The Tribune

IN 1962, the movie, The Manchurian Candidate, spurred fears that far outlasted its popularity and gave rise to a remake in 2004 starring Denzel Washington. The title character in the original version was played by Laurence Harvey, and through hypnosis and other means his mother (Angela Lansbury) and other sinister characters manipulate him to favour the interests of an unfriendly foreign power.

Laurence Harvey was running for President of the United States.

Watching and listening to Donald Trump reminded me of The Manchurian Candidate. At least the movie’s premise provides a plausible explanation for the Republican standard-bearer’s otherwise inexplicable admiration of Russian President Vladimir Putin and the autocratic means he is using in an attempt to return his sprawling but economically faltering nation to the superpower relevance it enjoyed for decades until the last decade of the 20th century.

Most Americans who pay attention to foreign policy cannot otherwise fathom how Trump could view Putin so favourably.

Similarly, Trump’s outrageous behaviour in the three debates with Democrat Hillary Clinton has reportedly turned off white women voters in big city American suburbs who might well otherwise be inclined to vote for the GOP. Persistent reports of his adolescent talk and behaviour toward women during his sexual heyday 20 years ago, and since, haven’t helped with females, either. Nor has his patent disrespect for his opponent.

The list goes on. Immigrants, minorities, union workers, gun-control advocates and others have found Trump’s outrageousness to be offensive. At last count, a grand total of three insignificant American newspapers has endorsed Trump. Republican leaders and office holders are hastening to distance themselves from their candidate whose flailing campaign threatens to dismantle solid GOP majorities in both houses of Congress.

All of the above notwithstanding, the 2016 Presidential election was ripe for the Republicans to win. And the core support for Trump, which is estimated at about 35 per cent of the US electorate, has perfectly good reasons for supporting its maverick candidate.

Whether you believe the Great Recession of 2008-9 was hastened by a too-cozy relationship between Bill Clinton’s White House and Wall Street in the 1990s or the willfully lazy regulatory disinterest of George W Bush’s administration in the 2000s, that scary recession’s effects have lingered distressingly for millions of Americans.

Many of these Americans are un- or undereducated white males, and females too. While it is easy to label these voters “Deplorables,” as Hillary Clinton carelessly did, the fact is that they have largely been left behind as better-educated Americans fattened their stock portfolios and otherwise feasted. Trade deals such as Bill Clinton’s NAFTA may well have benefitted the US overall, but there seems little dispute that they have cost American jobs in certain sectors. The irony here is that free trade has been a consistent Republican pillar for so long as anyone can remember. Trump has scored points arguing against it nevertheless.

The Democrats – President Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton in particular – have faced a barrage of criticism of their stewardship of the country and its economy during the past eight years. So too would the Republicans if they had held the White House. That’s why smart money would have favoured a GOP candidate in 2016, until the Republicans nominated someone who cannot get out of his own political way.

Trump’s 35 per cent believe, with reason, that the government in Washington has let them down. As the American ship of state sails resolutely away, they are left adrift in unemployment, poverty and despair. It is reasonable to assume that any Republican candidate would enjoy the support of this 35 per cent. Racism and other prejudice aside, the Democrats can be blamed for the economic hardships of the past eight years simply because they have held the White House.

Add to the 35 per cent the significant numbers of US voters for whom religious and social issues such as abortion are politically paramount. These voters are justifiably disenchanted with the Republican party establishment, which has for decades offered them rhetorical support and delivered to them virtually nothing. For conservative religious voters, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts’ positions on abortion rights and same-sex marriage are tantamount to political treason. Ted Cruz made sense to these voters. Trump cannot disguise his lack of interest in their perspective.

So the Republicans are heading rapidly toward political disaster. The demographic tides in an increasingly diverse America all oppose their particular brand of nativist conservativsm, and they richly deserve their abandonment by religious conservatives whose passionate support has been unrewarded.

Remember Barry Goldwater, back 52 years ago when the Manchurian Candidate was released in theatres? Trump may well be buried under an electoral avalanche of comparable proportions.

– By John S. Ford, diplomat, retired, former Deputy Chief of Mission (1993-1994), American Embassy, Nassau.