the rise of trump

During our excellent, annual Guest Writer Series (a topic upon which I will soon more reflect), I made multiple observations. In all honesty, such is one of my favorite things to do — sit back, be silent, just watch and learn. Too many seem to fill their surrounding air time most with the sound of their own voice. It’s often far more fun (and uh, wise) to be intentional in our observations.

Hence, one of my observations comes in the political arena… yes, I speak of the controversial, mind-boggling, oft-fascinating, to-some-infuriating, at-times-funny, rise of Donald Trump. Donald Trump is a serious candidate for President of the United States in 2016.

Ok, first things first. Take a deep breath. Take off your partisan hats. This is not an endorsement nor any show of opposition or support. We are making observations. We are simply attempting to watch what’s happening and examine potentially why. There is very little emotion embedded in the process of making observations.

Over the past month, we have observed the following:

• Donald Trump’s support increasing.
• Hillary Clinton’s support decreasing.
• Growing interest in candidates Carson, Fiorina, Kasich, and Sanders.

In a head-to-head match-up (which — by the way — is way too early), in June, Clinton held a 24% lead over Trump; now, it’s less than 6% (per CNN).

So back to our observations. Why the attraction to Trump? I understand that many of us are not attracted to him, but the reality is that many people are; that’s what I’m attempting to observe. Here is a man, with all due respect, who has made some preposterous statements. He has been rude. He has flip-flopped. He has evolved. Sometimes I question his comprehension of the Constitution. He comes off as incredibly arrogant, and without a doubt, he really seems to like the sound of his own voice. And yet, for some reason, he has been surging. The media has been eating it up. What is it about Donald Trump?

There is one trait Trump exhibits as a potential President, that this country has not seen consistently manifest for over two decades. Note the following:

• While in the White House, Bill Clinton’s grand jury comments about his behavior with women damaged his credibility with many.
• While in the White House, George W. Bush’s stated motives for pursuing Saddam Hussein damaged his credibility with many.
• Still in the White House, Barack Obama’s multiple misstatements about ObamaCare damaged his credibility with many.

My point is that whether we agreed or disagreed with the motives of the man in the office, we have had valid reason to believe whether or not the sitting President of the United States was telling the truth. Are they being honest with us? Or are they assuming we are stupid and/or undiscerning of what they really think and mean?

Enter Hillary Clinton — a candidate with a reasonable resume to run for the highest office in the land; she has extensive political, legal, and foreign policy experience (although personally, I’m thinking we need fewer lawyers in the White House). But Hillary seems to struggle before cameras, press conferences, and large groups — especially when her notes are removed. She seems stiff — a little robotic; her answers seem proven and poll-tested. And on that whole, yukky, ongoing, emaily thing, she keeps hedging and contradicting herself. In other words, there’s a growing sense we are not getting the truth, whole truth, and nothing but the truth from her. I thus find myself always wondering if what candidate Clinton is saying has been filtered and edited,  and if everyone on her campaign team has sat around and said, “Ok, good one; let’s go with that!” It just doesn’t feel authentic.

Why? Because authenticity means saying what you mean and meaning what you say.

We crave authenticity.

Let’s be clear: Donald Trump says some of the darnedest things. I don’t get how he does it. But he doesn’t need notes; he doesn’t need a TelePrompter; and his campaign staff hasn’t filtered everything he says. He at least appears to be authentic — even in his often rude, preposterous statements; we know what he means. From my initial observations, that authenticity seems a similar reason driving the growing interest in candidates Carson, Fiorina, Kasich, and Sanders. They may not be totally authentic, but there’s something in their individual speaking styles and interactions that’s attractive and refreshing to many.

Say what you mean. Mean what you say. Let the rest of us decide from there.

Respectfully…
AR