Monthly Archives: November 2016

Did They REALLY Say That? Part I

 

Welcome to a brief recap of the 2016 election based on many of the America Film Institute’s “100 Greatest Movie Quotes of All Time.”  I hope you enjoy reading this as much as I enjoyed writing it.  The format for each quote includes AFI ranking, the quote, movie and year and the situation in which it appeared during the campaign.

#1  Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn. (Gone With The Wind,  1939) Bernie Sanders rejects Hillary Clinton’s private email server as a campaign issue.

#2 I’m gonna make him an offer he can’t refuse. (The Godfather, 1972) Donald Trump, Jr. tells John Kasich aide the Ohio governor will be the de facto president if he joins the ticket.

#3 You don’t understand! I coulda had class.  I coulda been a contender,  I could’ve been somebody, instead of a bum, which is what I am. (On the Waterfront, 1954) Announcing he is withdrawing from the race for the Republican nomination, Mario Rubio regrets having turned negative in an attempt to out-Trump Trump.

#5 Here’s looking at you, kid. (Casablanca, 1942)  Huma Abedin to Hillary Clinton as she leaves the campaign headquarters for the last time.

#9 Fasten your seat belts.  It’s going to be a bumpy night. (All About Eve, 1950)  Rachel Maddow on MSNBC as early returns start coming in from Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin.

#10 You talking to me? (Taxi Driver, 1976) Response by any Trump supporter to any pollster.

#11  What we’ve got here is a failure to communicate.(Cool Hand Luke, 1967) Trump explains how he can take both sides of an issue in the same sentence.

#13 Love means never having to say your sorry. (Love Story, 1970)  Preamble in each of the pre-nuptial agreements between Trump and his wives.

#19  I’m mad as hell, and I’m not going to take this anymore. (Network, 1976)  Every Trump and Sanders voter.

#20 Louis, I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship.  (Casablanca, 1942)  Trump welcomes Breitbart editor Steve Bannon to be part of his campaign, but keeps forgetting his first name is Steve, not Louis.

#23  There’s no place like home. (The Wizard of Oz, 1939) Trump explains why he and Melania may not make the White House there primary residence.

#25 Show me the money! (Jerry Maguire, 1996) Hillary Clinton demands pre-payment before addressing an audience of Wall Street bankers.

#26  Why don’t you come up sometime and see me? (She Done Him Wrong, 1933)  An open invitation to Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell to have lunch at Trump Tower.

#29  You can’t handle the truth.  (A Few Good Men, 1992)  Editor’s Note:  Too easy.  Make your own joke.

#30  I want to be alone. (Grand Hotel, 1932)  Every Democrat on the morning of November 9, 2016.

#31  After all, tomorrow is another day! (Gone With The Wind, 1939)  Entry in Hillary Clinton’s diary following her loss to Barack Obama for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination.

#33  I’ll have what she’s having. (When Harry Met Sally, 1989)  Attendees at the Hillary Clinton “victory” celebration.

#35  You’re going to need a bigger boat.  (Jaws, 1975)  Clinton speech writer before they change the text of her September 10 speech from “boat of deplorables” to “basket of deplorables.”

#36  Badges?  We ain’t got no badges! We don’t need no badges! I don’t have to show you any stinking badges! (The Treasure of Sierra Madre, 1948)  MSNBC reporter Katy Tur at Trump rally.

#37  I’ll be back.  (The Terminator, 1984)  See #31.

#38  Today, I consider myself the luckiest man on the face of the earth. (The Pride of the Yankees, 1942)  Every Democrat who turned down an offer to be Clinton’s running mate and hopes to be president some day.

#39  If you build it, he will come.  (Field of Dreams, 1989)  Trump explains how the wall on the Mexican border is just what he needs to increase voter turnout.

#40  My mama always said life was like a box of chocolates.  You never know what you’re gonna get.  (Forrest Gump, 1994)  True, but in this case, the candy must have been made with white chocolate.

#44  I see dead people. (The Sixth Sense, 1999)  Article in Breitbart News documenting all the people the Clintons allegedly murdered.

#48  Well, nobody’s perfect.  (Some Like It Hot, 1959)  Standard Paul Ryan line following each outrageous Trump statement.

#49  It’s alive!  It’s alive!  (Frankenstein, 1931)  Establishment Republicans on the night of July 19 when Trump secures the party’s nomination.

Stay tuned for Part II.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

 

Charles Foster Kane or John Doe?

 

It should come as no surprise Donald Trump’s favorite movie is the 1941 Orson Wells classic Citizen Kane. In a 1998 review, critic Roger Ebert opens with the following.

