The establishment-argument that votes cast for a candidate other than Donald Trump are in fact votes against him, specifically, is insane. The opinion that all these votes are against Trump usually is the result of unreliable opinion polls, bad math and manipulation. What’s being ignored are the people who will change their minds once their candidate drops out of the race.
I’m not promoting Trump here - I’m just pointing out that the media manipulation and political hysteria is at unprecedented levels. Most of the people forging these opinions are too emotional to think clearly.
Using their ‘insane’ argument, if Donald Trump is the front-runner and he ends up with roughly 35% of the vote, Ted Cruz 25% and Marco Rubio’s 20%, then it would be reasonable to say that more people voted against every other candidate than voted against Trump.
Numbers don’t lie. The leading percentage of Republican voters, including many Democrat converts have chosen Trump. Some 20,000 Democrats switched parties in the Massachusetts primary to vote predominantly for Trump. We should champion the process where people, not politicians, pick the candidate they feel is best prepared to lead. If a Republican is saying they are unwilling to vote for Donald Trump even if he is the nominee that is manipulative threat. It rises to the level of absurd and should be outright ignored. Yes, Mitt, I’m talking to you! Trump might be their least favorite candidate, but any action for a third party, or abstinence from voting is effectively a vote for Hillary Clinton.
There’s a chance Trump will receive the most votes but not reach the 1237 delegates need to secure the nomination. This will lead to a contested convention. If the Republicans attempt to subjugate the people’s voice, then the result will be far more disruptive to the party than anything Mr. Trump might do as President.
The mentality that seems to be prevailing in Republican leadership is one that flies in the face of American greatness. Donald Trump is a complex, storied businessman. He presents a risk. He might prove to be one of the greatest leaders we’ve seen or the worst. Leaders who reach the pinnacle of success and are capable of leaving the greatest legacies are complex, complicated and frequently met with the most ridicule and misunderstanding. If we are unwilling to embrace and consider complex and unique candidates, instead settling for the comfortable, we will continue our demise.
As an example, let’s reflect on Steve Jobs. Steve Jobs virtually invented the personal computer and smartphone. But along his journey of transforming the way we all communicate, he was fired from Apple Computer — a company he founded. The investors and board members couldn’t handle him. He was ‘over the top,’ ‘bombastic,’ “unconventional’ and considered far worse than even some Republicans consider Donald Trump. After being fired, he kept dreaming and pressed forward. He launched Pixar (now owned by Disney), which revolutionized children’s films as much or more as did the advent of cartoons.
Apple later brought Steve Jobs back to the company realizing his unconventional style and harsh tone was a manifestation of his brilliance and unique capabilities. The company, absent their cash-reserves was destined to bankruptcy. His return quickly led to the iPod, iPhone, iCloud, iTunes, iMac and other transformational tools that sparked the greatest media and communications revolution in our history. At the time of Jobs’ death, Apple was the most valuable company in the world.
Given the dysfunction in Congress and the divisive nature of our politics, we need someone who can champion the change people desire. Is Trump that guy? I don’t know. But, in order to break the path of failure and corruption in Washington, we need someone remarkably different. It will likely be someone who both excites us and brings us fear. Ronald Reagan was the last President that fit this mold.
In order to change the direction of any business, state or even our country (that’s on the wrong path), it requires trial and error, boldness and some risk. It most definitely requires being willing to fail and learn quickly from your mistakes (leading to eventual success). Steve Jobs learned from his mistakes early at Apple. It remains one of his greatest leadership legacies. Comparing this to the election, most of Trump’s opponents and many in the media have spent their time taunting his mistakes from 20 to 30 years ago instead of asking him, “what did you learn from them?” As a result, we’ve never really taken the time to understand Trump in that context.
You may feel that Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio or John Kasich are better choices. All three of them have very attractive qualities. And, if the people legitimately choose one of those three over Trump, then so be it. But, if a bunch of delegates seize this divide (and Trump’s failure to earn the 1237 required delegates) to pick their own candidate, the Republican party as we know it is finished.
Many of the Republican leaders who are fearful of Trump are unwilling to keep an open mind, listen to the people and learn how to better move forward. Instead, they fight to retain their power and control in lieu of fighting for our crumbling nation. An open mind is detrimental to their entire way of life. They’ve spent zero effort scratching the surface in trying to understand Trump because his style of leadership actually works - the contrast alone is revealing. I suppose if you possess all that power, you’re accustomed to everyone following your orders. An entire group of Republican leaders are stunned and paralyzed by one man. It’s laughable, if not for what it reveals.
Trump or not, this election season has been a revelation. The people are no longer in charge of this Democracy.