Trickle Down Magic

The impression of what the first Presidential debate "means" or "meant" are as numerous as the snowflakes, or Hardee's Biscuits. It is surely true that people applying logic to what they heard, plus a modicum of their own non-lying eyes, will probably conclude that Mrs. Clinton "won." But like all the Presidential Debates of yore, there are really no rules, no clear presentations of policy or point of view. Mrs. Clinton surely did much better than Mr. Trump at.... something. I'd say that for sure I'd feel better with the country in her hands, than in the hands of a man who seems incapable of saying complete sentences, or of maintaining his personal composure in the face of almost any resistance at all, justified resistance or not. And Trump's post-debate remarks dig the hole deeper. The mic was bad? Really? I am around sound systems a good deal and I didn't notice any difference in the amplification quality of the two "debaters." Whenever Mr. Trump is questioned, on almost any subject, his default response, which he seems unable to gain mastery over, is 4th grade, hand in the cookie jar lies. It's obvious and really appalling, and it speaks, more than anything he says, to his Presidential abilities. And that is what the "debates" are also designed to showcase.

A parallel case would be Mr. McCain's exhibition of his own Presidential judgment in his first "presidential act," the nomination of the ridiculous Sarah Palin as his Vice-President. It is what it is. I was certainly going to vote for Mr. Obama in any event, but Mrs. Palin's patent incompetence was a necessary and sufficient reason to vote against the man who thought she was capable of being President of the United States. This is almost primarily what the "debates" are "about." The implicit question is, "so, if you're so presidential, what would you do about this." Over and over, Trump fails this existential test. Last week he was more or less starting a war with Iran over gestures Iran's sailors made to a U.S. warship. As this is in one way or another a fairly common test of both our military and our ability to maintain a cool hand, six months of Trump leadership is likely to yield a de facto world war, with the United States, going it alone, on the attack against quite a number of "uppity" countries here and there around the globe. The result of the United States adopting as official foreign policy a Trumpean attitude towards the world is likely to be, over a fairly short time, a world-wide coalition of countries aimed at stopping the United States. As Mrs. Clinton pointed out with regard to the trade discussion, which was one of the most cogent bits of debate as far as debate itself goes, we only have about five percent of the world's population. As long ago as 1864, U.S. Grant illustrated this bottom line military problem. Mr. Jeff Davis shortly found himself riding a train to nowhere. He allegedly was toting the Confederate gold.

But it's important to keep in view that Mr. Trump is not some weird outlier, not "really" a Republican in the mold of Mitt Romney or John McCain or George W. Bush. One of his minions notes this in the screen captured tweet above. The GOP believes in the trickle down magic lock, stock and barrel. Trump is just incapable of containing his real beliefs to the moments when he's ranting at the club, after 18 holes. It's always, for the GOP, those 47 "loser" "user" American citizens, rankling them to a bed sore the size of Jupiter.

The choice is between an incompetent, and a scream of exasperation that, once again, the "takers" are getting away with it. And for the rest of us. As usual it is just small increments, life at its petty pace. As I've said here before, the Germans didn't vote for a Berlin in rubble. But that's what they sure as hell got.

By the way, I see for the moment that all my links have vanished. I'm working on figuring out why. Sorry.