Tuesday, December 5, 2017

Our next President - the Centrist in Chief






"But what if some don't want to live under our Constitution when the majority of people do? There is the door. To coin a phrase from yesteryear, 'America - love it or leave it.'" 


During the past ten years, we have really seen the "Ying" and the "Yang". The "Ying", that would be President Obama, tried to pull this nation so far to the Left, we might have tipped over. But after eight long, tough years, he was finally gone. In reaction to the "Ying", we elected the "Yang". That would be President Trump. And he is pulling back from the Left so hard, we might get whiplash. These two men are as far apart as the east is from the west.

There are as many people how had a visceral dislike for Obama that have a visceral hatred for Trump. That is a big problem. Some on the Left might be thinking, "Oh boy! In the 2020 elections, we will vote this guy out of office and get someone like Elizabeth Warren in there!" Some others on the Right might be hoping for another term of the "Yang". Here is my perspective. The country is tired of being dragged from the far Left and then back again. I am thinking in 2020 we will have our first centrist President in a very long time. 

Why would I say that? There are many, myself included, who think this country is about an inch or two away from being ungovernable. Look at sanctuary cities as an example. A FLAGRANT disrespect for the law of the land. Thumbing their noses at the federal government. This issue has all the ingredients for a showdown between federal and state (or city) law enforcement. If it every came to that, nothing good would come out of it. 

I also think going forward this country needs to do some introspection. Many on the Left have a disdain for many parts of our Constitution. You know - it was written by old white guys about a zillion years ago. It is full of ancient rural incrementalism. It needs to be totally re-written to keep up with the times.

However, there is a growing chorus from those on the Right to hold a Convention of States. There has always been a provision in the Constitution for doing just that (Article V). This is like an acid test. It allows us to look at the letter and the intent of the Constitution and compare it against how we are operating today. If the government is not operating in accordance with the Constitution, it allows the country to make a mid-course correction and get it back to operating where it belongs. 

Now here is where it gets tricky. The next President needs to be Constitutional. This should NOT mean he lives on the Right side of the street. Both the Right and the Left should be concerned about being Constitutional. And our "swamp" is not Constitutional.  My belief is a centrist who is also Constitutional can govern this country nicely - as well as draining the swamp.

But what if some don't want to live under our Constitution when the majority of people do? There is the door. To coin a phrase from yesteryear, "America - love it or leave it." 


7 comments:

  1. You are much more optimistic than I. It is very hard for me to believe that today's Democrats can actually vote as a centrist.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The United States of America are about as ‘united’ as the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is ‘democratic’.
    After the election of 45, everyone now occupies a camp.
    You’re either “for” government healthcare or you’re against it. You either “believe” in climate change or you don’t.
    It has always been so to some extent: that is why individual States have had the right to govern themselves as they see fit. Liberal Vermont probably has more in common with Germany than it does with deeply Christian Alabama.
    The country cannot seem to move ahead on key issues because it’s so starkly split on what it stands for.
    America barely survived the Civil War of 1861–65, the Great Depression of 1929–39, and the rioting and protests of the 1960s.
    Today’s growing divides are additionally supercharged by instant Internet and social-media communications, 24/7 cable news, partisan media, and the denigration of America’s past traditions.
    The big difference this year is the president. In the past, almost every U.S. president has invoked language of national unity, even at times of deep division like the Civil War.
    45 is different, he has no patience or time for those niceties, which is why his constituency likes him.
    Politics has become a team sport that is more about beating the other side than improving living conditions for citizens.
    Have a great day, winter is here!
    David Gjerdingen

    ReplyDelete
  3. Dave, most of what you say makes sense. The only place I quibble is the notion that Trump has somehow created the great divisions you speak of, which he has not, and the idea that somehow getting back to some "moderate" position is the great but unrealizable "solution." Neither is true. Trump is simply articulating clearly what "his side" of the great debates believe, and as near as I can tell, his opponents only want to harangue him for saying it and wanting to DO it, without offering anything remotely resembling compromise, let alone a better idea.

    The problem with compromise/moderation is that one side of the debate is always closer to "right" than the other, and so a compromise is always a half-*d solution to the problem.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Obama's election created the first divide, over race. 45 is simply the other side of that coin.
      You are certainly correct that compromise is a disappearing concept and ideas are certainly in short supply.
      Bodes ill for our nation and our future.

      Delete
  4. Please, please do NOT call that Constitutional convention. Our Constitution needs to be re-read, not re-written.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The first amendment will be challenged if 45 has to respond to the NY sex harassment case. Is campaign talk considered free speech and how are the words in tweets classified.
      It would be great if we all could agree on the intent of the founders and not parse the words so much.

      Delete
    2. I'm a lot more worried about the amount of damage that could be done to all the other Amendments, as well as to the basic structure of our government itself. There is no end to the mischief that could be created, and no conceivable good that could be done. The Constitution is fine, if we followed it.

      Delete