“I don’t think any word can explain a man’s life,” says one of the searchers through the warehouse of treasures left behind by Charles Foster Kane. Then we get the famous series of shots leading to the closeup of the word “Rosebud” on a sled that has been tossed into a furnace, its paint curling in the flames. We remember that this was Kane’s childhood sled, taken from him as he was torn from his family and sent east to boarding school.

Wouldn’t it be ironic if the president-elect’s final words are, “Cornwall-on-Hudson,”the site of the military boarding school where his parents sent him at the age of thirteen.

However, 1941 gives us an alternative cinematic analogy of Donald Trump’s rise to power.  In his March 1941 review of Frank Capra’s Meet John Doe, then New York Times movie critic Bosley Crowther describes the title character as:

…a young fellow, a genial and aimless tramp, who is hoaxed into playing the role of a cynical social firebrand for the sake of a newspaper stunt. At first he lolls in luxury while articles ag’in this and that are ghost-written for him and printed in the aggressive, unscrupulous sheet. Then, under the pleasantly romantic influence of his beautiful “ghost,” he goes on the radio with a stirring and encouraging appeal to the “little man.”

If only life was as black and white as these two cinema classics.  Donald Trump is hardly a one-dimensional personality.  Like Charles Foster Kane, he has parlayed his standing as the head of a business empire into a political career.  And a la John Willoughby (Gary Cooper’s character in Meet John Doe), Trump is, to some extent, the creation of ghostwriters such as Tony Schwartz (The Art of the Deal).  Add a pinch of Willie Stark (All the King’s Men) and you’ve got an very mottled concoction.

Though the most obvious comparisons are between the president-elect and the title characters in each of these films, what I find more intriguing is the extent to which  the Trump electoral coalition responded to the populist themes embedded in the three screenplays.  Consider the following .  In Citizen Kane, the protagonist lays out his “declaration of principles.”

I will provide the people of this city with a daily paper that will tell all the news honestly. I will also provide them with a fighting and tireless champion of their rights as citizens and as human beings.

In Meet John Doe, John Willoughby includes the following to explain his emergence as a champion of the people.

If anybody should ask you what the average John Doe is like, you couldn’t tell him because he’s a million and one things. He’s Mr. Big and Mr. Small. He’s simple and he’s wise. He’s inherently honest, but he’s got a streak of larceny in his heart. He seldom walks up to a public telephone without shoving his finger into the slot to see if somebody left a nickel there.

And finally, Willie Stark explains how tragic events triggered his evolution from a self-interested lawyer to the voice of the common person.

Now I’m not gonna lie to ya. He (referring to himself) didn’t start off thinkin’ about the hicks and all the wonderful things he was gonna do for ’em. Naw, naw, he started off thinkin’ of number one. But something came to him on the way. How he could do nothin’ for himself without the help of the people. That’s what came to him. And it also came to him with the powerful force of God’s own lightning back in his home county when the school building collapsed ’cause it was built of politics’ rotten brick. It killed and mangled a dozen kids. But you know that story. The people were his friends because he’d fought that rotten brick. And some of the politicians down in the city, they knew that, so they rode up to his house in a big, fine, shiny car and said as how they wanted him to run for Governor.

Two of these stories end in tragedy.  Willie Stark is assassinated by the brother of the Governor’s mistress.  Charles Foster Kane dies a broken man, morally and spiritually, who is said to have been loved by millions and hated by millions more.  Only John Willoughby emerges unscathed when he acknowledges he has deceived his followers and atones by exposing those who have used him for their own political purposes.

I wish I knew which ending best fits the real-life drama of 2016 and the forthcoming Trump administration. They say life imitates art.  I guess the course of history depends on which masterpieces hang on your walls or which Netflix videos you save to “My List.”

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

 

In Defense of the Electoral College

 

“HOLY COW!” One can only imagine how excited legendary Chicago Cubs announcer Harry Caray would have been after those perennial losers clinched the World Series title on the evening of November 2nd.  After all, it had been ONE HUNDRED EIGHT years.  Quite a streak.

Yet there was a longer streak which was broken in the 21st Century.  On another November night 16 years earlier, George W. Bush became the first successful presidential candidate to lose the popular vote to his opponent in ONE HUNDRED TWELVE years.  (In 1888, Benjamin Harrison won the electoral vote while losing the popular vote to Grover Cleveland by 90,000 votes.)  And just as the Cubbies are favored to win the baseball championship again in the near future, it did not take another century for this to happen again. It now appears Hillary Clinton will have won the 2016 popular vote by as many as two million votes or 1.5 percent of the total ballots cast.

As a result the electoral college has come under attack, particularly among Democrats as their candidate has been on the losing side in 2000 and 2016.  They are not alone.  Before he realized he would be the beneficiary of what appears to be unfair in light of Supreme Court decisions (e.g. Baker v. Carr, 1962) which affirm the principle of “one man, one vote,” president-elect Donald Trump tweeted following the 2012 election, “The electoral college is a disaster for democracy.”

