Thomas Sowell: Voting at a Crossroads (the March 15 primaries)

[mountaineer]

Voting at a Crossroads
Thomas Sowell | Mar 15, 2016

It is seldom that the fate of a nation can be traced to what happened on one particular day. But that may be what happens in the United States of America on Tuesday, March 15, 2016.

That is because the front-runners in both political parties are not merely inadequate but appalling -- and the vote in this Tuesday's primaries may be the last chance for the voters to unite behind someone else.

The trends that brought us to this crucial day go back for years. But whatever the paths that led to this crossroads, we are in fact at a crossroads and our future, and our children's futures, depend on whether we can come up with some presidential candidate better than either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump.

In other times and in other conditions, one bad president could not ruin a great nation. We survived Jimmy Carter and we may survive Barack Obama, but there is no guarantee that we can survive an unlimited amount of reckless decisions in a dangerous world.

The dangers are both internal and external. Two of our bitterest enemies -- Iran and North Korea -- are openly declaring their desire to destroy us. And both are developing intercontinental missiles that can carry nuclear warheads.

These and other mortal dangers are a product of the feckless foreign policies carried out by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, as the Obama administration weakened our military forces while our adversaries around the world have been rapidly strengthening theirs.

We will be lucky to survive the damage that has been done already. A third consecutive term of such policies, with Hillary Clinton in the White House, can be suicidal.

Internally, Hillary Clinton's whole political career has been based on polarizing the American population by race, sex, class and any other way that will serve her political interests. This kind of cynical political exploitation can take the "United" out of the United States, and Balkanize us into an internal war of each against all. That is a war in which we can all lose.

These are not subtle nuances. They are blatant revelations about something fundamentally wrong. Too many people missed similar revelations about Barack Obama. For that we have already paid a price, and we will continue to pay a price, even after he is gone. So will generations yet unborn.

There is a reason why polls repeatedly show Donald Trump producing the highest negative reactions of any candidate of either party. Yet the small hard core of Trump supporters seem oblivious to his antics, his recklessness and his all-consuming ego.

Some of these supporters may simply not be paying careful attention. But there have also been some very knowledgeable and intellectually talented people who have backed Trump. Sometimes it takes a high IQ to evade the obvious.

What does Trump offer his supporters that makes them so willing to overlook so much? He boldly articulates the resentment and anger they feel at having been betrayed by smug elites in general and the Republican establishment in particular.

Charismatic leaders who articulated the just grievances of the people have often risen to power on the basis of that talent alone. And those who put them in power have often paid a catastrophic price afterwards. That story was repeated in countries around the world in the 20th century.

Will that story be repeated in America in the 21st century? The vote on March 15, 2016 may give us a clue.

The only candidate who has any real chance to stop Donald Trump at the ballot box is Ted Cruz. But the Republican elite, who have never liked Senator Cruz, may prefer to stop Trump with chicanery at the convention. That can cost Republicans the votes of Trump's followers, putting Hillary Clinton in the White House -- and the country on the ruinous road to a point of no return.

Townhall

[Jazzhead]

Is there anyone more respected by conservatives than Thomas Sowell?   We'd do well to listen to him. 

What does Trump offer his supporters that makes them so willing to overlook so much? He boldly articulates the resentment and anger they feel at having been betrayed by smug elites in general and the Republican establishment in particular.

Charismatic leaders who articulated the just grievances of the people have often risen to power on the basis of that talent alone. And those who put them in power have often paid a catastrophic price afterwards. That story was repeated in countries around the world in the 20th century.

Yes, and it can happen here, too.     

[Right_in_Virginia]

Thomas Sowell is a brilliant man. 

Possibly.   But right here's he sounds like a political hack pushing his candidate.   

[GAJohnnie]

The five stages, denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance are a part of the framework that makes up our learning to live with the one we lost. They are tools to help us frame and identify what we may be feeling. But they are not stops on some linear timeline in grief.

This drama queen hyperbolic nonsense is the depression stage.

[GAJohnnie]

Brilliant minds do not engage this this sort of emotional hyperbole. Sowell might have been brilliant, there is nothing remotely brilliant in this article.

[mountaineer]

There's nothing emotionally hyperbolic about it.

[aligncare]

I'm afraid Sowell constructed this analysis of Donald Trump heavily colored by his opposition to Trump, the man and hence, Trump the candidate. Some of it may conflict with one's own point of view. Like mine, for instance.

My observation comes from the very opening of this piece. Sowell's use of the word "appalling" is rarely used to describe a political candidate for president. Especially one from the party of the right. It tells me about how much emotion is involved. So, I take it with a grain of salt.

