Over the past many weeks political commentators have likened Donald Trump’s spectacular rise in the opinion polls of Republicans to that of Bernie Sanders’ equally surprising rise in the polling of Democrats. Their conclusion has been that both are benefiting from being ‘outsiders’ at a time when the political establishment is unpopular.
It is tempting to look for a common thread but this is a very facile explanation and fails to stand up to examination. There is no similarity other than the commentators’ surprise. Sanders is a longtime member of the Senate and despite his claim to ‘independence’ has been a rock-solid supporter of the Senate Democrat leadership and Obama. There is nothing ‘outsider’ about him.
The ‘outsider’ explanation has been popular with Left-leaning commentators because it has allowed them to ignore mentioning Democrat anxieties over Clinton’s crooked history and Email revelations. The herd of Leftist Media commentators, habitually fawning on all Democrats, have been unwilling to publicly treat these as substantive. Not that Democrat voters or Leftist MSM commentators are disapproving of her lies, greed and self-serving use of private Email facilities for official business. It is that some are worried that the independents’ vote might be affected in 2016.
Trump’s popularity, also a surprise to the expert commentators, had its kick-start from his anti-immigration stance and his un-PC outspokenness but most of all it has been fed by the rage that many Republicans feel about the Boehner/McConnell leadership. It is certainly a revolt against the ‘insiders’.
The commentators have been unwilling to explain the twin falls of Bush and Clinton other than to attribute them to anti-establishment sentiment. In the case of Jeb Bush, his failure to garner Republican grass-roots support is astonishing and worth probing. Clinton’s recent, and perhaps terminal, decline in support can only be explained by the unusual appearance of a persistent MSM leaking of damaging revelations concerning her illegal Email use at State. This departure from Democrat loyalty by an influential section of the MSM suggests that the Ruling Media Class is intent on forcing Clinton out of the contest, if necessary by putting her in Court. We have explained this MSM hostility in a previous article but in passing, here is an NBC headline this week “Highly Classified Information in Clinton Emails”. This is not the usual MSM cover-up of a Democrat.
Bush had much going for him when he announced his entry into the race. For months the MSM had been recording the growth of his war chest and the enthusiasm of rich backers. He had unsurpassed name recognition. He had been out of politics for some years and so was not tainted by the Boehner/McConnell Congressional treachery. He enjoyed a reputation as a successful former Governor of Florida which was a swing State. He had in place a group of experienced advisors and a well-financed and seasoned national network.
In past times these advantages would have deterred many ambitious Republicans from throwing a hat into the ring, but this time the field became crowded, including the entrance of the unlikely maverick celebrity Donald Trump. What has separated The Donald from the rest, and made a mockery of the form book, has been his unwillingness to play by the PC rules established by the new Ruling Class. One of the PC rules is that illegal immigration cannot be opposed without succumbing to charges of racism. Jeb Bush, assuming that supporting a pathway to citizenship would be popular with the MSM and therefore not an issue, nailed his colors to the Latino mast. In doing so he immediately found himself leading the anti-Trump charge and the representative of the Republican Party’s despised elite. No matter what he does now he has that albatross around his neck.
To make matters worse for Bush, Trump’s colorful, energetic and hard-hitting style, arousing his audiences, has been in stark contrast to his own limp and didactic delivery. The website videos of Trump’s great crowds, thirsting for unrestrained political incorrectness, his impromptu speeches containing only uncompromising statements of intent and his poking fun at his rivals have appeared alongside Bush’s earnest policy lectures to somnolent retirees in small public libraries.
The Bush campaign has sunk like a stone and the polls are showing it. We see no revival of his fortunes, despite his war chest. Mrs. Clinton looks set to join him in his fall but in her case she may land in jail.