Why Republicans are to Blame for the Trump Phenomenon and Why Everyone Else is to Blame Too!

Many conservative Republicans cringe when Donald Trump is mentioned as a candidate in the Republican primaries. Uninformed in policy terms, blustering, bombastic, and, frankly in my opinion, an uncouth self-promoter, Trump has been an embarrassment for the Republicans and for the country alike. So, why is he doing so well in the Republican polls and why do people seem to support him? 

To a certain extent, the Republican Party has only itself to blame for this episode. Not for Trump himself but for his popularity amongst Republican primary voters. For years, Republicans have elevated certain professions – businessmen amongst them. They have routinely been upheld as the “job creators”, giving the impression that they are, therefore, superior to the workers, who should be beholden to this group. The idea is that businessmen (and women) have unique leadership skills which qualify them to hold any or all leadership positions. Yet, how do you measure success in a business? Obviously, through wealth. The more money you have, the more successful you are. This was the foundation of Mitt Romney’s campaign in 2012. It is the foundation of Carly Fiorina’s campaign this year. Romney and Fiorina did not explicitly claim that wealth makes them good candidates for the Presidency. They are not that crass. Indeed, I do not know if Fiorina is wealthy and really, it does not matter. But the fact is that their very candidacies imply that business skills translate to the political arena. However, Trump has made explicit what the Republican Party has kept implicit until now. Vote for Trump because he is a successful businessman and we know he is successful because he is wealthy.

Of course, this argument falls flat when we consider that Trump has declared bankruptcy multiple times. Asked this question in the first Republican primary debate, Trump claimed that in declaring bankruptcies, he had simply used the country’s laws to his own advantage. Who cares about the money which other companies lost as a result of his actions? He was wealthy. He, personally, did not lose. Again, crass, but has Trump said something which is often ignored? What is the goal of a business? Profit. Not the common good but personal profit and profit for shareholders. Can a country be run on the same principles? If not, then does someone who has operated a corporation on these principles automatically know how to govern a country?

Trump also stated that he used his wealth to buy political good will and favors. Campaign contributions made politicians beholden to him. Here again, Trump crassly said something which has been left implicit. Not only are businessmen perceived as superior in skill set but they have an advantage which others do not have – wealth and the concomitant power and connections which comes with it. So, Trump claims that he has two qualities which set him apart from others – his wealth which proves his skill (in what we will discuss later) and his wealth which proves his influence and power. In other words, why should we elect him? Because he is wealthy…

But while the Republican Party is certainly to blame for their promotion of “job creators” as skilled public servants, I think there is a larger problem here and more blame to go around. We, as a country, have stopped thinking about what qualities we would like to see in our leaders. The qualities of a great leader are not immediately obvious. There was a reason why the President was supposed to be chosen by the Electoral College. It is not easy to pick a person for this job. Clearly self-promotion was never the idea. But we also have to stop pretending that business skills are transferable to the political arena. Political skills are different from business skills or military skills. Is there overlap? Sure. But are they the same? No. Success in one field does not guarantee success in another. We have to stop pretending it does and think long and hard about what political skills actually are and what we are looking for. 

Finally, we spend too much time arguing about big government vs. small government and not enough time thinking about politics itself. Aristotle saw politics as the master science. Aristotle was not talking about small or big government. He pointed out that politics determines almost all things within the geographical boundaries of a state. Even the size of a government is the decision of the government. Yes, in this country we have popular sovereignty but the value of that is greatly diminished by our disengagement and malaise. No matter what, it is indisputable that politics is a master science. And yet, we allow elections to resemble a reality TV show. We revere the Constitution while denigrating the current system. We complain, moan, and whine while doing absolutely nothing to change the system. 

I think it is essential that we stop pretending that politics is unimportant or that it requires no real skill or knowledge. That people with no specialized skill or training can be a good President. That people who are not serious thinkers would make good politicians. That success in any other arena equates to political success. This is a devaluation of politics. As a country, we devalue politics and value other professions. We look down on politics. That has to stop. This is a vicious cycle. The less importance we give to politics, the lower our standards to measure who should take those roles, the worse the political drama and chaos, and the lower our view of politics gets. 

Politics requires more skill, more knowledge, more selflessness, more dedication than many other professions. We should revere it accordingly and demand more of our leaders, not less. Let us start by highly valuing politics and we will have a political system worth valuing and emulating. I would love to get to a point where Washington insiders will not run as Washington outsiders because being an “insider” is a bad thing. Where a person’s qualification will not be about their success outside of politics. Where disagreement is possible without discord and compromise is possible without defeat. Where being a part of government is a mark of esteem and not cause for derision. That would be a world where we would not have to worry about Donald Trump running for office – he would not have made it to that debate!