Guest Post: Like it or not, Trump Would Govern

Republicans and Democrats Crave Governance 

Every candidate is making promises “to govern”. 

(Stop a moment, please!   Before you read this Guest Post, please consider putting your email address in the little box up there on the right.  That way you "Follow" me.   What it means is that every day or so in the middle of the night you get an email containing the full text, with photos, of whatever got posted that day.   It is easy and convenient.  And don't worry, you can always unsubscribe instantly.)


Peter Sage's introduction:   Thad Guyer is an attorney who represents whistleblower employees, which means he looks closely at what messages are persuasive to judges and juries.   He is currently living in Vietnam, which gives him some insights regarding the issues facing the American electorate: immigration, xenophobia, Islam, strong-man governance. 

Over the past three months Thad has observed that American punditry has badly misunderstood and underestimated Trump's appeal with voters.  Thad has been proven right so far, most recently last night in Nevada.  Thad asserts here that Trump most certainly wants to govern, expects to govern, and that he would use his independence and popularity with voters to shake up a political/money system that has lost its ability to work on behalf of most Americans.

Guest Post:  Thad Guyer

Thad Guyer's comment:

Each wants to govern, that is what politicians do with power. And voters on the left and right want governance on exactly the same issues: (1) Immigration-- either deport or legalize; (2) Wall Street and income disparity—stop the rip offs by either more regulation or by pushing back the lobbyist donor class; and (3) Economy and jobs—either use federal monetary policy and income redistribution, or stop the manufacturing exodus and trade ripoffs. Voters on both sides agree the government is coopted by special interests and political money, and want it stopped—through governance. 

Democrats have little faith that Hillary can effectively govern on the three issues. She disavows Obama deportations and enforcing even existing immigration laws. She is already clearly corrupted by Wall Street money. And she’s an absolute globalist with a family foundation largely funded by foreigners. 

Sanders

Bernie is what we on the left used to call Republican ideologs—“the lunatic fringe”. His efforts at governance would be talking to himself in the mirror, shunned by Democrats on Capitol Hill who won’t risk re-election by pushing socialist fantasy legislation of free college and single payor health care that will never even get out of committee. He’s such a “wingnut” on immigration that he advocates bringing back those already deported by Obama. Bernie’s brief “viable” candidacy was mostly due to incurable Clinton fatigue.

Republicans know that Trump is one of two candidates who could govern on chaotic immigration, Wall Street ripping off the little guy, and globalism eating their jobs. Cruz is another wingnut lunatic fringe candidate like Bernie, so he’s out. 

That leaves Rubio. He would softly enforce deportation laws, claim that with less regulations Wall Street will be governed by free markets, and assert that better trade deals and fewer work visas will tame globalism.  In other word, Rubio is Hillary, both missing the point of the 2016 political revolution is to tear down the status quo. Rubio and Hillary are boring, untrustworthy “change the system from within” candidates. 

Trump, therefore, is the only viable candidate in either party who could govern consistent with prime imperative—tear down the current political structure by disempowering the donor lobbyist class. He will build a wall with billions Congress will appropriate, lest Trump campaign against their reelections, making fearsome examples of the first few. He will begin deporting millions, since that already is the law, and immigration reform is a legislative myth. He will terrorize the Congress into modifying trade and tariff treaties, and will deregulate Wall Street and offer them legitimacy if they stop corporate inversions and bring the offshore money home. 



As Trump says at most rallies, “I haven’t even started on Hillary yet”. Picture what he did to Jeb!, but threefold. There will be relentless attacks on: (1) her sex-pervert husband whom she enabled; (2) her own version of Nixon’s chief of staff Bob Halderman with a flattop redneck hairut, except now it Hillary’s Huma Abedin, a Muslim who will soon be deposed in federal court over the email server; and (3) Bengazi as told in the movie “13 Hours”. Once everyone watches that movie, Hillary cannot recover her credibility. All this assumes she will not be hauled before a federal grand jury over classified information violations in the next 9 months.

That is governance, whether you like the goals or not.

Huma Abed

 
Street fighting is a particular art of war. Trump is a champion. It is street fighting instinct that enabled him to trash George Bush as a 9-11 liar and loser who should have been impeached. Trump smacked the audience in the face and walked out with arms raised in victory to a sea of cameras. Hilary Clinton will collapse in the ring if she gets that far. America wants governance—Trump style.