Contrary to the inspiring speech delivered by Michael Douglas as President Shepherd, the most important considerations for voters in a U.S. Presidential election are not around the “character” of the candidates. They are: “Who pulls the strings?” and “What can a President actually do?”
Looking at the last two administrations might be enlightening. Eight years of “W” clearly presented a White House under the thumb of the Military-Industrial complex Eisenhower warned against. Wars everywhere, trillions of dollars wasted, lost and stolen, credibility, power, and arms for fanatics.
Obama, on the other hand, appears to have been a man of the people. with the aforementioned character, great ideals and an initial supply of unowned aides. True, things changed, many for the better, but the overriding lesson of the Obama Presidency is “the President is not omnipotent”. The
Affordable Care Act is not the medicare Obama’s supporters expected. Little has been accomplished in improving education. Wars and their associated enemy-creation continue.
So where does that leave American voters in 2016?
Were he even ten percent as good as he says he is at business, negotiating and winning, Donald Trump could not, in eight years, accomplish what his campaign suggests. There will be no wall completed, and most certainly any parts started will not be funded by Mexico. Law and order à la Trump might be close enough to Mussolini’s to conceive a second American revolution, perhaps in itself not a terrible idea. His distaste for NAFTA and the TPP may well bring jobs back home. Yes, Mr. Trump and many of his cronies will amass even more dizzying piles of wealth, but Trump is not the corporatist one might expect of a “billionaire”, and he is certainly no friend to the banking cartel currently subjugating most of the planet.
The likely legacy of a Trump Presidency? A better understanding of how little power resides in the White House.
The Democratic nominee, on the other hand, is quite clearly “connected”. The American Presidency took a hard right turn in 1981 into the hands of the corporate world and the new feudalism became firmly entrenched in the West. The rights of Corporations expanded well beyond simple “person powers”, and Corporate control rose above even nation-state power. Realizing it more rewarding to be a revered Reagan than a discredited Nixon, the Clinton’s jumped on board. Where Trump has suggested dismantling the EPA, a Clinton resurgence would achieve the same result without public outcry through weakened regulation and budgetary restriction.
Hillary’s legacy could see the world firmly back in the hands of the elites and an end to this upstart “government of the people by the people” nonsense.