President Tr*mp?

I'm beginning to think it can happen.

True, the Donald has very high negatives.  So does Hillary, though, and it will be just as hard to prevent Hillary from winning the Democratic nomination as it will be to prevent Donald from winning the Republican.

Matched in a general election, Hillary will be the Establishment candidate, Tr*mp the "outsider."  Since Americans are justifiably sick and tired of the way their government operates, the "outsider," however potentially dangerous and patently bizarre, has the advantage.  The outcome might surprise a lot of people.

Hillary's disavowal of free trade pacts certainly is suspect, reversing decades of enthusiastic support.  How many of those working class Sanders supporters will switch their allegiance to Tr*mp if their alternative is another Clinton?  Labor will reflexively "endorse" the Democratic candidate, but how well will a former Wal-Mart board member serve Labor's interests, and how many rank-and-file union members will play "follow the leader?"

What will happen if voters, who tend to stick to a single party line on their ballots, fail to return the Senate to Democrats?  Who would Tr*mp nominate to the Supreme Court?  (Nobody has even a vague idea of the answer to that last question.)

Nobody seems to have asked any of the candidates how they might fill jobs like Secretary of the Treasury, chief economic adviser, Chair of the SEC, etc.  Tr*mp, hopelessly ignorant of the actual workings of government, would have to depend on "advice" from the likes of Chris Christie and Jeff Sessions.  Clinton is most likely to return to the charlatans of her husband's "economically successful" administration, meaning more acolytes of Robert Rubin.

Frankly, I think Bernie Sanders is America's best bet, despite the fears of Establishment black, labor, and "liberal" figures.  Compared to Hillary, Bernie is far more likely to win.

Donald, Carly, and Ben

Given the quality of their politicians, it is understandable that Republicans would want a non-politician as their presidential candidate.  Sadly for them, the three they have on offer are unlikely to be any better than the rest of the incompetents crowding their field.

Government is not a business.  We don't allow it to be a business, because as soon as any government enterprise threatens to make some money, it gets privatized.  Even if it were a business, we still wouldn't want anybody as incompetent as Donald or Carly running it.

Donald inherited $60 million from his father, and now he claims to be worth eight billion, albeit Forbes estimates that four billion probably is more like it.  Had he invested his inheritance in a fund indexed to the S&P 500, he'd be worth twelve billion today.  Actively managing his money, apparently, was a costly mistake.  As for his Atlantic City bankruptcies, he probably should have noticed all the casinos opening in neighboring states because Grover Norquist wouldn't allow them to raise taxes.

As became clear during her Senate run against Barbara Boxer, Carly really did screw up at HP, and her prior efforts at Lucent were not much better.  Her self-declared "successes," like the merger with COMPAQ, had to be undone by her successors to avoid financial disaster.  One successful put-down of Donald Trump does not a presidential candidate make, or the field would be filled with late-night comedians.

As for Ben Carson, a brain surgeon does not have to be a "rocket scientist."  Brain surgery is a manual skill, rather like a higher level of auto mechanics.  Just the fact that a person can separate conjoined twins while believing the universe is 6000 years old should tell us something.

Whoever the Republicans are left with in the end is likely to be more than a little shopworn,  On the Democratic side, though, Hillary also has been subject to more than a little wear and tear.  It's beginning to look like record low voter turnout in 2016.

Kim Davis

It occasionally happens that I agree with Lindsey Graham, and this is one of those times.  He says that if Kim Davis feels she cannot carry out the responsibilities of County Clerk of Rowan County, Kentucky, she should resign.  (Personally, I don't mind if she uses up her vacation days while she's in jail — it's the kind of thing vacation days are for.)

Her mother was county clerk for thirty-seven years, and Kim Davis worked under her mother.  Her son works in the office now, and probably expects to be elected to his mother's job when she's ready to retire.  That's small town politics.  It's extremely likely she ran unopposed, or against some token Republican candidate.  (Yes, Kim Davis is a Democrat.)