I believe both sides are wrong.  And here is why this year’s outcome is the perfect example why the electoral college makes sense.  Forget the fringe supporters for both candidates. As the county by county returns clearly demonstrate, this election was about rural and exurban voters saying, “We don’t care if a majority of Americans live in metropolitan areas of one million or more residents.  We still matter.”  Although, they were often characterized as “angry,” perhaps better adjectives might be “frustrated” or “unappreciated.”

The media wondered how this would play out post-election if their candidate lost.  Would they accept the outcome?  Would they be marching in the streets?  Would they take up arms?  [NOTE: With the exception of taking up arms, many on the losing end of this election have not accepted the outcome and have taken to the streets.  A perfect example of Miles law, “Where you stand, depends on where you sit.”]  To say this election was volatile is an understatement.

So what does this have to do with the electoral college?  At last count, Hillary Clinton won the popular vote in the State of California by 2.49 MILLION votes, almost a half million votes more than the margin in the national vote.  Just imagine the level of frustration among Trump supporters if one very urban state had marginalized the preferences of 31 other states.  How wise were the founding fathers to see this coming?  But California did not exist in 1789, when delegates to the Constitution convention came up with this concept.  True, but Virginia was the California of their time.  And they realized the dominance of one state threatened the stability of the union.

This is not to say the electoral college process does not have it flaws which need to be addressed.  This first requires differentiating electoral votes from electors.  Two Washington State electors (die-hard Bernie Sanders supporters who were included on the slate of Democratic electors) vowed not to vote for Hillary Clinton when the college convened.  Talk about a violation of “one man, one vote.”  I do not know if this would require a constitutional amendment, but it is time we simplify the system.  I would suggest the authorized chief of elections (often the Secretary of State) merely certify the state totals and announce the recipients of each state’s electoral votes.  Eliminate any possible rogue human factor.

Second, two states (Maine and Nebraska) have chosen to allocate their electoral votes by congressional district.  We have already seen the impact of gerrymandering on Congressional elections.  Here are two examples.  In 2012 in Michigan, the cumulative vote in 14 contests for the House of Representatives was 2.08 million for Republican candidates and 2.33 million for Democrats.  Yet the Michigan delegation consists of NINE Republicans and FIVE Democrats.  The same was true in North Carolina.  In spite of a cumulative margin of plus 80,000 votes for Democratic House candidates, the congressional delegation includes NINE Republicans and FOUR Democrats.  Basing Congressional elections on arbitrary boundaries which change every ten years based on the whims of state legislators or reapportionment commissions is bad enough.  To rely on such a system for electing national offices would be a travesty.

There is no need to throw our the baby with the bath water.  All we need to do is adjust the temperature.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

 

The Wonderful Wizard of ORs

 

The late George Carlin once questioned whether the opening to the TV series The Adventures of Superman starring George Reeves was redundant or contradictory.  Each week, the narrator would remind us:

Yes, it’s Superman, strange visitor from another planet who came to earth with powers and abilities far beyond those of mortal men. Superman, who can change the course of mighty rivers, bend steel in his bare hands. And who, disguised as Clark Kent, mild-mannered reporter for a great metropolitan newspaper, fights a never ending battle for truth, justice and the American way. And now another exciting episode in the adventures of Superman.

Carlin satirically wondered why the phrase “and the American way” was necessary.  He argued there is no need to include it unless the American way is different from truth and justice.  “Wouldn’t it be more correct to say ‘truth, justice or the American way’.”

In the aftermath of Tuesday’s election, the most disappointing aspect for me is not the fact my favored candidate did not win, but the extent to which candidates up and down the ballot, their surrogates and the parties that supported them have become what I would call the “wizards of ORs.” In a previous post, I applauded Trevor Noah, host of The Daily Show, for pointing out you can be pro-police and empathize with the Black Lives Matter movement.  I would like to believe individuals can be atheists/agnostics AND still support freedom of religion.  Or one can honor the Second Amendment AND still question the wisdom of making semi-automatic weapon systems available to the general public.

Policy discussions in the United States used to be about compromise and accommodation.  Ronald Reagan once said, “If I can’t get 100 percent of what I want, I’ll settle for 80 percent.”  Today, those who don’t get 100 percent, take their ball and go home.  Imagine what sports would be like if owners, coaches and players shared that attitude.  Any time an official’s call went the wrong way, teams would retreat to the locker room.  Game over. And who suffers the most.  Not the owners, coaches and players, as they likely will still get paid regardless (just as public officials do even when they do not do their jobs).  The real victims are the fans who no longer get the value they thought the paid for.

