Somehow, our mainstream media never got it!
The seething anger that has enveloped America like a smoldering fire can be described with two words:
"Anti-globalism."
The Paul Ryan's, Mitt Romney's, the Bush clan or any of the Republican "leadership" never got it! Neither did Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Chuck Schumer or any of the Democrat bosses. Buried deep inside their Washington bubble, they never comprehended that the average Joe didn't want to hear their proclamation that we "live in a global society" and we must accept Thomas Friedman's verdict that "the world is flat."
Therefore, when Donald Trump emerged on the political scene, professing problems with our current trade deals, they became incensed. I use the word "they" because it was indeed a bi-partisan preference for the ways that things were.
So are we not a global society? And, if not, what are the alternatives?
Let us visit the second question first. The polar opposite to globalism is nationalism. Too simplified? Let's dissect it from a media perspective.
Our mainstream media is essentially a concentration of globalists who see the United States as a nation that has traditionally exploited other nations to amass the wealth currently held. It was so flagrant that Barack Obama felt that he needed to issue an apology to the rest of the world during his first months in office.
Trump's brand of nationalism AKA as "America first," was quickly construed as racism and bigotry. His promise to "make America great again," was translated by Hillary Clinton among others as "taking America back to a time of discriminatory practices and limited opportunity for all."
The objective to "secure the borders" was also given a thumbs down by both party hierarchies. For Democrats, it amounted to thwarting future voters. For the Republican Establishment, it posed a threat on an ongoing supply of cheap labor. Trump talked of "building a wall." He stated correctly that without it, "we wouldn't have a country." His party leadership seemed more worried about alienating Latino voters. Hillary and company picked up on it, cagily asserting that that their aim was to "remove barriers not create them."
The hope, of course, was to confuse "Joe-Six Pack." If the hierarchies of both parties were successful, a rogue like Donald Trump would be dismissed as a charlatan who didn't understand how things actually worked. Problem for both Democrat and Republican leadership was that Joe-Six Pack wasn't confused! He understood plainly that "globalization" translated to his job being shipped overseas, where cheap labor maximized profit for large corporations.
These Washingtonians may be further surprised this November when Donald Trump does much better than predicted with Hispanic voters. Why will he? Because, inside the beltway bubble, there is little understanding that "immigration reform" is not the only issue concerning Latinos. Both "currency stability" and "jobs and the economy" outrank it! Imagine that!
Why African Americans continue their love affair with the Democrat party remains a mystery. But statistics tell the story. Black unemployment remains unchanged, despite nearly eight years of an African America president. Yet, Mrs. Clinton and Democrats seem unable to offer any solutions, other than gun control.
Eventually, Abraham Lincolns famous assessment will find sufficient African American ears: "You can fool some of the people all of the time and all the people some of the time. But you can't fool all of the people all of the time."
Look for people of color to finally ignore the stale words of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, taking a look at Trump's plan to incentivize job creators in inner city problem places such as Baltimore, Chicago and Detroit. It is reminiscent of that old national Negro college ad, "We don't want a handout, just a hand."
Promoting minority entrepreneurialism in the inner cities may be the correct path for America in general. But, it does reduce dependency. That in itself, is a threat when remembering that we are speaking of a key Democrat constituency! Like blue-collar whites, these voters fully understand that globalism is not in their best interest. By the same token, border security is.
In short, globalism is not something to be excited about, let alone embrace. Unless, of course, you are seeking cheap labor and maximum profits. Up until now, "lower middle class America" has lacked a spokesman. The two parties in power have essentially been one in the same where globalism was concerned. Donald Trump has identified it as the real woe in the lives of a frustrated population.
"Brexit" has inspired the country. More and more Americans are seeking something that will allow them to reclaim their destiny. Those opposed are being reassessed. Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan, the Bushes and the Clintons are undergoing renewed scrutiny. The traditional party lines are growing increasingly blurred.
Make no mistake! There will be Bernie Sanders supporters who will pull the lever for Trump this November. It is also common knowledge that both Bush first ladies have expressed preference for Hillary Clinton!
Up until now it has been "red team versus blue team, playing for the same university." Much to the chagrin of both, there is now another alternative.
