MANY TRADITIONAL POLITICAL AXIOMS GET BROKEN

That sound you hear in our highly charged political biosphere is not unlike the sound of arctic glaciers falling off into the sea. This eerie crash is the collapse of golden rules that normally control our political processes.  Donald Trump and his supporters are to politics what global warming is to climate change. Other forces are at work as well as many traditional political axioms come tumbling down.

The first rule holds that: “Presidential Campaigns must be based on optimism and forward looking issues.”  This maxim is based on the thinking that a positive campaign is more likely to broaden a party’s base and help the candidate enlarge his appeal in the few swing states that decide most presidential elections.  Candidate Trump has shattered this rule by insisting that little is right with the Country and that only his bold unarticulated vision will “make America great again.”  Significant blocks of voters are viewed as part of the problem and attacked in order to hold together his angry coalition of supporters.

In previous presidential elections the axiom has been: “Be presidential on the campaign trail and in debates. Let the Super PACS do the negative campaigning.”  Again, Trump has fractured this rule by a) not having a PAC and b) showering competitors with degrading personal attacks at rallies and during debates

In the modern era of presidential politics: “developing a strong ground game in state and local party organizations” has been an indispensable maxim to ensure victory.  Trump has not only ignored this rule, he has successfully accumulated large numbers of delegates without it.  His success has been based on endless media coverage, name recognition and large boisterous rallies.  It remains to be seen whether Trump can be successful at the convention and/or in the general election without developing contacts down in the weeds of state and local party politics.

 Pennsylvania has its own broken maxim, not related to Trump. There is an unwritten political truism that:  “A Supreme Court Justice is the most secure, influential and above reproach elected position in the Commonwealth.”  This rule is supported by our constitution which seeks to place the judiciary above the political fray and as a check on other political institutions.  Unfortunately, in Pennsylvania almost half of the Supreme Court Justices have been replaced (3) since 2012 for criminal activity and for ethical conduct unbecoming of a Judge. The Supreme Court has been forced into a defensive position and its respect has been severely damaged.

The United States Congress has a rule that: “Once a congressional district has been reapportioned in favor of voters who are members of the Congressman’s own party, reelection will become all but automatic.”  This maxim (also called gerrymandering after Mass. Governor Elbridge Gerry who sought to redraw this Commonwealth’s voting districts in 1812) has been seriously undermined by the tea party. 

It has become common for republican office holders to be “primaried” out of office by candidates to their right, despite the incumbent’s own conservative credentials. The redistricting has backfired against the establishment republicans responsible for tinkering with the voting maps in the first place.  Representative Eric Cantor, Republican House Majority Leader from Virginia, is the most well known victim of this broken political rule.  Despite his high regard and position in the Washington republican hierarchy, he lost his primary contest to a non establishment tea party supporter.

Since the chaos of the 1968 democratic convention, leaders from both parties have stuck by the axiom that: “presidential conventions are to be well choreographed infomercials that place party and candidate in the best possible light.”  The 2016 republican convention in Cleveland is shaping up to be anything but.  The republican establishment is trampling on its own rule by pulling out all the stops to prevent Trump from having enough delegates to win on a first ballet.  If they are successful there will be a contested convention with demonstrations, back biting and meetings in smoke filled rooms that display anger and disagreement not unity.

Perhaps the most important liberal political maxim in recent years has been: “the Federal Supreme Court decision Citizens United is an abomination to the political process and must be reversed.”  This decision struck down limits on corporations’ campaign expenditures.  Liberals believe it permits billionaires to buy elections. In the present election, Citizens United has been a non factor and rarely discussed.  Trump uses his own resources and has not organized a PAC or sought out large donors. The democratic candidates are battling to accumulate the largest number of small donors.  Outsized contributions from billionaires and corporations are not encouraged and considered a negative by all the campaigns.  Instead, “Not being bought” is a major theme in all the stump speeches.

A significant political maxim in presidential election years is that: “under card party candidates for the House, Senate and local elections need a strong candidate at the top of the ticket to carry them to victory.”  Ticket splitting, even among independents in a general election, is not prevalent in modern American politics.  This leaves republican candidates in blue and purple states in a quandary. Do they support Trump with vigor, give him lip service only, or forge an all out attack against him, to remain in office? How this issue is resolved will determine whether republicans will be able to retain the majority in the Senate.

Many other political maxims are in danger of being broken in the general election.  Will we have an election where candidate personalities with the highest negative ratings in history will be more important than positions and/or principles?  Will voters who have a long track record of loyal party voting, instead vote their heart, their country or their moral beliefs? Will traditional conservatives and/or young progressives not vote at all? Will a third party emerge to not only challenge but defeat the established parties?

 Stay tuned for the sound of additional traditional political maxims crashing to the ground.