If You Choose to Support Trump in Part, You Are Choosing to Support “The Full Catastrophe”
Written by: Joe Morris Doss
David Duke was running hard for the Senate. The Louisiana media was following his every move, reporting all the juicy controversies that popped up on a daily basis, and making him the center of attention for the electorate. At one point Duke offered a proposal that many, even activists who opposed him with great passion, found relatively plausible. It had nothing to do with white supremacy or racism; it actually seemed downright innocuous to most observers. The buzz was that it might even be considered valid and certain politicians on the opposite side were beginning to consider how being able to support something Duke proposed might be good politics. One of the people working to elect Duke’s opponent was Kenneth Duncan, Treasurer of the State of Louisiana and President of the National Association of State Treasurers. At a certain juncture, Duncan found him self cornered by reporters who were asking if he was going to give the proposal his imprimatur.
“Have you read what Duke has to say about it? Will you be able to go along with it?” Duncan replied without hesitation: “I don’t have to read anything he writes. I only need to see whose name is there. I am not going to support the political standing and power of a David Duke by supporting him on anything. He is too toxic to touch.”
That made a lot of sense to me. It was not until Duke was sufficiently isolated by colleagues who would not play ball with him that he finally disappeared into the background.
Then suddenly late this spring, he was on every national news channel announcing his support for Donald Trump. Trump’s response was utterly revealing. Trump refused to distance himself from Duke until the coded signals of racism had been duly received and recorded. It is legitimate to speculate that Trump’s posturing about Duke helped move him along the path to presumptive nominee of the Republican Party.
These now are days when a lot of jockeying is taking place among Republicans, seeking positions that might allow them to have their cake and eat it too. Many are pointing to certain aspects of the Trump candidacy that they can support while acknowledging with long faces that the decision as a whole is problematic. One approach of “Vichy Republicans” – the ones who choose to go along with the take over and occupation of their political party – is to try to distinguish between those issues and areas of governance on which they may be able to support him and the things about which they want to disassociate.
Let’s be clear, if a voter or a politician supports Trump on any one of his ideas, assertions, accusations, proposals, and promises, — his program — that person is supporting all of what will happen if he becomes President.
If it troubles one that Muslims will be blocked from coming to the land first founded on the desire for freedom of religion,
if one would rather not see a wall against Mexicans,
if it causes concern that women will have a leader who is so an obviously a misogynist,
if it distresses voters to realize that the word of a President Trump would not be trustworthy or even to be taken seriously and that when he speaks he will be casually ruthless,
if it is problematic for a President to be lazy and ignorant about “the what” and “the how-to” of government,
if it is uncomfortable to put your life and those of your children and families in Trump’s hands after being warned about his plans for nuclear proliferation and the inevitable use of nuclear arms – by a range of countries,
Then, please be aware that you will be responsible for all of this – and so much more – that the candidate has openly exposed.
The person who chooses to support Trump because she or he can support him in part? That person becomes responsible for the whole!