Has Trump Reached His Peak?

The husband and I attended a Clinton-Kaine event tonight - something I suspect that we will be doing much more of between now and November (along with making campaign contributions).   I hope others will step up their efforts and contributions to make sure that Donald Trump is NEVER elected to the presidency.  A piece in Vanity Fair questions whether or not Donald Trump has perhaps reached his peak of support.  Much depends on how the balance of the Democratic Convention plays out and how effective the Clinton-Kaine is in getting its message out.  Here are article highlights:

If the Republican National Convention was characterized by order on the streets and disorder on the floor, perhaps the Democratic National Convention will be characterized by order on the floor and disorder in the streets. It’s a tidy notion, at least, and there is discontent. Americans on the left have been angered by a trove of hacked e-mails showing that the Democratic National Committee was biased toward Hillary Clinton, a revelation as shocking to the world as that of Liberace’s secret attraction to men. They have also been disappointed to see Clinton pick as her running mate Virginia senator Tim Kaine . . .

Meanwhile, Donald Trump has had a surprisingly good few days. In the wake of last week’s Republican convention, Trump’s numbers have experienced a bounce, something Trump needed in order to stay in the game, even if, with further speculation about Ted Cruz’s dad, he seems determined to drive them back down.

So, according to at least one poll, Trump leads. The question next becomes how much it means. Is this a blip, a brief moment of low-point Clinton and peak Trump, or is it something more enduring?

While I still think that Hillary Clinton ultimately wins this election, Trump does have a respectable chance for reasons I’ve given and still affirm.

Whether this is Trump’s high point or not depends a lot on how well this week goes for Clinton. Picking Kaine was a good start, despite the complaints. Kaine and Clinton respect one another; they’re in sync politically; and Kaine doesn’t overshadow Clinton or look like a gimmick. Keeping the week on the right track will depend most on three other things, all of them obvious, but still worth considering:

1. How persuasively Bernie Sanders appeals to his supporters to settle for Hillary.Bernie Sanders has already endorsed Clinton, and it went all right. But he’ll have to grit his teeth and do it again Monday and do it even more enthusiastically.  . . . . He’ll have to suggest that he’s very much at peace with Hillary. It will hurt. But only a thoroughly convincing performance has any chance of draining the energy and quelling the rage of die-hard anti-Hillary Bernie supporters.

2. How peacefully dissenters go about their demonstrations.This is related to point one. Everyone who is fanatical about Sanders will listen to what he has to say, and if he does his job well they will simmer down for the rest of this week. Nevertheless, the left is energized at the moment, and many of its activists have causes that they intend to promote, regardless of Bernie’s status.

If people—even just a few hundred—are determined to get violent or unruly, then they can create a lot of trouble and there isn’t much that the police can do to prevent it. Such behavior would help Trump and hurt Clinton, but there’s not much Hillary can do to influence whether it happens. Democrats will just have to keep their fingers crossed.

3. How effectively Clinton addresses voter discontent.
Obama ran a great campaign in 2008, one that emphasized both the failings and staleness of Republicans and the youthfulness and vigor of Obama’s Democrats. What Obama doesn’t recognize, however, is that some of the same messages can now be directed at him. When Trump stresses that things are bad and Obama replies that they’re not, Obama looks out of touch, even if the facts he cites are correct. Clinton, therefore, must find a way to align herself with Obama yet also address the concerns raised by Trump. 

On the first two points, so far things are going well as exemplified by Bernie Sanders' call for Hillary Clinton's nomination by acclamation - some thing I was lucky enough to witness.  The big issue, therefore, will be how well Hillary does in convincing would be Trump supporters that she, not Trump, will better address their disaffection.  Granted,  nothing will change the minds of the Hillary hating Christofascists and white supremacists.  Others, however, can potentially be convinced to see Trup for what he is: a lying con-artist who cares nothing about anyone other than himself. 

The Mindless Whining and Tantrums of Sanders Supporters.

I can't cite a lousy night's sleep for my crankiness today when it comes to Bernie Sanders supporters who continue to whine and threaten to sit home if Sanders isn't the 2016 Democrat nominee.  As if staying home on their grumpy asses on election day and by default potentially putting a Republican in the White does anything other than spell a death knell for the policies Sanders supporters claim to support and value.  Is seeing the Supreme Court shifted to the right for a generation, more failed trickle down economics, increased military spending at the expense of social programs, and  even more income inequality really worth proving ones "purity" to the Sanders mantra?  I'm sorry, but I see such behavior as both irrational and an example of cutting off one's nose to spite their face.  A pro-Sanders reader sent me a link to a piece that looks at the idiocy of this mindset as laid out by a Sanders supporter who cannot see that refusing to "learn to love Hillary Clinton" threatens everything the author claims to support.  Here are excerpts:

The moment has arrived. That moment when the establishment’s sniggering apologists tell those damn idealists that it is time to get with the program and settle for the latest shabby party product or risk going home empty-handed. Hear the eternal refrain: Don’t make the perfect the enemy of the good.

There has been a slew of these strident come to Jesus jeremiads from the usual suspects after former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s win in the New York primary. But the latest sermon on submitting to destiny from former Obama speechwriter Jon Favreau both perfectly encapsulates the mindless DNC Hillary Clinton Campaign talking points, while attempting to provide a how do you do fellow kids credibility because he was part of the 2008 primary fight against Hillary Clinton.

The substance of the screed is as tired as it is tiresome. Favreau makes a number of claims that fail basic scrutiny when he counsels supporters of Senator Bernie Sanders, or “Berniacs” as they are called by The Daily Beast. For instance:

“Maybe you don’t believe that she’s different from the caricature we’ve all helped perpetuate. But she is running a campaign with a policy platform that’s more progressive than her husband’s administration, her 2008 campaign, and—in a few cases—Barack Obama’s administration.”

The problem, of course, is not that Hillary Clinton is not taking progressive positions. The problem is that, given her record, the best analysis of her policy platform is that she is lying about those positions.

Senator Sanders not only offers a progressive platform that he has a well-demonstrated commitment to, but his theory of change is vastly different than former Secretary Clinton’s. Sanders sees change as coming from social movements, such as the Civil Rights Movement he participated in, which uses people power to pressure government officials into making concessions. Clinton claims that she will use her extensive experience in politics and government to personally work the gears of the state apparatus from the inside on behalf of the causes and people she states she cares for.

In summation, for those who genuinely support a progressive platform on domestic and foreign policy, Hillary Clinton is not qualified. Her record shows her approach to domestic policies is to run to the right while throwing up progressive rhetoric to cover her escape, and her foreign policy would be a return to Bush-era belligerence and incompetence.

In other words, no Jon, we won’t learn to love her, though maybe some of us will hold our noses and vote for her in November if she is the nominee to prevent an even worse candidate from taking over the empire. Then again, maybe not.

To quote the author, do Sanders supporters really prefer allowing someone even worse to occupy the White House, nominate Supreme Court appointments and push policies diametrically opposed to what Bernie Sanders supposedly stands for?  Oh, and as for the parallel with the civil rights movement, does the author not recognize that 50 years later, the civil rights battle still is not over.  Wake up to reality!!