Now that Trump is President-elect, where do we go from here?

I’ve been asked to comment on the following issues. 

1)      Where do we go from here?

2)      Why did Trump win?

3)      What caused the change at the end of the campaign?

In this post, I’ll address #1.  In another post, I’ve addressed #2.  I’m not sure if I will address #3.  Please remember these are just one person’s thoughts.

Where do we go from here?

Although I was an early and consistent “never Trump” person, I am taking an optimistic view.  As Hillary Clinton said in her concession speech, “We owe him an open mind and the chance to lead.”

In his victory speech, Trump voiced some encouraging intentions:

• He urged us to “dream big and bold and daring”
• He said he would seek “common ground, not hostility”, “partnership, not conflict” and would “deal fairly with everyone”.
• My favorite words from his victory speech were when he said he had “spent my entire life in business, looking at the untapped potential in projects and in people all over the world.  That is now what I want to do for our country.”  “Every single American will have the opportunity to realize his or her fullest potential.”
• He also vowed to fix inner cities and infrastructure.

Would anyone disagree with those intentions?

As I noted in earlier writings during this campaign, I did not vote for some presidents who subsequently did quite well, in my opinion.  Many candidates change when they become president, most often shifting toward the center, which enables them to accomplish more and makes them more acceptable to people who voted against them.

Trump seems more unpredictable than any previous president-elect in my lifetime because he is a pragmatist and inexperienced in politics.  Past inconsistencies make it harder to anticipate his actions.  Until now, he has not had to put together a political administration and develop a comprehensive program.  However, he has much more management experience than many past presidents.  Whether we voted for him or not, we owe it to our country to give him the benefit of the doubt and to help fulfill the admirable goals of his victory speech.

With a Republican Senate and House, Trump has a stronger chance to be able to affect change.  However, it is important to recognize that many of the Republican legislators were not Trump supporters and that Trump is quite independent himself, often supporting positions which have typically been Democratic rather than Republican.  As a pragmatist, Trump may be more concerned results than how goals are achieved.  For these reasons, there may be an opportunity for vigorous discussion which may stimulate more creativity and healthy cross-party votes on legislation. 

Separation of Powers may be less at risk.  Many of the Republicans in Congress have been staunch defenders of the Constitution.  Trump will likely roll back President Obama’s aggressive executive orders.  Hopefully, Trump will not issue new executive orders of that type.  With a Republican legislature, he has less reason to do so and he may want to set a good example for the future.  I suspect that my friends who supported President Obama’s power grabs despite my protests are now more accepting that such power grabs are wrong regardless of which side is doing the grabbing.

The Supreme Court should have fewer vacancies under Trump than would have been the case under Clinton.  Ginsburg, in particular, is likely to try to hold on until another Democratic president comes to office.  Breyer and Kennedy may take a similar approach. 

Unfortunately, with our aging Supreme Court, we could have a constitutional crisis if one of the judges shows signs of dementia.  The only option to remove a judge is to impeach the judge for bad behavior.  Particularly because of the momentous impact of selecting a new judge, there would likely be strong disagreement as to whether the judge had dementia and whether his/her condition justified impeachment.

Although Trump did not adopt Clinton’s position that the nature of the court should be changed from judges to advocates, he did cite two “litmus tests” – pro-life and pro-gun. 

I hope litmus tests will not be applied.  Litmus tests are inappropriate because justices should not decide cases until they have heard the evidence and the pleadings of the attorneys and have discussed the principles with each other.

Relative to particular issues:

·         In foreign policy, Trump seems much less likely to ignore a “red line” he has drawn.  I hope he is wise in identifying when and how to draw such lines.  I am a strong believer in diplomacy, but diplomacy works best when there is strength behind it.  (Teddy Roosevelt’s “walk softly but carry a big stick”.)  Trump seems to believe in having clear strength.

·         Relative to international trade, it is easier to negotiate a good deal when your leader has limited the other side’s expectations, which Trump has already done.  I hope we can negotiate good deals and maintain them without rupturing relationships.  Renegotiating past deals is risker, because it can undermine trust that lasting deals can be reached with the USA.  I hope Trump proves wise in such efforts.

·         I have always felt that the vast majority of citizens can be satisfied if we stem illegal immigration and then address amnesty.  Amnesty with leaky borders encourages more illegal entries.  I’d guess that Trump will support more visas for people with vital skills needed by an organization.  I can imagine significant progress on the immigration issue during a Trump presidency.

·         Relative to guns, I believe some politicians spurned widely-accepted legislation because they feared less public support for their more extreme goals if some restrictions were put in place.  Their peers might abandon politicians taking such a stance.  I’m hopeful progress can be made that will satisfy most people.

·         Trump should be able to stimulate a positive turn-around in the formation of small businesses and more hiring in large businesses.  But it is really up to all of us.  A healthy culture, including an emphasis on education and hard work, and a strong economy should stimulate business development, hence more jobs.  My impression is that Reagan’s trickle-down approach did not work optimally because too many employers reaped benefits, rather than finding ways to support “trickle down”.  We should have another chance now and hopefully will manage the economy in a way that instills hope among those of us who have not yet achieved economic success.

People often tell me that those who are financially poor will always vote for hand-outs.  I don’t think that is true.  Over the course of our history, such people have had hope to improve themselves and have supported the capitalist system.  We must foster hope rather than a welfare mentality, by reducing the need for a safety net and maintaining a safety net in a fashion which rewards productivity.  Ms. Clinton’s ideas to encourage employee-owned companies deserve consideration.

·         The national debt is a particularly important issue to me.  I was a big fan of the 2010 Simpson-Bowles proposal.  Unfortunately, I do not foresee this issue being effectively addressed in the new administration.  I pray I am wrong in that regard.

·         I hope President Trump decides not to prosecute Hillary Clinton.  Her mishandling of her emails has already cost her the election, which is punishment enough.  She has learned her lesson and will not be receiving classified information in the future anyway.  There is little to gain and much to lose from prosecuting her.

I believe peaceful protests are the right of our citizens and can be healthy expressions of opinion.  However, I believe they should be focused on issues.  Calls for impeachment before Trump takes office are inappropriate.  “He’s not my president” is inaccurate and rudeness is counter-productive.  Regardless of which presidential candidate we favored, we can perhaps help people channel their frustrations in a positive fashion.