The “Money
Man” Spoilers
Remember that time when it was suggested that a millionaire or a
billionaire would do a far better job as President of the United States than a
career politician? That time when a
supposed businessman was the best qualification for the highest office in the
land. Remember that? They would know how to best manage money,
because they’ve already proved it in the business world, and they couldn’t be
influenced by special interests because they would have their own money. Remember?
And we believed it! And by “we”
that also includes this commentator.
Now before you start saying his name... no I am not talking about
Narcissist Donald Trump.
I am referring the late H. Ross Perot, third-party wannabe for the White
House and – in all likelihood – was just one flake-out away from being the
President of the United States of America back in 1992.
Yes, the same arguments used by the orange-skinned narcissist two decades
later were first used by Perot and his supporters. The argument that only a successful
businessman, only a millionaire, or even a billionaire, could “fix” America.
Before his flake-out in the summer of 92, Perot was considered by many
people to be a serious challenge to then-President George H.W. Bush and
then-Governor Bill Clinton. He used his
money to buy political infomercials to get his name on the ballot in every
state. He appealed to the everyman in
ways that neither Bush Senior nor Clinton really could.
And then, of course, he
flaked out. And then, after his name
was officially on the ballot in every state, he “flaked-in”, and still had
enough draw to get almost a quarter of the votes come Election Day.
Since then, the idea of a “businessman president” would continue to resound
in the minds of certain people that were sick of career politicians and special
interest groups screwing things up. And
that became one of the key draws when it came to a certain orange-skinned
narcissist in his eventual Napoleonic quest for the White House. People saw the brand that Narcissist Trump
cultivated over the years and they interpreted that as “success”.
Of course, reality – and quite
a few documentaries you can see on Netflix – show that Narcissist Trump
isn’t as “successful” he claims to be in the world of business. His current bungling of trade and
international agreements show that his tenure as president matches his many
failed business dealings. I
mean, seriously, who bankrupts a casino?
But the argument that a supposed “money man” is more qualified to be
president than a career politician is still resounding in the minds of certain
people seeking to replace Narcissist Trump.
Two supposed “money men” have now become presidential wannabes for the
Democratic Party’s nomination in the 2020 Con-job. Tom
Steyer and the former NYC mayor Michael
Bloomberg have thrown their hats and moneybags into the already crowded
ring of wannabes. Steyer is known among
the Democrats, but Bloomberg has been more of political renegade, serving as an
independent as mayor and helping several
GOP (now Trump Party) politicians
in the past. Both, in their own ways,
think that their status as “money men” make them the only ones that can stop
Narcissist Trump from serving another despotic term in office.
And yet they could very well be the ones that keep Narcissist Trump in
despotism for at least four more years.
The biggest selling point of these two candidates is their money and
their respective successes in the world of business.
Steyer is a hedge fund
manager. In other words, he knows
how to make rich people even richer.
Remember the Great Recession? He may
not have caused it, but he certainly came from the group that were part of the
problem. Granted, he has since used his own
money to advance progressive causes, but to call him a successful businessman
is a bit of misnomer. He is a successful
money manager. That may be a business,
but not one in the traditional sense.
He’s not a Sam Walton kind of businessman, who creates brick-and-mortar
businesses that employ average people and tries to appeal to Mister and Missus
Middle-Class America.
And there is the problem right there.
Narcissist Trump’s appeal and the source of his cult followers are from
that segment of the great unwashed. The
ones that watch Fox Spin and Fox Business Spin.
The ones that shop at Walmart.
That may seem to be a contradiction, given Narcissist Trump’s preference
for wealth and golden toilets, but it was the group that was cultivated by Fox
Spin and talk radio long before he decided to run for office, and now those are
“his” people. All they see in Steyer is
that he’s another one of those filthy rich people who don’t know a thing about
them and their struggles.
Bloomberg is an
actual businessman, not to mention a media mogul in his own right. Granted, he too comes from the money-side of
the business world, as his media service appeals to the same groups that Steyer
came from, but he also has actual public service under his belt, serving as
mayor of New York City for three consecutive terms – one more than the term
limits law allowed.
Bloomberg’s third mayoral term could actually work against the Dems as it
feeds the notion that Narcissist Trump should also ignore term limits and turn
his despotism into the very “president-for-life” position that
he has previously hinted he desired.
Plus, during his three terms in office, Bloomberg screwed
over a lot of people in the city, including groups that he now has to suck
up to in order to get support.
Making matters worse for Bloomberg is his asinine decision to skip the early
primaries and caucuses in New Hampshire, Iowa, Nevada, and South Carolina,
focusing his money and efforts on winning those “super” primaries and caucuses
that happen later in the year. If you’re
from those first four states, would you really want to support a candidate that
has decided that you are not worth his time?
Progressives may argue that we should all vote for a ham sandwich before
casting another vote for Narcissist Trump, but keep in mind that Hillary
Clinton’s snubbing of certain states in 2016 worked against her, and
Bloomberg’s snub can also work against him and in Narcissist Trump’s favor.
But, really, Steyer’s and Bloomberg’s argument that a “money man” makes
for a better leader is ultimately irrelevant.
That has been Narcissist Trump’s sales pitch since 2016, and, even if
it’s just a con, and even if he isn’t the successful businessman that he
claimed to be, that is still *his* sales pitch.
And you cannot truly succeed in beating Narcissist Trump by trying to
out-Trump him with his own pitch.
Let’s get brutally honest here... Tom Steyer and Michael Bloomberg are
really nothing more than late-coming spoilers in a race already overcrowded by
wannabes. Sure, they bring money into
the race, but it’s not for the wannabes that have been spending the past year
travelling and speaking and trying to get supporters and funds. Rather, it’s for themselves. It’s money that would be better spent helping
those that have been out there trying to get their message out that there is a
better alternative to the self-promoting clown act with the fake Jersey
tan. Find the candidate that closely
matches your views and then sugar-daddy that candidate! It’s a whole lot easier to appeal to the
voters that way than to try to buy your way in outright.
If anything, Narcissist Trump has pretty much ruined the argument for a
“businessman leader” for at least the next few elections. Every time someone suggests that a
“businessman” would be better running the country than a politician, people are
going point to Narcissist Trump as the reason why that argument is patently
wrong. They’re going to point to his
trade war and his reckless explosion of the debt and the failure of his tax
changes to help out hard-working Americans and the slump of the economy and
then ask you if you think those were better with a supposed “businessman” in
charge
Steyer and Bloomberg need to understand that when the problem is
Narcissist Trump, and you’re trying to remove him, the last thing that you want
to be is anything like him.
No comments:
Post a Comment