I remain a part of the dissenting minority who argue that our system isn’t broken. Action on a number of thorny issues — ranging from immigration to education reform — is stymied because of big disagreements on what should be done. Our experience with the Affordable Care Act illustrates the peril of making big changes in the absence of substantial majority support.
The Goldwater Rule declares it to be unethical for any psychiatrist to diagnose a public figure’s mental condition “unless he or she has conducted an examination and has been granted proper authorization for such a statement.”
On the one hand we’re told that politicians cautiously hold a finger to the wind before acting and lack the courage to get ahead of their constituents. On the other, when politicians step forward—as Obama did on the TPP or ACA or David Cameron did on EU affiliation or Angela Merkel on immigration—their positions are deemed proof of the growing gulf between the governing elite and the masses who would be impacted. Continue reading Follow the Leader (or not)
This revolution in communication isn’t over. The 2016 presidential campaign has brought us more dramatic transformations in the art and science of political communication. It’s changed what constitutes an appropriate statement by a candidate or campaign, and changed the content and nature of the news itself. Most of this has been driven by one candidate.
No wonder Trump is preemptively depicting himself not as a loser, but as the victim of a rigged election. You know he won’t go away quietly. Nor will his base, whose fire he has recklessly stoked. I can’t believe he’d give a gracious concession speech, a call to come together and support the one president our nation has. He’s more likely to summon a retributive movement – a fifth column of Trumpistas.