Election 2016

Trump, Clinton Slug it Out Over the Narcissism of Small Differences

There was drama, hot takes, and nasty exchanges at the final presidential debate. There was everything except a real choice.

|

Screen cap

If the third and final presidential debate proved anything, it's that Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump—and the parties they represent—are more alike than they are different.

Sure, the former Secretary of State and the billionaire developer are worlds apart when it comes to style, experience, and temperament. Flipping through the cable news channels, all you can hear is the stagey disbelief that Trump, as churlish a candidate as there has ever been, refused to say he would automatically abide by the results on Election Day. The Donald refused to cave to convention and instead insisted that he'd have to wait and see. Sure, why not? Whatever else you can say about Trump, his big-city bravado blew more than a dozen Republican contenders off the primary stage like the Big, Bad Wolf blowing down so many houses of straw. He is rude, crude, and brusque, and Clinton is not any of that. She's not particularly polished and certainly is no nore likable than Trump, but they do carry themselves differently.

Which is one of the greatest sleights of hand at work in American politics. The two parties are like, totally different, right? One's red and the other is blue, conservative and liberal, tight and loose with money, exclusive and inclusive, you name it. Except that they really aren't that different, and it shows. On more issues than not, Trump and Clinton were in near total agreement. Each eschewed free-trade deals and ran from screaming from the idea of open borders. In fact, when Trump laid into Clinton over "open-border" comments she made in a speech revealed by Wikileaks, she rushed to say that she had voted for the sorts of border walls the Republican has made central to his campaign. And she's right. The 700-mile border wall she voted for an a senator is just about 300 miles shorter than the one Trump is dying to erect. In fact, he was pleased as punch when he got to point out that President Barack Obama, who typically only figures as a villain in Trump's speechifying, has deported hundreds of thousands of people.

On foreign policy, it quickly became clear that neither candidate had anything meaningful to say about what comes next, in Syria or anywhere else. They were too focused on whether Trump did in fact support the Iraq War a dozen years ago (who cares, really?) and whether it was a sign of virtue that Clinton had apologized for voting in favor of it (to quote her in a different situation, what difference at this point does it make?). Beyond that, there was the empty bluster of Trump saying that Clinton and the Obama administration had demonstrably failed at resculpting the lone and level sands of the Middle East into anything approaching civilization. True enough, but what exactly was he, who had once pronounced that would "bomb the shit" out of ISIS, going to do? Neither candidate could pull themselves out of the most-banal conversation about whether we were winning or losing in Mosul or in Aleppo. Neither offered up even the faintest vision of what might guide them as president when it came to military interventions, economic engagements, or diplomatic efforts. Here we are, running down the clock on the 21st century and still huffing the fumes of Cold War nostrums about America being the indispensable nation, or about being great because we are good or good because we are great.

Toward the close of this debate, we got to hear at least a little bit about spending and debt, intertwined issues that in most ways undergird all other questions. A bankrupt government can't really do much of anything, or at least not for very long. Chris Wallace, the Fox News anchor who moderated this debate with welcome aplomb and force, noted that each candidate was punting on the questions of spending and debt. The Committee for a Responsible Budget (CFRB) has scored both candidates' spending and tax plans and neither is good on these issues. Nobody's talking much about debt and deficits anymore, mostly because owning the problem means you get less money to spread around. Sure, large and growing debt correlates with slower and lower economic growth (on this, right- and left-wing economists agree), but let's leave that to the grandkids to figure out. Over the next decade, CRFB says, debt owned by the public (a subset of the national debt, which also includes intra-governmental IOUs) would grow from around 77 percent to 86 percent under Hillary Clinton's plans and to 105 percent under Trump's. She would increase spending massively but also raise taxes significantly. Trump would spend less but slash tax receipts even more, causing greater deficits. Each candidate is guilty of the worst sort of magical thinking, that somehow their tax hikes or cuts would yield increased economic growth to cover whatever it is they want to do next. More importantly, as Wallace stressed, the major trust funds for Social Security and Medicare are drying up and neither candidate is offering up even mildly serious plans to address those problems. Trump has said that he's not going to cut anybody's benefits while Clinton is calling for expanded benefits.

