When
Donald Trump began his improbable run for president 15 months ago, he
offered his wealth and television celebrity as credentials, then slyly
added a twist of fearmongering about Mexican “rapists” flooding across
the Southern border.
From
that moment of combustion, it became clear that Mr. Trump’s views were
matters of dangerous impulse and cynical pandering rather than
thoughtful politics. Yet he has attracted throngs of Americans who
ascribe higher purpose to him than he has demonstrated in a freewheeling
campaign marked by bursts of false and outrageous allegations, personal
insults, xenophobic nationalism, unapologetic sexism and positions that
shift according to his audience and his whims.
Now
here stands Mr. Trump, feisty from his runaway Republican primary
victories and ready for the first presidential debate, scheduled for
Monday night, with Hillary Clinton. It is time for others who are still
undecided, and perhaps hoping for some dramatic change in our politics
and governance, to take a hard look and see Mr. Trump for who he is.
They have an obligation to scrutinize his supposed virtues as a
refreshing counterpolitician. Otherwise, they could face the
consequences of handing the White House to a man far more consumed with
himself than with the nation’s well-being.
Here’s how Mr. Trump is selling himself and why he can’t be believed.
A financial wizard who can bring executive magic to government?
Despite
his towering properties, Mr. Trump has a record rife with bankruptcies
and sketchy ventures like Trump University, which authorities are
investigating after numerous complaints of fraud. His name has been
chiseled off his failed casinos in Atlantic City.
Mr.
Trump’s brazen refusal to disclose his tax returns — as Mrs. Clinton
and other nominees for decades have done — should sharpen voter wariness
of his business and charitable operations. Disclosure would undoubtedly
raise numerous red flags; the public record already indicates that in
at least some years he made full use of available loopholes and paid no
taxes.
Mr.
Trump has been opaque about his questionable global investments in
Russia and elsewhere, which could present conflicts of interest as
president, particularly if his business interests are left in the hands
of his children, as he intends. Investigations have found self-dealing.
He notably tapped $258,000 in donors’ money from his charitable
foundation to settle lawsuits involving his for-profit businesses,
according to The Washington Post.
Continue reading the main story
A straight talker who tells it like it is?
Mr.
Trump, who has no experience in national security, declares that he has
a plan to soundly defeat the Islamic State militants in Syria, but
won’t reveal it, bobbing and weaving about whether he would commit
ground troops. Voters cannot judge whether he has any idea what he’s
talking about without an outline of his plan, yet Mr. Trump ludicrously
insists he must not tip off the enemy.
Another
of his cornerstone proposals — his campaign pledge of a “total and
complete shutdown” of Muslim newcomers plus the deportation of 11
million undocumented immigrants across a border wall paid for by Mexico —
has been subjected to endless qualifications as he zigs and zags in
pursuit of middle-ground voters.
Whatever
his gyrations, Mr. Trump always does make clear where his heart lies —
with the anti-immigrant, nativist and racist signals that he
scurrilously employed to build his base.
He
used the shameful “birther” campaign against President Obama’s
legitimacy as a wedge for his candidacy. But then he opportunistically
denied his own record, trolling for undecided voters by conceding that
Mr. Obama was a born American. In the process he tried to smear Mrs. Clinton as the instigator of the birther canard and then fled reporters’ questions.
Since his campaign began, NBC News
has tabulated that Mr. Trump has made 117 distinct policy shifts on 20
major issues, including three contradictory views on abortion in one
eight-hour stretch. As reporters try to pin down his contradictions, Mr.
Trump has mocked them at his rallies. He said he would “loosen” libel laws to make it easier to sue news organizations that displease him.
An expert negotiator who can fix government and overpower other world leaders?
His plan for cutting the national debt was far from a confidence builder: He said he might try to persuade
creditors to accept less than the government owed. This fanciful
notion, imported from Mr. Trump’s debt-steeped real estate world, would
undermine faith in the government and the stability of global financial
markets. His tax-cut plan has been no less alarming. It was initially
estimated to cost $10 trillion in tax revenue, then, after revisions,
maybe $3 trillion, by one adviser’s estimate. There is no credible
indication of how this would be paid for — only assurances that those in
the upper brackets will be favored.
If
Mr. Trump were to become president, his open doubts about the value of
NATO would present a major diplomatic and security challenge, as would
his repeated denunciations of trade deals and relations with China. Mr.
Trump promises to renegotiate the Iran nuclear control agreement, as if
it were an air-rights deal on Broadway. Numerous experts on national
defense and international affairs have recoiled at the thought of his
commanding the nuclear arsenal. Former Secretary of State Colin Powell privately called
Mr. Trump “an international pariah.” Mr. Trump has repeatedly denounced
global warming as a “hoax,” although a golf course he owns in Ireland
is citing global warming in seeking to build a protective wall against a
rising sea.
In
expressing admiration for the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, Mr.
Trump implies acceptance of Mr. Putin’s dictatorial abuse of critics and
dissenters, some of whom have turned up murdered, and Mr. Putin’s
vicious crackdown on the press. Even worse was Mr. Trump’s urging Russia
to meddle in the presidential campaign by hacking the email of former
Secretary of State Clinton. Voters should consider what sort of deals
Mr. Putin might obtain if Mr. Trump, his admirer, wins the White House.
A change agent for the nation and the world?
There
can be little doubt of that. But voters should be asking themselves if
Mr. Trump will deliver the kind of change they want. Starting a series
of trade wars is a recipe for recession, not for new American jobs.
Blowing a hole in the deficit by cutting taxes for the wealthy will not
secure Americans’ financial future, and alienating our allies won’t
protect our security. Mr. Trump has also said he will get rid of the new
national health insurance system that millions now depend on, without
saying how he would replace it.
The
list goes on: He would scuttle the financial reforms and consumer
protections born of the Great Recession. He would upend the Obama
administration’s progress on the environment, vowing to “cancel the
Paris climate agreement” on global warming. He would return to the use
of waterboarding, a torture method, in violation of international treaty
law. He has blithely called for reconsideration of Japan’s commitment
not to develop nuclear weapons. He favors a national campaign
of “stop and frisk” policing, which has been ruled unconstitutional. He
has blessed the National Rifle Association’s ambition to arm citizens
to engage in what he imagines
would be defensive “shootouts” with gunmen. He has so coarsened our
politics that he remains a contender for the presidency despite musing
about his opponent as a gunshot target.
Voters
should also consider Mr. Trump’s silence about areas of national life
that are crying out for constructive change: How would he change our
schools for the better? How would he lift more Americans out of poverty?
How would his condescending appeal to black voters — a cynical signal
to white moderates concerned about his racist supporters — translate
into credible White House initiatives to promote racial progress? How
would his call to monitor and even close some mosques affect the
nation’s life and global reputation? Would his Supreme Court nominees be
zealous, self-certain extensions of himself? In all these areas, Mrs.
Clinton has offered constructive proposals. He has offered bluster, or
nothing. The most specific domestic policy he has put forward, on tax
breaks for child care, would tilt toward the wealthy.
Voters
attracted by the force of the Trump personality should pause and take
note of the precise qualities he exudes as an audaciously different
politician: bluster, savage mockery of those who challenge him,
degrading comments about women, mendacity, crude generalizations about
nations and religions. Our presidents are role models for generations of
our children. Is this the example we want for them?
Bobby Darvish of Platinum Lending Solutions
Robert Darvish of Platinum Lending Solutions
Robert Bobby Darvish Platinum Lending Soltuions.
No comments:
Post a Comment