Like most others, I’d say the biggest risk areas in foreign policy are the high chances of alienating allies and blundering about with badly miscalibrated responses to emerging crises. Domestically, I see all sorts of chances for mischief involving misuse of the law to settle personal vendettas (see Gov. Christie’s kangaroo court Tuesday night at the convention for a taste of what’s to come), general ineptitude at setting policy due to unfamiliarity with the system (this may actually be a good thing in some cases) and packing the Supreme Court with a bunch of Scalia clones.
Add to that, and please understand I’m not going to claim there’s a high chance of this happening, I nevertheless cannot rule out a Trump administration sufficiently chaotic to potentially spark a military coup.
Yes Russia may even invade multiple Middle Eastern countries and establish enormous military bases. They could even pick a fight with a nuclear armed country over a few islands. Imagine if they increased their military spending 9 or 10 times so they would be even with the very modest and peaceful US government.
Imagine the horror when the Russians instigate a coup in Canada, installing a regime that attempts an ethnic cleansing of the French minority. Oh my! They may even send them armaments.
Quoting PJ O’Rourke, a Conservative author and columnist:
“I am endorsing Hillary, and all her lies and all her empty promises,” O’Rourke continued. “It’s the second-worst thing that can happen to this country, but she’s way behind in second place. She’s wrong about absolutely everything, but she’s wrong within normal parameters.”
“This man just can’t be president… pause They’ve got this button — this briefcase. He’s going to find it.”
“Egon, I’m fuzzy on the whole good/bad thing. What do you mean, “bad”?”
“Try to imagine all life as you know it stopping instantaneously and every molecule in your body exploding at the speed of light.”
On the one hand, a Trump administration will probably set new standards for government scandals. Trump will be more hands off than Reagan was. There’ll be no oversight and low level officials will either be running their own ideological agendas or simply robbing the place blind.
On the other hand, while Trump might ignore the day-to-day duties of the Presidency, he’ll be there to make the big mistakes. Like saying he might not uphold America’s NATO commitments.
Hmmmmmm…well, how about some unfortunate but minor “attack” occurs. A small hotel explodes in the middle of the country somewhere. Maybe it was a gas leak, who knows. Somebody is positive that they saw something! (Likely the Sikh owner of the nearby 7-11 was picking his car up from the nearby repair shop.) FOX news goes into full 24-7 mode about ISIS/Islamic Terrorists pouring over the borders. The Donald, as President, decides it’s time to shut the borders, it’s time to round up all of the people who don’t look exactly like Mike Pence within our borders. He shows up on TV wearing a faux military outfit (because he can!). The call goes out and some not insignificant portion of his supporters decide they like to wear outfits like The Donald. Weeeeeeee!
From the OP “The judiciary will still be active. Media will still exist.” Well, that was true in another country that I could name, where their fatherly leader had been democratically elected.
We have a deeper system than just “elect the President”. Germany in the Weimar years and Russia today exemplify makeshift democracies with zero protections for individual rights and no rule of law. Banana republics. The US is no banana republic. Trump can do damage, but there are limits.
Ezra Klein today posted a great article summing up why Donald Trump can’t be President. Listing “Liar” is a bit odd, not because it’s not true, but because unlike Trump’s other problems, it doesn’t disqualify him to be President. Most Presidents lie enthusiastically and often. But other than that, a great case against Trump:
How do you figure? Why would “being a narcissist” disqualify him, but being a liar doesn’t? Nothing in that list technically disqualifies him, and “being a liar” is far from the most trivial of the charges the article lodges against him.
The list was of good reasons not to vote for him. It was a list of reasons to fear what might happen if he wins. It wasn’t a list of “disqualifications,” just of severe personality flaws.
Take all your overgrown infants away somewhere
and build them a home a little place of their own
the [del]Fletcher Memorial
Home for Incurable Tyrants and Kings[/del]Trump Towers
and they can appear to themselves every day
on closed circuit t.v.
to make sure they’re still real
it’s the only connection they feel
I can’t help but think that even if Trump is elected, there’s a fever going on, also evident in Europe, that has to break SOMETIME. Yeah, the world will be worse off, especially in the short to mid term, but if that’s what it takes to show people how ugly that side of humanity is, it might, MIGHT work out in the long run, especially as I don’t think there will be anything apocalyptic as a result. Lots of people will be hurt and killed, yes, and we should try our best to prevent that, but I also see no reason to just give up if Trump wins.
I’m not sure I believe that. If anything, I would think Trump would be the micromanaging executive all up in everyone’s business.
IIRC, don’t a lot of Republicans dislike Trump because they feel he’s too far moderate left policy-wise?
Some of which he has already said he’d like to erode, e.g. making it easier for political figures to sue media, getting the right to dismiss at will any federal employee hired in the last 8 years, and the one he walked back about how if he gave the unlawful order to attack the terrorists’ families, the military would obey, lemme tellya.
Except when it comes to foreign policy and emergency use of armed forces. There is almost no limits on what Trump could do in those regards. Please please please let’s not find out.
Just to reiterate what others have said, the POTUS is called “Leader of the Free World” and “Most Powerful Person on the Planet” for good reasons. Consider how much damage George W. Bush, a genius and policy geek compared with the Trump, did to American prestige and treasure, and the catastrophic effects his policies had on the Middle East. Then imagine Geoge W. Bush replaced with a moronic egomaniac. The mind boggles that OP could even ask such a question.
Trump and Putin see each other as “kindred spirits.” Which of the two do you think would be the mastermind if they develop a close relationship? The potential for disaster is huuuuuuge.