Which means not only are these not serious candidates, they are not distinct candidates either.

Somewhere in Los Angeles, the Libertarian candidate for president Gary Johnson was twiddling his thumbs on Twitter, in the green room waiting to appear on Jimmy Kimmel Live! A few weeks ago, Johnson muffed a couple of foreign policy questions ("What is Aleppo?") and failed to reach 15 percent in the five polls the rankly partisan Commission on Presidential Debates said would determine attendance at tonight's event. Bless his heart, he might not be popular enough with Americans to be on the stage, but unlike either Clinton or Trump, he's openly and unapologetically for free trade and more-open immigration. He's called for a different foreign policy, one grounded in skepticism about armies building nations in far-flung lands. And he's brazen on the third-rail of American politics, saying that of course we need to change Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, so that we can have a sustainable, targeted, and effective safety net that helps those of us who need help without bankrupting the entire nation.

But Gary Johnson, a two-term Republican governor who served successfully in heavily Democratic-leaning New Mexico, would have presented an actual alternative to the two folks on stage tonight. So of course he was nowhere to be seen. Because Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, the Democrat and the Republican, express the full range of diversity in a country that celebrates choice in everything but politics.

NEXT: Trump and the Lying Media

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Or we could stop looking to leaders for salvation.

    1. I wish we could stop looking for an article about those O’Keefe videos–I wish it was right here.

      1. I’m making $90 an hour working from home. I was shocked when my neighbour told me she was averaging $120 but I see how it works now. I feel so much freedom now that I’m my own boss. Go to this web site and click Tech tab to start your work…. http://www.ImdbCash.tk

  2. There are a few differences.

    (1) Trump has enough money that he doesn’t need bribes, and Hillary has a long history of corruption while in public office.

    (2) Trump is much less politically connected and skilled, so that he won’t be able to pass as much legislation and hence will be doing less damage.

    (3) Hillary has already announced she is going to kill 1A and 2A with specific legislation and policies.

    Furthermore, with Hillary, it’s crystal clear that the policies she campaigns on are going to bear little resemblance to the policies she will implement (except for (3), those are personal).

    1. Yeah but do you really want Trump to grab your pussy? Not in my America.

      1. I’m so old, I remember when the Democrats were anti-war and believed sexual conduct was irrelevant to the office of the president.

      2. I’d rather have Trump grab my pussy than Hillary grab my wallet and my balls.

    2. Yeah, and Trump has dug a hole that Young Un in NK prolly couldn’t get out of. And he keeps right on digging.
      I keep lowering the EC vote number for Trump, wondering if, like the Nixon supporters, there’s some sort of historic lower limit.
      SIV seems to suggest that stupidity has no lower limit.

      1. He’s clinging to 5 point leads in SC, GA, MO, TX, and UT and behind in AZ.

        These should not be battleground states.

        1. In polls with +14D and greater samples.

        2. All the polls I have seen have Trump trailing Clinton by 4 points here in Georgia. And I don’t think Georgia has gone blue since Jimmy.

      2. So? We aren’t talking about who will likely win.

        What we’re talking about what the relative threat to our country is from either candidate.

        Are you able to keep those two concepts apart in your mind, or is that too complicated for you?

    3. Hillary has already announced she is going to kill 1A and 2A…

      I didn’t watch the trainwreck, but I’m guessing neither Citizens United or gun control got through the MSM issue filter.

      1. Chris Wallace is not MSM.

  3. Liliana . if you think Lawrence `s blog is incredible, I just purchased a new Honda after earning $5741 this – 4 weeks past and also 10 grand lass month . it’s by-far the most-comfortable job I have ever done . I started this four months/ago and almost immediately began to make minimum $85… p/h .

    see this……………. http://www.BuzzNews10.com

  4. http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/19/…..index.html

    I find this dubious at best. I have absolutely no intention of voting for Trump but he kind of wiped the floor with her tonight.

    She never rebutted a single one of her proven lies, graft and complete failure as Secretary of State. Not to mention the criminality. She was a deer stuck in the headlights. Deflection and talking points. Her whole demeanor was saying: Dear Lord Satan! Please just get me through this night so I can forever surround myself with people who have no power or the balls to shit on me in the same building, much less within 20 feet of me.

