The Phenomenon of Donald Trump

Astoundingly, Donald Trump is currently at the head of the Republican pack. He does present some attractive (albeit vague) positions for conservatives, but his past political affiliations and flip-flops in political convictions are less than trust-inspiring. The Donald seems to switch political parties and opinions like other people change their clothes. First, he was a Republican, then became an independent, next a Democrat, and finally in full circle has become a Republican again. In a 2004 interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, he declared “In many cases, I probably identify more as Democrat”. He also told Blitzer on another occasion “Hillary’s always surrounded herself with very good people. I think Hillary would do a good job”. He has also contributed a great deal of money to Hillary Clinton and other Democrats. As a Politco.com article puts it, “Will the real Donald Trump please stand up?”

All of this past history together with his vagueness on what he would actually do to achieve the goals of his political positions should make Republicans very uneasy. On a first read Trump’s political menu appears very appetizing to a conservative palate. He says he wants:

1. To be a fiscal conservative: Trump claims to be sympathetic to Tea Party positions.
2. To cut taxes: Trump expresses support for Reagan-like tax cuts in which tax reduction stimulates investment and job creation, which in turn causes a larger economic pie to be divided and additional government tax-revenues.
3. To do away with Obamacare: Trump has made no secret that he has no love for Obamacare and would do away with it as soon as he could. (Also see here and here) Marc Thiessen on the Washington Post says that this sounds like what a Republican politician would say, but that we should all keep in mind Trump helped enable the Democrats to enact the Affordable Care Act by helping finance the 2006 Democratic takeover of Congress.
4. To get tough with China: Trump blames China for taking away American jobs and income, and cheating Americans of hundreds of billions of dollars by manipulating its currency. He never quite becomes specific about what he would do, but he strongly implies he would erect trade sanctions against countries such as China, Japan, and Mexico for taking jobs and income away from the United States.
5. To believe in American Exceptionalism: Trump has been quoted as saying “We are the greatest country the world has ever known. I make no apologies for this country, my pride in it, or my desire to see us become strong and rich again.”
6. To defend the second amendment of the Constitution: Trump has a concealed carry permit for a pistol in New York City, and is a big gun-rights supporter.

Most of these positions are music for conservative ears, except possibly for position number 4 in the list above. I have a great deal of trouble with his positions on international trade because of what we know about the usefulness of trade and about what historical events have told us about it. At least in his public statements he displays an ignorance about the importance of foreign trade, as well as the forces that drive it. Ricardo’s law of comparative advantage demonstrates that it is desirable for two nations to trade in a good if the nation with a comparative advantage in producing the good sells to the country lacking the comparative advantage. This used to be an economic law so universally accepted that communists, socialists, Keynesians, and neoclassical economists all believed in it. Today this continues to be the case, except for some of the so-called “heterodox” economists. The really bad results of the Smoot-Hawley tariff at the beginning of the Great Depression gives empirical evidence of the dangers of flouting the Ricardian law. I will admit that this law is not as intuitively obvious as one could desire. Even the nature of comparative advantage as opposed to absolute advantage takes some thought to understand. Nevertheless, one can actually craft a fairly easy mathematical proof that the law is true. The proof does produce a limit on the amount of profit the seller can get for the trade to be beneficial to both sides, but such trades can still benefit both of them.

On top of these considerations of foreign trade and foreign policy, Trump’s mercurial inconsistencies should make a Republican very uneasy. His blunt conclusions about many national problems, while in many ways attractive, are also often very unattractive, even repulsive, in the way he makes them. In his delivery he often seems like a blow-hard and very full of himself. How would he comport himself in negotiating with the Congress? Part of a President’s job is to persuade members of Congress to his side. Would not a President who seems belligerent and hostile simply alienate his opponents rather than persuade?

So, dear reader, would Donald Trump actually be the Republican Party’s best choice for nomination? There are a number of other candidates who have more credentials in actually making things work in  political organizations as governors or legislators. Would not one of them make a better choice?

GO TO HOME

Sharing is caring!