Republican spoilers both?

By Bill Rife

You can’t be serious!!  John McEnroe’s all-to-familiar tennis taunt was never more right on.  No kidding, Donald Trump has blustered himself into the 2012 presidential race. The megalomaniac real-estate billionaire threatens to run as a Republican, an appetizing prospect for Democrats and one which strikes terror into establishment Republican hearts.

Why is this troubling? For starters, “The Donald” has a Clintonesque adversarial relationship with the truth.  He claims to have been a “very strong Republican for a long while,” in abject defiance of his own record.  The Washington Post found that he was a registered Democrat between 2001 and 2008, and supported Obama in the last presidential election, saying “He has a chance to go down as the greatest president.”  From that to far right wing “brither” in just two plus years! A typical Trump tidbit, this one from CBS Channel 12 News PALM BEACH, Fla.  -- “Part-time Palm Beacher Donald Trump is apparently fibbing about his political participation record.  He told New York One on Friday (04/22) that he has voted in every general election.  However, voting records obtained by the New York City Board of Elections shows that he did not vote in the 2002 general election. Records also show that Trump skipped at least three presidential primaries and two mayoral primaries over the past 25 years.”

Ethics clearly aside, the man is fast on his feet. 

Trump has donated to 96 candidates, over 50% of whom have been Democrats. Senate Democratic Leader Harry Ried is the 4^th largest recipient of his largesse, and former Obama chief of staff Rahm Emanuel’s successful Chicago mayoral campaign received a robust $50,000. Liberal icons Hillary Rodham Clinton, John Kerry, Charles Schumer, Charles Rangel and the late Senator Edward Kennedy all benefited from hefty campaign contributions. Trump claims it was just business. To this supposedly true believer birther, business “Trumps” integrity every time.

Trump’s hyperbolic pronouncements actually delight Democrats and scare the bejesus out of the Republican establishment. Thursday’s F and MF-bomb laced tirade in Las Vegas is becoming de rigueur Donald. In it, he later added: "There is a really good chance that I won't win because of one of these blood-sucking (read Republican) politicians."

Crude, lewd, and way beyond rude, Donald Trump gives “Ugly American” new meaning.

He blames China for our economic woes (“I’d slap a 25% tax on the MF’ers”) while his line of clothing labels proudly tell us “Made in China.” As Donald Lambro wrote recently in the Washington Times, Trump is conducting “…a shallow , sound-bite campaign  that invents ‘facts’ to fit his own reality, threatens the Arab world, pushes China around and brags how ’easy’ it is to fix the financial mess we’re in, without a hint of a well-thought –out plan (which) may play well with some voters.”

How could such rickety presidential timber have the audacity to run for the highest office in the land? That Barack Obama won with the thinnest resume in U.S. history was not lost on Donald. But there may well be a more sinister explanation for the Trump candidacy, one actually designed to keep Obama in office.

Remember Ross Perot, the jackass who, many believe, put Bubba Clinton in the White House? Could it be déjà vu all over again with Trump? In light of Obama’s success, it’s risky to say Trump has no shot at winning, but given how conservatives might view the multiple wives or the moderates’ take on the birther debacle (for which Trump proudly takes credit), the shot is a long one. A much more likely scenario is Perot II, a 3^rd party spoiler, siphoning off Republican votes and awarding Obama another 4 years.

Outraged liberals howl that Perot was not the difference maker in 1992. Kevin Willis (ksw@kevinwillis.net) refutes that position with a thorough and credible analysis of that year’s presidential campaign: www.kevinwillis.net/viewarticle.php?&artID=245. He writes in part, “…..there is no way that Perot was not a spoiler for Bush senior (in 1992). Now, in fairness, that was the landscape of that political year, and Bush could not keep Clinton and Perot at bay. But Perot acted as a spoiler, if by no other measure (such as the extra ad buys he made and press coverage he got where he spent 80% of the time attacking H.W. Bush) then electorally--while it may not be impossible, it is statistically highly improbable that Clinton would have won without Perot in the race. Even if you accept the notion that Perot drew evenly from both candidates, which you should not (were Blue Dog Democrats who had voted for Reagan and Bush really going to vote for Clinton, if Perot had not been in the mix? Probably not, but those folks are counted on the Democrat side of "drawing evenly between the two parties") . . . there were enough states with enough electoral votes where the smallest shift in Bush's favor would give Bush the election.” He concludes, “By contrast, there were very few states where the Nader vote could have possibly made the difference. Florida, yes, and he did make the difference. But Perot made the difference in a dozen states, and effectively put Clinton in the Whitehouse in 1992.”

Neither party has a corner on dirty tricks but if Trump, indeed, fancies himself as a spoiler, some credit must be given for creative dirt.

That possibility is gaining currency. One energized lefty recently wrote to Democratic Underground:

“ I’m seriously considering donating $25 to any Trump candidacy….I love him. He is the ULTIMATE ‘Trump’ card for an easy Obama win. Thank you Mr. Trump.”

The Donald may well be hatching something with his demo buddies behind the scenes. He won’t be our next president but if he, personally, can keep Obama in the White House his massive ego will be well served .