Some states are enacting legislation which would allow public officials to refuse to perform their duties when those duties conflict with their religious convictions.  We can be quite certain that such laws will be invalidated by Federal courts, but the process is likely to drag on and on, and get pretty boring before it's over.

Catholic judges can't refuse to issue divorce decrees, and Muslim postal workers can't refuse to deliver copies of Playboy because the centerfold isn't wearing a hijab.  As Donald Trump says, this is a nation of laws.  I hope Ms. Davis enjoys her moment of celebrity, but the chief significance of this particular instance of conscientious objection is that it is further splitting the Republican party.

The "Debate"

Q: Why is Barack Obama the worst president in the history of the United States, and why would Hillary Clinton be even worse?

Okay, they didn't ask that question — but Fox being Fox, there were questions galore inviting the contenders to dump on Democrats.  ClintonObama and ObamaClinton were condensed into single words.  The audience ate it up, of course.

Every candidate got a totally predictable "gotcha" question, by and large answered by totally predictable talking points.  Jeb Bush drew some audience disapproval for his failure to heartily endorse his brother's invasion of Iraq.  (Where do they get those people?)  Ben Carson deflected criticism of his abysmal knowledge of foreign policy by saying how smart he is.  John Kasich impressed me somewhat by actually defending his decision to expand Medicaid in Ohio.

Donald Trump was asked about his contributions to Democrats, including Hillary Clinton, and his answer was Trumpily brilliant.  First, he pointed out that he'd also contributed to every candidate on the stage.  (One, possibly Ted Cruz but it was hard to tell, whined "Not me!  Not me!")  Then Trump went on to explain that he'd merely been buying influence, not too subtly implying that all politicians are for sale.  Unstated, but understood, was that Trump is so rich he can't be bought.

Unfortunately, Trump didn't get to speak often enough to turn the alleged "debate" into the laughfest I anticipated, but there was one interesting go-round between Rand Paul and Chris Christie on the subject of government spying on citizens.  Christie, supporting the police state, was better received by the yahoos in attendance.

I don't believe that anybody "broke out" of the pack in this first unpacking of the clown car, but Trump, as Trumpy as ever, certainly didn't do himself any harm — despite the clear efforts of Fox to discredit him.  I won't be at all surprised if his poll numbers are up today.

Trump

I am thoroughly confused by Donald Trump.  It is clear enough what he is doing.  Far less clear is why he is doing it.

Trump is appealing to the racist, nativist component of the Republican base, and his popularity in recent polling indicates that it is a distressingly large group.  If his goal is to be taken as a serious contender for the Republican nomination rather than just a billionaire buffoon, he has been successful.  If his goal is to become President of the United States, his perception of the American public is considerably more negative than my own.

Trump, a real estate developer, almost certainly is a net winner from illegal immigration.  His contractors and subcontractors can offer him lower bids if some of their workers are illegals earning low or even sub-minimum wages.  He is rich enough to be immune from the kinds of "criminals" who may sneak across the Mexican border, just like everybody else in his social set.  Is he guided by some twisted sense of "social responsibility?"  Doubtful.

He may be an asshole, but I find it hard to believe he is a complete idiot.  He must know he is hurting the Republican brand by shouting out the ugly thoughts his competitors are content to merely imply, so party loyalty doesn't come into his calculations.  Is he a secret, Machiavellian Democrat, working to help Hillary Clinton (who accepted his donations in previous elections)?  Again, doubtful.

Some suggest he just enjoys publicity, attention, and doesn't especially care how he gets it.  I call that the "mental illness model" of Donald Trump, and cannot entirely discount it, but I suspect the Trump candidacy goes beyond that.

Trump, who is as rich as he says he is, can afford to place large wagers against long odds — and the odds against him becoming President of the United States are very long indeed.  Just the same, if enough Americans are sufficiently hateful, fearful, and knuckle-draggingly angry to vote for a pompous bag of wind like Trump, he just might win.

What would Trump do if he became the next "Leader of the Free World?"  Has he thought it out that far?

Doubtful.