THE ALMOST, BUT NOT QUITE, BITTER REALITY

By Edwin Cooney

One of the most common or, if you prefer, lingering threads since I became aware of voting around 1956 when I was 10 years old and Ike was running for a second term, is that most Americans tend to insist that they “…vote for the man, not the party!” Being interested in the effect and significance of political parties and their ideologies, I’ve been dubious about this disclaimer for the most part. My dubiousness in the midst of the current administration’s fifteenth week appears downright naive!  As President Donald John Trump completed his first 100 days on Saturday, April 29th (today being his 102nd day), nonpartisan politics could be a “critical reality!”

Americans are a busy and largely self-indulgent people. Many are busy parenting and earning a living while others may really and truly have little interest in the details of civic affairs. Many of them are interested more in civic affairs at the state, regional or local level than they are about the intricacies of national and even international politics. Even worse, that dirty word “politics” appears to give them permission to ignore some vitally significant issues that often mean the difference between poverty and prosperity, peace and war, and, ultimately, life and death.

Here are three truths as President Trump insists that his first 100 days have been a sterling success:

(1.) The whole discussion is pointless. FDR’s phenomenal success between March 4th and June 16th, 1933 was largely, although not totally, due to desperation on the part of the whole nation which was simultaneously affected by bank closures, home and farm foreclosures, and the crisis of high unemployment. Although FDR was a highly skilled and charming president, he eventually misjudged the temperament of both the Congress and the people in 1937 when he sought to “pack” the Supreme Court.

(2.) Lyndon Johnson, from the White House, was still a master of Congress passing bills affecting civil rights, education, and much controversial consumer legislation during his presidency, but he left office in 1969 in near, although not total, disgrace in wake of his failure in Vietnam.

(3.) Most significant of all is the myth that the “one hundred days” of 1933 was solely  about President Roosevelt’s historic accomplishments. FDR took office on Saturday, March 4th, 1933. His 100th day in office occurred on Monday, June 12th, 1933. Congress met to confirm FDR’s cabinet on Saturday, March 4th, but didn’t begin its second day of business until Thursday, March 9th. Thus, the “one hundred days” which was  marked on Friday, June 16th, 1933 had as much  to do with the 100 day Congress (the final session of the 73rd Congress) as it has to do with FDR.

President Trump’s success continues to be, like it or not, what it ultimately was last November:

(1.) A divided Democratic party which, during the recent campaign, focused more on socio/political issues and seemed to forget the reason it was the most successful political party throughout the 20th century when it was all about jobs. Today it is a minority party in both the House and the Senate and is devoid, at this point,  of a sufficiently inspiring and potentially electable spokesperson.

(2.) Since trust of both political parties is in short supply, President Trump wasn’t elected because he was, or is, a Republican. Even after 102 days of reckless and irresponsible tweets and pronouncements, and despite his failure thus far to sign a single piece of congressionally approved legislation and despite the fact that he’s largely governed, by executive order as President Obama did (although not all of them have been upheld), Trump remains popular with his base. His popularity lies to a great extent in his defiance of standard political conventions. To those who still love him best, he’s the anti-politician’s politician. Therein lies the almost, but not quite, bitter reality.

Popular and potentially re-electable presidents are sustainable in office by a vital factor that, I think, is too often not taken seriously enough by sophisticated political pundits and scholarly academicians. A president’s reputation and temperament must match the mood of the electorate if a president is to be re-elected. Consider the following:

(1.) FDR was politically and personally charming and skillfully used the medium of radio to his and the nation’s advantage. Plus, he was a superb campaigner. FDR easily mastered his opponents Herbert Hoover in 1932, Kansas Governor Alf Landon in 1936, businessman Wendell Willkie in 1940, and New York Governor Thomas Dewey in 1944.

(2.) Harry Truman was plain and decisive as the average American needed to be if successful at home or in the workplace. Harry Truman defeated Thomas Dewey by 2,000,000 votes in 1948.

(3.) Ike could have had the nomination of both political parties in 1948, but was almost irresistible by 1952 when the GOP snatched him up. As president, he was everyone’s wise and heroic grandfather whether speaking before the U.N. or playing golf at Augusta, Georgia. Adlai Stevenson’s entertaining intellect had no chance against Ike either in 1952 or 1956.

(4.) Young, vigorous, athletic, intelligent, handsome, a war hero, and entertainingly articulate, Jack Kennedy as both a parent and politician, appealed to students and working people throughout the nation. JFK was exciting while Richard Nixon was just plain serious and excitement usually bests seriousness.

(4.) Richard Nixon was elected in 1968 because, unlike the likable Vice President Hubert Humphrey, Nixon wasn’t tied to the creation or continuance  of the Vietnam War. He was re-elected, not for a “hundred day” significance, but because he was seen by the nation as solid on foreign policy matters while Senator George McGovern appeared dull and bumbling by comparison.

(5.) Ronald Reagan was, whether right or wrong,  class and eloquence personified. You just had to love him, at least a little bit, because although he was quite dogmatic, he was friendly and believable — until the second half of his second term when along came Iran-Contra. President Jimmy Carter, in all his earnestness, and Walter Mondale, invariably linked to Carter, were totally outclassed by Reagan.

(6.) Bill Clinton was kind of everyone’s brilliant, but rather wayward kid. His first opponent, President George H. W. Bush, was, with all his hard earned conservative credentials, still something of an elitist. Clinton’s second opponent, Senator Robert Dole, was politically past his prime as an effective politician, so “Slick Willie” was re-elected.

(7.) George W. Bush was the son of an “elitist,” but he was mostly a well-connected Texas cowboy. He was re-elected because the people needed a cowboy’s protection from possible weapons of mass destruction whether from Saddam Hoessein or the still  at large Osama bin Laden. Besides, he was genuinely shy and plainspoken in comparison to both Al Gore and John Kerry.

(8.) Barack Obama was an inspiring orator who was both polished and personable. Even more important, the fact that he was black was augmented by the fact that he didn’t campaign as an angry black man in search of “justice.” Thus, he “wore well” with most people and trounced Senator John McCain and Alaska Governor Sarah Palin in 2008 as they inherited George H. Bush’s growing recession.

(9.) As for 2012, President Obama’s progressivism clearly appealed to American voters more than did Mitt Romney’s businessman’s approach to governing.

I’m increasingly convinced that President Trump’s magic is that he’s really and truly neither a Republican nor a Democrat. Thus, his continuing, and even frustrating to many (me included) successful identification with working Americans is unfathomable.

Hence, after 102 days in office, both his successes and failures are still deliciously ahead of him. It’s still not certain that he really knows how to do his job. He should be more aware than he appears to be, that his success in business won’t be instructive in either domestic or international politics.

Guess what? The American voter, on the whole, is clearly impatient with purely partisan politics. Both Conservatives and Liberals may stubbornly be concerned with dogmatic consistency, but I’m convinced that the great majority of the American people still ask that historic question: “what have you done for me lately?” The answer to that question will, more than any other issue, ultimately dictate President Trump’s political fate.

Remember, a presidential term isn’t 100 days, it is 1,461 days. As Winston Churchill observed about World War II: “…everyday a day!”

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

EDWIN COONEY