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/06/01/larry-kudlow-trump-may-not-pure-free-market-guy-hes-growth-guy-opportunity-guy/>
have offered Trump advice on his economic policies.  Now, getting guys like
those to volunteer their help looks a lot like he's operating from a
position of strength.  His economic policies are, we could say, in the
"negotiation" stages.  In the same way, his policy on illegal aliens always
allowed for a policy of "touchback," and his supposed flip-flop on amnesty
is therefore more of him gently "altering the deal."

And this brings us to maybe the most important point: no, Trump is not a
policy expert, but he doesn't really need to be.  As fellow New York icon
Tom Wolfe observed <http://spectator.org/65918_tom-wolfes-view-trump>, high
intelligence is not necessary to be an effective president.  Given how
complex the world is now, almost no one can be the kind of technocratic
expert we seem to want our president to be.  Gary Johnson consistently
proves he is not this kind of expert, and while Hillary Clinton may fit the
bill (i.e., she may be the most "qualified"), given the way the world looks
right now, how she has run the machine does not make her experience look
like an asset.

Trump, on the other hand, for all his self-aggrandizement, is perfectly
aware of his limitations.  In his book *Crippled America*, he explains how
he will solve the health care problem in America: he will lock the nation's
top experts on the subject in a room together and not let them out until
they figure something out.

At first, this sounds outrageous and risible, but give it a moment's
reflection: wouldn't you prefer a president who governs based on what the
experts decide rather than his own agenda?

This raises a point about Trump's style not often observed: as aggressive
as he is to his enemies, he has a habit of reaching out to them for his
projects, perhaps realizing the advantage of a corrective or complementary
point of view.  As much as he may disown Trump now, Tony Schwartz,
ghostwriter of *The Art of the Deal*, reveals
<http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/07/25/donald-trumps-ghostwriter-tells-all>
that Trump approached him after reading a *negative* article that Schwartz
had written about him.  But this is consistent with Trump's style.  When he
was going to build golf courses in Florida, environmentalist Ed Russo was
vocal in opposing him.  Trump approached Russo and actually put him in
charge
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/donald-trump-says-hes-an-environmentalist-others-beg-to-differ/2011/05/12/AFPJV42G_story.html>
of the environmental work on the courses.  Russo has since written a
book lauding
Trump as an environmentalist
<http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/article102833942.html>.
And it is fascinating that his recently released list of Catholic
advisers includes
figures
<https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/trump-campaign-announces-catholic-advisory-group>
like John Klink, former president of the International Catholic Migration
Commission and someone who has a long record of advocacy
<http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/a-heart-for-helping-refugees> for
migrants and refugees of all religions.  Will Klink's presence influence
Trump's rhetoric or policy on refugees?

We'll see, but for now it is important to remember that, reportedly, Trump
wants his V.P. to be in charge of most domestic and foreign policy, and
while he wanted to offer the job to Chris Christie, he ended up going with
Mike Pence
<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/20/magazine/how-donald-trump-picked-his-running-mate.html>
based on his advisers' counsel.  This, if true, refutes the stereotype of
him as bullheaded and unreasonable.  This doesn't mean Trump is an
ideological vacuum, but rather that he has basically sound conservative
instincts and a talent for recruiting competent people, even his critics,
to come up with the best policies that are consistent with them.

This, Mr. Douthat, is the intellectual case for Donald Trump.  We'll see if
time bears it out.


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/10/the_intellec
tual_case_for_donald_trump.html#ixzz4M9J20SYQ
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter
<http://ec.tynt.com/b/rw?id=dlia0Qbjyr4BNDacwqm_6l&u=AmericanThinker>
| AmericanThinker
on Facebook
<http://ec.tynt.com/b/rf?id=dlia0Qbjyr4BNDacwqm_6l&u=AmericanThinker>


------------------------------
[image: Avast logo] <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>



__._,_.___
------------------------------
Posted by: "Beowulf" <[email protected]>
------------------------------


Visit Your Group
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJma2RrNG5nBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE0NzU2MTk2Nzg->


[image: Yahoo! Groups]
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlNHJsc3JiBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQ3NTYxOTY3OA-->
• Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> •
Unsubscribe <[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe>
• Terms of Use <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/>

__,_._,___

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to