Promises, Promises

I gritted my teeth and made it through The Trump's acceptance speech at the RNC on Thursday night.  I found myself shouting at the TV several times: "That's not even true!" and "You can't/won't do that!"  Many journalistic types have done a pretty good job at fact-checking the the things that incited the first sort of yell.  They have picked out the varied shades of truth that we have all become so accustomed to from political candidates.  I have learned to read the fact checkers, several of them usually for a big event like this one.  At the very least it helps me to see what is being spun and how fast it is spinning.  But Trump's relationship with the truth has been tenuous at best throughout the campaign, and it has become rather apparent that most of his supporters don't really care.  He has done one thing really well, and he hit this point over and over again: he has been the voice of people who feel deeply disenfranchised by the political process.  Whether or not they are is another question, but again, facts have ceased to matter much in general to large sections of our population, not just at the Republican convention.
So, I'm going to joust at the other windmill: could (hold gag reflex down) President Donald J. Trump actually do what he said he was going to do: Make America Safe, Make America Win, Make America Great (again).  I get it, believing politician promises during an election is mostly like trying to believe bacon is health food: futile and probably dangerous.  But Trump's promises were especially egregious because he has virtually no specific plans that can be debated, and zero track record as a politician.  He always falls back on his record as a business man, but running a business and running a country are absolutely not the same thing, any more than driving a car is the same as driving an ocean liner.  Even a "big" businesses like the ones Trump runs are tiny compared to the scale of the Federal Government, and unless he makes major changes to the Constitution, he will have nowhere near the the absolute power he seems to relish in his Alpha Male Ego.
Furthermore, I cannot actually critique any of his specific ideas, because other than the infamous "wall," he seems to have none.  It was all big talk and posturing.  "Believe me," he says, illegal immigration, crime, terrorism, they're all going to end.  Not how, just empty blanket statements.  As if if ending crime and terrorism are possible goals.  Because I'm sure Obama has really secretly had the solution for crime and he's just been sitting on that for 7.5 years.  Likewise, defeating ISIS, no big whoop, we just need to roll into Syria with our big American flags waving and stomp a mud hole in those dudes, that worked pretty well in Iraq right?
Actually it didn't, that's why we have ISIS right now.
Vladimir Putin, who I could see having a serious bromance with Trump, isn't even that delusional.  Almost everyone in the world knows that the solution to ISIS is not more occupation by western powers (which breeds terrorists and extremists like bunny rabbits), except people who are desperate to feel secure behind a wall of "shock and awe" style violence.  We have given the whole "make the world safe by force" idea a pretty fair day in court, it's not passing muster.  While we're at it, let's get Iran back in a choke hold and keep punching them in the face, because that will slow down their march towards nuclear weapons.  Let's give them every incentive to want to make and use a nuke, and in the process make them blame us and Israel for all their problems, good times.
There are two young men, both of whom I'm kind of fond of, who are on active duty in the US Marines, and for their sake this war mongering has got to stop.
For the sake of all of our children, we have to stop believing the lie of security through violence.  Violence is an idol that will eventually demand your children, and it would appear that too many people are willing to make that sacrifice if it means being safe.  The repeated appeals to "law and order," sounded awfully totalitarian, and I wonder if all the State Police departments and county Sheriffs around the country would actually like the idea of the Federal government all the sudden telling them what to do and how to do it.  Did the Donald realize that the President of the United States is not also the police chief?  I mean, unless he's going to declare Marshall Law and start using the National Guard to handle the policing duties, maybe he would do that, I don't know.
I understand that the reason we're even having this conversation is because the Gubmint has let a lot of people down, and made a lot people angry.  I get it, I'm absolutely on board with the idea that some things need to fundamentally change.  We need to seriously consider the effectiveness and the justice of our system, we need to constantly work to learn to cooperate better, our goal is always that "more perfect union," that was envisioned by our Founding Fathers.
Trump is an iconoclast to be sure, and that is maybe necessary given the ossification of our political system, but what I didn't hear from him on Thursday was any sort of vision beyond frankly adolescent Alpha Male fantasies.  What I will be looking for from Hillary this week, what I actually rather expect to hear is not iconoclasm, but rather a typically dull and steady political approach, she is not going to tear the system down.  As I said, I think a little world shaking might be good for us, and that is why I am sort of Meh about Hillary and would have much preferred Bernie, but Bernie excited me because he had a rare blend of populist iconoclasm and the political experience and understanding to shake the system constructively.  Trump does not, at least he has given no real sign that he does.
If we are going to tear things down, and our society is to flourish, we must do the deconstruction purposefully and wisely, with an eye towards what will replace the things that we despise.  If we want to rid ourselves of Saddam Hussein or Osama Bin Laden, we should also consider the things that created them rather than just trying to cut off the head of the beast.
One model of leadership is to be the non-anxious presence that leads with a clear head, another is to be the carnival barker or the pep rally squad that riles up the mob.  After watching Thursday night, I think I might know which type of leader Trump will be.  I'm not entirely sure Hillary is the embodiment of the first type, but I am absolutely sure she is incapable of being the second. This is not likely to change anyone's mind, because inciting people to frantic action is usually easier than calling them to calm rationality.  We will see which one wins over then next few months.