Originally published by Communities @ Washington Times
SAN DIEGO, June 11, 2011 —Donald Trump’s May 16 announcement that he would not be a 2012 contender may be old news, but the news is changing. Last night, Trump added a significant amendment, reminding Fox News host Bill O’Reilly that he only promised not to run as a Republican.
“If the economy continues to do badly and if the Republicans pick a weak candidate, I may very well run as an independent” (Fox News, The O’Reilly Factor, June 10, 20011).
Deciphering political Newspeak is not always an exact science, but these words probably translate as, “No matter who the Republicans nominate, I have already decided that it will be a weakling and therefore, I will run as an independent.”
The story is nothing new. Supposedly, no candidate ever jumps into an election merely for glory’s sake. They enter only when they feel drafted by “the American people” and then, kicking and screaming, they finally decide to be that one humble servant who is capable of turning our country around. And so, if you want to bet on whether or not Donald Trump plans to run as a third party candidate, you have better odds than a Black Jack player sitting opposite a sleepy dealer.
Without a doubt, Donald Trump’s bull in a china cabinet bluntness sounds refreshing at times, especially when we remember that a mealy mouthed nominee would have a difficult time against charismatic President Obama. Still, one can’t help but wonder if there are other reasons why Mr. Trump has given up on Republicans, namely expressed GOP uncertainty as to where an outspoken, loose cannon truly stands on important issues.
We could take the time to list all of Trump’s flip-flops but that would make this article longer than a Yellow Pages phone book. Instead, a few small samples should suffice, starting with a selection from social controversy such as the always-volatile matter of abortion. Presently, Trump claims to be pro-life.
“I believe strongly in just about all conservative principles … I’m pro-life. I think that’s a big social issue’’ (Fox News, On The Record with Greta Van Susteren, Feb. 14, 2011).
And yet, Donald the Direct articulated something quite different in 1999, while flirting with the idea of a Reform Party presidential bid: “I believe it is a personal decision that should be left to the women and their doctors” (Pat Eaton–Robb, Associated Press Dec 2, 1999).
The metamorphosis was not without explanation from Michael Cohen, executive vice president of the Trump Organization, who said, “People change their positions all the time … What you stood for 11 years ago you may not be standing for today. Maybe it was the birth of his five children or his grandchild that changed his mind’’ (National Journal, Feb 15,2011).
Fair enough. Nobody can claim to read Trump’s mind. In politics we are not awarded such luxuries and must instead make our decisions about supporting or rejecting candidates with an educated guess as to whether or not a back and forth pattern is going to continue. Certainly Trump is not alone under that microscope. Candidate Mitt Romney also has to answer for his own changed view of abortion, not to mention a “pseudo flip” on government driven health insurance, exhibited through a bashing of Obama Care, balanced like a circus tight rope walk with a section of his own resume that he probably wishes didn’t exist but must defend anyway; Massachusetts health care.
Still, Trump’s flip-flops include something far less common, contradictory opinions of the very man he might potentially run against, Obama himself! The president has been raked over the coals by Trump on many an occasion including speeches for conservative audiences. Trump’s credibility as a businessman with amazing success has been intriguing to at least some of the Tea Party movement. At one such function, organized specifically as a “tax day rally,“ Trump delivered harsh words for President Obama’s health care program and handling of the economy, using the opportunity to offer quite a power packed quotable: “He’s the worst president in the history of the United States … He’s been a terrible president. It’s very important that he be replaced” (South Florida Tea Party, April 16, 2011).
Unfortunately, Trump’s response when Obama won the 2008 election was virtually the opposite of his Tea Party words: “I think he has a chance to go down as a great president” (NY1, Nov. 11, 2008).
Some might defend Trump’s multiple faces by pointing out the difference between an appraisal of a two year Obama track record and a willingness to grant our new president the benefit of the doubt earlier on, but since candidate Obama had been none too shy with his views on health care and wealth redistribution, what exactly did businessman Trump think would be great?
Trump has also criticized Obama’s foreign policy quite sharply by characterizing him as “our weak president that kisses everybody’s ass …” (Daily News, April 1, 2011).
But back in 2008, Trump sounded like he wished Bush had kissed a behind or two: “You know, you can be enemies with people, whether it’s Iran, Iraq, or anyplace else and you can still have dialogue. These people wouldn’t even talk with him. It’s terrible” (NY1, Nov. 11, 2008).
He also called George Bush evil in the same interview: “He has been so incompetent, so bad, so evil that I don’t think any Republican could have won.”
Certainly George Bush gets a mixed review, even from many Republicans, but evil? That opinion, in concert with Trump’s other variations, is a tough sell from somebody who two years later considers running as a GOP nominee and the man is smart enough to have eventually figured out that his varying opinions, easily accessible in an Internet age, are becoming impalatible to at least a significant portion of primary voters. Such an observation may be the reason Trump finally cut his losses with the Grand Old Party.
Enter Trump the Independent: Ironically, two candidates running against Obama in the fall of 2012 will hand the election to Obama by splitting anti-Obama votes, dividing both Republicans and Independents who are unhappy with Obama and now have to choose between Trump or some other candidate whose own baggage makes him less than ideal. This conclusion is not rocket science, but to any who still doubt, I offer just two short words: Ross Perot. In 1992 he took votes away from President George H.W. Bush. Yes, Bush made part of his own bed with that broken “read my lips” pledge, but Bill Clinton still won with less than 43 percent of the national vote compared to Bush’s 37 percent and Perot’s 19 percent which together would have defeated Clinton considerably.
Many modern elections have had third party candidates who made no more difference to the outcome than a pesky mosquito. But most of them do not share the popularity and controversy of Donald Trump. It may be fun to watch Trump go after Obama with a veracity lacking in the McCain campaign. Some other candidate who wins the Republican nomination will also scrutinize our current president, making it two against one. An entertaining show waits in the wings, left wing as well as right. Unfortunately, the sequel show will not be nearly as fun: When you see Donald Trump entering the race with enough people supporting him, prepare for an Obama victory. Two against one will leave us with one more Democratic term.
If an outrageously successful businessman like Trump understands anything, it’s numbers and percentages. How then, would he honestly expect to win a three party election against a man whom he insists must be replaced? Perhaps hard math falls in the face of wishful thinking. Then again, there may be a much simpler reason: Ego. Even a psychologist can never know for sure, but the dethroning of an apparently narcissistic president may just fail because his strongest, most vocal adversary has so much narcissism of his own that personal attention is more important than true victory.
Share this on