[sinkspur]

I'm afraid Sowell constructed this analysis of Donald Trump heavily colored by his opposition to Trump, the man and hence, Trump the candidate. Some of it may conflict with one's own point of view. Like mine, for instance.

My observation comes from the very opening of this piece. Sowell's use of the word "appalling" is rarely used to describe a political candidate for president. Especially one from the party of the right. It tells me about how much emotion is involved. So, I take it with a grain of salt.

Yes. Lots of emotion involved.  Just look at all the white screamers at Trump's rallies.  Ask them afterward why they're supporting Trump and the reasons are all visceral.

That's why one cannot be reasoned out of supporting a person one has not been reasoned into supporting.

[musiclady]

Thomas Sowell is a brilliant man.  He does not speak in such strong words often.  Are we the people wise enough to listen to him?

I was thinking the same thing.

When a brilliant, serious man like Sowell sounds this kind of alarm, it behooves us to listen.

These are dangerous days, and too many people with high IQ's are 'evading the obvious.'

Donald Trump will make America worse, not great.

[musiclady]

There's nothing emotionally hyperbolic about it.

Absolutely right.  That's what makes it so disturbing.

It's rational and true.  No hyperbole whatsoever.

[Bigun]

There's nothing emotionally hyperbolic about it.

Unless you have been bitten by the Trump bug!  Once that happens EVERYTHING that is not completely worshipful of the Donald is heresy!

[musiclady]

Unless you have been bitten by the Trump bug!  Once that happens EVERYTHING that is not completely worshipful of the Donald is heresy!

So sadly true, Bigun................ sigh..................

[Jazzhead]

Possibly.   But right here's he sounds like a political hack pushing his candidate.   

Maybe he's simply a patriot concerned about the foolishness of the voters seemingly poised to nominate a maniacal strongman.

But sure, to the Trumpsters, he's just a hack.  Can't brook any dissent against the Dear Leader.   

[musiclady]

Maybe he's simply a patriot concerned about the foolishness of the voters seemingly poised to nominate a maniacal strongman.

But sure, to the Trumpsters, he's just a hack.  Can't brook any dissent against the Dear Leader.   

Yeah........ Thomas Sowell, a political hack............. that's the ticket.          

[HonestJohn]

Well, to some... Ann Coulter is the pinnacle of punditry.

Others find Thomas Sowell to be up there.

And we know who likes whom.

[A-Lert]

Unless you have been bitten by the Trump bug!  Once that happens EVERYTHING that is not completely worshipful of the Donald is heresy!

Your accusation that people who support Trump worship him is disgusting. I'm a Christian and I take offense.  I believe many others do also.

[musiclady]

Well, to some... Ann Coulter is the pinnacle of punditry.

Others find Thomas Sowell to be up there.

And we know who likes whom.

We do, indeed!

[aligncare]

Your accusation that people who support Trump worship him is disgusting. I'm a Christian and I take offense.  I believe many others do also.

Aah, you get used to it...been told that so many times it just bounces off me now.

[mountaineer]

Your accusation that people who support Trump worship him is disgusting. I'm a Christian and I take offense.  I believe many others do also.

But that's not what Bigun said. He said "everything that is not completely worshipful of the Donald." He did not accuse any person here of worshiping Trump. Big difference.

"Everything" and "worshipful" are not the same as "everyone" and "worshiping." Stick to what actually was said, and maybe you won't be so offended.

[Lando Lincoln]

But that's not what Bigun said. He said "everything that is not completely worshipful of the Donald." He did not accuse any person here of worshiping Trump. Big difference.

"Everything" and "worshipful" are not the same as "everyone" and "worshiping." Stick to what actually was said, and maybe you won't be so offended.

Perfectly stated.

[musiclady]

Perfectly stated.

Agree.

[Lando Lincoln]

Can we not be, or should we not be troubled when a man such as Thomas Sowell is said to sound like a political hack when he expresses his concerns?  Very deep concerns. A foremost intellect of his generation. Learned beyond our imagination. Have we really arrived, there?  Challenge his assumptions.  Question his conclusions. But please, exhibit some depth.

[A-Lert]

But that's not what Bigun said. He said "everything that is not completely worshipful of the Donald." He did not accuse any person here of worshiping Trump. Big difference.

"Everything" and "worshipful" are not the same as "everyone" and "worshiping." Stick to what actually was said, and maybe you won't be so offended.

As long as you have attempted to explain away what was posted, maybe you can explain what  everything that  is not completely "worshipful of the Donald" means? What "things" are or are not,  not completely worshipful  of Trump? Is that possible?

[A-Lert]

Perfectly stated.

So can you explain what is or is not worshipful of the Donald?

[mountaineer]

Do I have to explain the difference between things and human beings? Maybe you could ponder it a while.