In my opinion, the response to Tuesday’s outcome by many public officials on both sides of the aisle has been disheartening.  Instead of becoming the ‘wizards of ANDs” and providing the leadership needed to re-unite a divided country, they are still hiding behind the curtain, manipulating the smoke and mirrors to demonstrate the false power they wield in lieu of genuine leadership.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

 

America’s “Basial” Divide

 

The Wednesday morning quarterbacking is in full swing.  Journalists and pundits are pontificating what each campaign did right or wrong and the challenges facing both major political parties.  Being a political junkie, that was my first instinct.  This morning I woke up with a different perspective.

This shift in mindset comes not from the questions posed the day after the election, but those raised during the campaign.  Here are just a few.

  • Can Hillary Clinton hold the Obama coalition together?
  • Are there enough disenchanted white voters to secure a Trump victory?
  • In reference to various campaign decisions, is this strategy or event designed to solidify the candidate’s base or broaden it?

Tuesday night, analysts, using data from the exit polls, addressed these queries and mostly confirmed the conventional wisdom that we are a nation divided by gender, race and age.

Then, as they always do following a contentious election, commentators quickly shifted to the topic of “healing the deep divisions among the American electorate.”  And equally sad, just as THEY always do, the candidates followed the script.  In his acceptance speech the president-elect said:

Now it’s time for America to bind the wounds of division; have to get together. To all Republicans and Democrats and independents across this nation, I say it is time for us to come together as one united people.

In her concession speech, Hillary Clinton urged the country to come together.

Last night I congratulated Donald Trump and offered to work with him on behalf of our country. I hope that he will be a successful president for all Americans.

What neither candidate did was take responsibility for creating what I have coined “the basial divide” during the campaign.  Microsoft Word does not recognize the term “basial.”  It is a derivative of the non-word “basism,” which, draws on the definition of racism.

belief or doctrine that inherent differences among various political groups determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one’s own political affiliation is superior and has the right to dominate others or that a particular political group is inferior to the others.

Race, gender and age are accidents of birth.  How individuals in these three categories migrate to one party or another’s base of support is the result of political discourse.  Therefore, it is the message from each candidate or party, in hopes of solidifying its base, which creates the political and cultural divide.

For argument sake, imagine each presidential candidate followed their post-election call for unity during the campaign.  What would it have required?  Please keep in mind, I am going to use extreme examples to make this point.

Donald Trump could have held a campaign event in a field of migrant workers instead of on the border.  He could have explained how undocumented workers are exploited when employers know they can pay lower wages without fear of their employees filing complaints with the Department of Labor.  He could have asked his supporters, “How many of you, given the opportunity to spend eight hours a day in the sun picking strawberries, would take that job?” At the Republican convention, they could have shown a video of the nominee’s encounter with migrant workers.  Trump could have asked, “Shouldn’t a GREAT AMERICA reward a hard day’s labor with a fair wage?”

Hillary Clinton could have shown how her theme of economic justice applied to all Americans.  She could have said, “I do not condone what the Bundy’s did in Nevada and Oregon, but I understand it.  If I were a rancher, I’d wonder why government subsidizes private ventures, but charges me fees if my cattle graze on public lands. STRONGER TOGETHER means we have to put ourselves in other people’s shoes, even when we disagree with them.”

Or how climate change is about more than rising oceans or more violent storms.  Clinton could have said, “Farmers in the grain belt should be just as concerned about the impact of rising temperatures on their assets as beachfront property owners on the two coasts.”  I don’t recall seeing  a Democratic rally in the heartland or a television spot which made that point.

Why are these scenarios unrealistic?  Because bringing America together is hard.  Because it requires taking the time to make well-reasoned and well-articulated arguments as opposed to campaign slogans or thirty second sound bites. Because candidates would rather spend their time in arenas, being cheered by thousands of supporters who were always going to vote for them (i.e. their base).  Because they fear being rejected if they venture into hostile political territory.

downloadI believe there is a chance to re-unite Americans.  I believe this because I saw it happen.  And the individual who helped me see this is often characterized as one of the most divisive figures in national politics, filmmaker Michael Moore.  On October 6, he traveled to Wilmington, Ohio, an overwhelmingly Republican town which was devastated when DHL shuttered a major regional processing center.  He called his one-man show, “Michael Moore in Trumpland.”  For 73 minutes, he talked with a largely hostile audience.  He empathized with their economic plight and their fears.  And then made the case why Hillary Clinton’s policies would do more for them than Donald Trump’s.

We’ll never know what impact Moore’s experiment had.  After all, there were only a few hundred people in attendance.  It does not matter.  What does matter is there was no name-calling or violence and after the performance, Moore joined many in the audience at a neighboring bar.  Next election cycle, maybe the candidates should try this.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP