Subscribe
E-Paper
 |
| Donald Trump |
By Oh Young-jin
%20200.jpg/dims/resize/120/optimize) |
It's not because of a few polls putting the Republican nominee ahead of the presumptive Democratic nominee after the Cleveland convention. It is because Clinton remains unexciting. From the voters' perspective, selecting a leader often proves not to be about experience but about change. Clinton doesn't have it, while Trump has plenty. Of course, with a few more months to go before the election, however hard it may be, turning the situation around can be possible.
First, let's talk about what makes Clinton unexciting. Few disagree that she, the former first lady, secretary of state and senator, is smart and calm under fire. These presidential qualities don't work magic on her and rather juxtapose with many images of her standing by her husband every time Bill Clinton's former or estranged lovers came out of the closet and threatened his political life. Now, these laudable traits don't make one feel sympathetic toward her but rather question whether she is that eager to be president as to condone her unfaithful husband.
Then, her obsession turns into inertia ― immobilizing her against a series of attacks from her handling of official emails during her stint as secretary of state until it gnawed her credibility to the bones. It also perhaps made her settle for Tim Kaine rather than firebrand Elizabeth Warren.
In Hillary's mind, the male presence in the mundane Kaine would look better to voters than the all-woman pair. That was typical of Hillary and being typical won't boost her winning chances.
Going back it can partially explain why she allowed the leftist Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders to breathe down her neck to the wire and is being pushed and shoved by the racist, sexist Trump, whose every word has proved to be a disaster or close to one. But one giveaway is his "Make America great again" slogan is catchy and pulls at the heartstrings of millions of mostly simple-minded Americans.
By now, for those who still believe Hillary will prevail, stop dreaming.
Ask former British Prime Minister David Cameron what cost him his job ― his failure and "remain" backers to grasp the anger of the ordinary ― the remaining 99 percent ― about being ignored by the top 1 percent. Even Boris Johnson, leader of the "leave" campaign and now foreign secretary in the Teresa May Cabinet, conceded just hours before the surprising outcome was announced.
In hindsight, the most plausible explanation about the outcome is that it is not about the fight over substance but about the tactics or the lack thereof.
The "leavers" somewhat accidentally focused on and took over issues such as immigration, the kind of issue that has an immediate relevance to voters, or the country's loss of sovereignty portraying Brussels as the supra-government led by Germany and France.
Remain backers often found themselves on the defensive, failing to create their own agenda and being dragged around. Then, the fatal mistake was to use a group of economists armed with jargon and graphs and force a reluctant group of corporate leaders worrying about their bottom lines to present the case for not leaving the European Union. The ordinary people won't believe eggheads and rich industrialists. Simply put, it was a Waterloo for remain backers because they failed both in strategy and tactics. What are the lessons for Clinton?"
First, it is important to take the fight to where it should be fought.
In other words, if uneducated male Caucasians comprise the core of Trump supporters, Hillary should give them up. Her focus is to bring together the rest of the population. This means preventing them from straggling into the Trump camp or voting with their feet, and making them ― women, young people, educate males and the like ― believe in her.
Then, the question is how to galvanize this crazy quilt of voters into action ― voting for Hillary.
For that, Hillary can borrow the spirit, if not the idea itself from Nigel Farrage, who resigned after his successful Brexit campaign. His U.K. Independence Party or Ukip used a poster under the title "Breaking point" in a scare tactic. The point is that streams of refugees in it had nothing to do with Britain.
Here is one suggestion ― a seven-day ad campaign.
Day One: A poster of Muslims being paraded with a green star and crescent sewn on their chest against the background of Nazi ‘s Kristallnacht, being superimposed with the image of the mustached Trump extending his hand forward like a Roman salute. Even Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would think again about his support for trump.
Day Two: A poster of empty shelves in malls and department stores a la Venezuela as the result of China's blanket embargo for clothing, toys, golf clubs, toilet paper, utensils, and so on and so forth. To the margin of the poster is a white male hillbilly eating potatoes with his hands at a wooden table.
Day Three: A poster of piles of rubbish and leaves littering the Rose Garden of the White House with Hispanics walking about with a picket sign proclaiming "No Walls."
Day Four: A poster of Trump shaking hands with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un with the subtitle reading "World Peace."
Day Five: A poster of a nuclear attack by North Korea.
Day Six: Trump University with the stamp of bankruptcy
Day Seven: Trump being escorted out from Trump Tower by a group of policemen and the world back at peace.
Oh Young-jin is The Korea Times' chief editorial writer. Contact foolsdie5@ktimes.com or foolsdie@gmail.com.
Footnote from the writer: This column is for those who talk as if the Trump victory would be the end of the world. I personally don't believe President Trump could singlehandedly change the world for the worse. What worries me is the energy that feeds the Trump phenomenon. That energy is from the ordinary people who feel they aren't getting their fair share and are subject to shakedown by the powerful. If that balance can be shaken, a bet on Trump wouldn't be such a bad idea just for the sake of resetting the world as we know.
