With Obama, the right kept saying ‘elect him and society will collapse’ and it didn’t. They are now to a lesser degree saying that about Clinton. Acting as if every democrat being put up for president will usher in a grand civilization wide collapse and it doesn’t happen.
But the left says the same thing about Trump (with more justification I might add, although most on the left don’t take it as far as saying it’ll usher in the dark ages). Lets say Trump wins and his 4 years really isn’t that horrible. It has bad stuff obviously because its Trump but no new wars, no economic collapse, no curtailing of civil liberties, etc.
How does society at large, and the left in general respond when 2020 rolls around?
That’s like asking how we will react if Trump doesn’t do what he says he is going to do, because our fears aren’t based on rumors and innuendo(like the right’s fears about Clinton and Obama)-they are based solidly on his own stated goals. Before I can answer what the results will be, you will have to tell me what he did instead of what he originally said he was going to do.
I think the Democrats would be favored to retake the White House in 2020 in a mediocre-but-not-awful-Trump scenario. There’s a decent chance they’d have both houses of Congress, too.
Trump will have made 2-3 SCOTUS nominations by then, two of which would satisfy GOP pro-life socially conservative litmus tests, but at least one of which would be a David Souter type, too liberal for GOP tastes.
The economy would be performing poorly, America’s image would take a hit internationally, the GOP would be stuck with a pretense of supporting Trump while in reality disliking him.
Actually, there’s a very good chance President Trump would be primaried out of the White House in 2020. He’d face an intense challenge from GOP insurgents in the primaries trying to knock him out, the like of which hasn’t been seen in decades.
I’m not sure all of the bad effects of a Trump Presidency would show up by 2020. If he wants to renegotiate trade deals, it will take years to negotiate them and more years to see the effects. If he weakens NATO, it could be a decade before that becomes obvious enough to embolden territorial aggression.
Overall, my prediction is that Trump will lead to an era of tightened foreign borders; less immigration, less trade. That will hamper economies worldwide. Perhaps not enough to look like a recession or a depression, but it might mean 1% GDP growth instead of 1.5%.
He will also lead to heightened military insecurity. Trump’s America will have a bigger military, but support fewer allies and be less consistent in how that is used. So Trump’s plan is for everyone to pay their own way, increasing military budgets overall. I’m not sure whether this translates to open aggression or not, but it will certainly give the US a weaker role in international affairs, not a stronger one.
The assumption you are making–that things would go on pretty much as usual if Trump wins–is unrealistic in the face of his documented instability and the record of his propensities, interests, and goals.
We have a government of checks and balances: between the President, the House of Representatives, the Senate, the Judiciary, the bureaucracy. How much Trump can do depends massively on to what extent the other parts support him. OP, what are your suppositions concerning this?
At least half of what he says he’ll do is unconstitutional, so can’t you assume he doesn’t do that stuff? Or are we to operate under the assumption that he’ll attempt to do as much big stuff by executive order as Obama (W. Bush literally did more, but a large number just involved pay raises and formations of committees/councils/boards/task forces or establishing orders of succession in various departments) but be even more successful at having it upheld by the supremes?
It’ll be much like the way Bush damaged the Obama administration. Obama had to spend a considerable portion of his presidency repairing the damage Bush did rather than moving us forward.
Let’s not even put that card into play, o.k.? I have been hearing that tired line from people since this all started, and I ask you this question: When in his entire history has Trump’s real agenda been anything other than to do and say what benefits him personally?
One thing you have to keep in mind is that Trump can say whatever crap he wants as President, but he can’t DO whatever he wants. Congress is a check on him(if they want to be), the courts are a check, and the executive branch itself is a bit of a check.
The best outcome is that Trump has a fairly typical Republican Presidency policywise, while of course making a fool of himself on TV on a daily basis. In other words, much like the administration of Silvio Berlusconi in Italy.
Apparently I"m not the first person to make the comparison:
People have said that because of things that Trump himself has said in the not too distant past which put him in centrist New York Republican territory. When he set out to become president it seemed like he was checking the box on every issue to make himself appeal to the stereotypical hardcore right winger. For instance I would be very surprised if he cares one bit about abortion either way. He is not religious. Early on in the campaign he was clear that he thought everyone should have healthcare and implied he liked the idea of single payer but since Obamacare is the devil he had to change his stance. I think that means he will be totally unpredictable. He’s not going to set policy using conservative ideals or republican platforms. He is going to use Trump ideals and ideas which will be whatever pops into his head at the time.
It’s pretty clear that the Republicans in Congress are behind Trump because it means they’ll get to pass their agenda. And it’s a pretty radical agenda.
Trump will not have a ‘fairly typical Republican Presidency policywise’ because all of the previous Republican Presidencies were in the past, when the party itself was less radical than now.
Take Dubya’s attempt at Social Security privatization in 2005: the Republicans could have pushed that through, but were afraid to do so without at least a fig leaf of its being bipartisan.
If anyone thinks today’s GOP would show similar restraint with respect to Paul Ryan’s agenda, all I can say is: pray we never find out.
I have to say also that Trump is the kind of guy that is setting all up to benefit him in the likely hood that he will screw up. Like in Brexit were he did not need to wait for the British exit from Europe to happen to see if it would be bad for most, the unrest caused was calculated by Trump to benefit him. His resorts, as he believes, did benefit right after the vote because of the unrest that took place even before any effects could be seen as a result of the expected changes. (He expected, and with the lowering of the Pound, that more people then did or will travel to places like his golf resort in Scotland).
The point is that Trump does see many Americans and even a lot of his supporters as being gullible people.
Yeah, this. The only way he avoids screwing everything up is by repudiating pretty much everything he has promised to his base.
And if he does that, his base will explode, branding him a RINO, calling him a sell out, accusing him of being co-opted by the NWO, and all that CT crap they are so enamored of. They’ll end up pushing for a new candidate even more crazy than Trump appears to be, and they might actually find one who really is that crazy, who isn’t just putting on an act.