    1. And for Christ’s sake, don’t click on Suderman articles. They’ll never fire that boot licking shithead if you give him traffic.

      Sleep well.

      1. I shouldn’t have done it. He’s a naive asshole. I’d rather read Shikha at this point; at least her posts don’t reek of “Pick me! Pick me!” directed at Journolist circles.

    2. Having Chris Wallace as moderator rather than some leftist stooge from CNN really makes a difference.

    3. At this point what difference does it make?

      My point is that at this juncture everyone has made up their minds. The left was never voting Trump and the right will never vote Hillary. The middle could care less about the ME; they just don’t want to be labeled sexist or racist. The debates never led to any debate; just talking points that would make good sound bites.

      This entire century has been about false choices for American politics and I predict that next decade when the balance sheets turn red we will face rough times as a country.

      1. “The debates never led to any debate; just talking points that would make good sound bites.”

        Which is the real purpose behind the CPD. Keeping third-partiers off the dais is just an added bonus. But it was the demands of the ruling duopoly about how the debates were going to be staged and ran that prompted the League of Women Voters to state, “…because the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter.” And that’s also why I refuse to watch any of the debates, it is nothing but a fraud meant to dazzle the ignorant electorate. The current “debate format” follows that old adage, “If you cannot baffle them with brilliance, dazzle them with bullshit.”

    4. Yeah, but she sounded cool & calm, while Trump reacted to her outrageous statements appropriately w sputtering outrage.

  5. Every time I see some debate article that links Trump and Herself, my first thought is “he must have done pretty well.” Otherwise, it would be a litany of what’s wrong with Donald.

  6. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $100 per hour. I work through this link

    ???????????? http://www.Reportmax90.com

  7. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $100 per hour. I work through this link

    ???????????? http://www.Reportmax90.com

  8. Facebook gives you a great opportunity to earn 98652$ at your home.If you are some intelligent you makemany more Dollars.I am also earning many more, my relatives wondered to see how i settle my Life in few days thank GOD to you for this…You can also make cash i never tell alie you should check this I am sure you shocked to see this amazing offer…I’m Loving it!!!!
    ????????> http://www.factoryofincome.com

  9. Hillary Clinton – Why Her Parkinson’s Matters
    https://youtu.be/vzKIM1SR_Po

  10. “Trump would spend less but slash tax receipts even more, causing greater deficit.”

    Apparently Nick does not read economic history. Cutting taxes increases tax receipts as the economy improves.

    1. Tax receipta have never represented more than 18% of total GDP, ever. The important thing is to encourage economic growth and unless El Trumpo can come up with magic economic beans, starting a trade war is not precisely conducive to growth, as economic activity IS TRADE.

  11. Here is the huge difference between Clit and Chump:

    Clit has thoroughly and demonstrably disqualified (literally and legally) herself from ever holding any civil service position.
    Chump has not (yet).

  12. But Gary Johnson, […] would have presented an actual alternative to the two folks on stage tonight.

    Yes, but Gary is not going to rebuild the Hadrian Wall that we need to keep the “bad hombres” from coming in, Nick.

  13. Listening to these debates and this election cycle and the endless pre- and post commentary by media and the pundits reminds me to pick up Fuller and read:

    War is the ultimate tool of politics. Political leaders look out only for
    their own side. Politicians are always realistically maneuvering for the next
    election. They are obsolete as fundamental problem-solvers.

    R. Buckminster Fuller

    More and more I am convinced that our world is slowly becoming aware of this and what we are bearing witness to is the death-throws of the old order of power (of which politicians are its most visible tool). To me it is a time of great hope but also great trepidation in how long it will take for death to come. Because the old order will not go quietly in its sleep and the question of how long it takes will certainly be of consequence to all of us on earth. How many people will suffer and die along with it as it maneuvers and struggles to hold on. If it takes many more decades it will certainly get worse before it gets better.

  14. Flipping through the cable news channels, all you can hear is the stagey disbelief that Trump, as churlish a candidate as there has ever been, refused to say he would automatically abide by the results on Election Day.

    Unlike Al “Recount until I win” Gore in 2000.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.