At the risk of famous last words: it will be Hillary.
For safety’s sake, it has to be. Unless there is a catastrophe, it will be.
But whither the withered Donald? And what of what he advocated?
To think about that future, we have to reflect on the recent past.
When we look back on his early candidacy, when quite likely Donald Trump was dipping his toe into politics to do no more than advance his business interests, what he tried to defy was what others with his background have found they could not: politics is not business and cannot be treated as one.
True, the two worlds have some similarities. In both, your history is your currency. Your public record of statements and activities is the foundation of what people understand about you in politics, just as your track record of leading and operating is the foundation of what employees and the market understand about you in business.
But what Trump tested and clearly did not respect was the long tail – the intrinsic digital permanence – of the public record.
Everything he had said and done was no longer an unrecorded and excusable exigency of moment-by-moment management but an embedded subject for the less forgiving lens of politics.
What he said and did in business might have been horrifying to his colleagues and competitors, but it was definitely not tolerable in public life.
The braggadocio and bluster of the baron will at times translate into the fire-breathing and fierce politician, but mostly the public recoils when, even in authenticity, humility is absent. Which is partly why the bravest political positions can be milquetoast in business.
Which isn’t to say the world of politics is without its business-like problems: with a lack of transparency comes a lack of trust, with an incessant change of positions comes a lack of integrity, with fear-mongering comes uncertainty, and with any personal attack comes the invitation to reply in kind. Business leaders know this, so it is baffling why candidate Trump didn’t.
In these final days of his campaign, Trump has to know his flouting of the game has hurt his brand worldwide. On balance, politics has not been good for business.
If there is good to come of his candidacy, it is in swallowing hard and setting aside some of the extreme – you know, the sexist, racist, viscerally derogatory stuff – to appreciate the value of some of the other elements. Have to admit, that asks a lot.
For instance, he has been correct (as has Bernie Sanders) in identifying a political system clearly off course in serving the interests of its people and captive of layered special interests that strangle and restrict effective public policy. The political dysfunction has contributed to disparity in America, and while it is questionable if Trump deserved to be a poster boy of public angst as he held the mirror to America about this, he had a point in identifying it.
Even if he took advantage of a tax code that grants generous breaks to the wealthy, even in failure, he was right to call it out and call for reform.
What is worrisome, even in jubilation of his failure, is what happens to those who believe they have not benefited in recent times, who want America to do more to protect their economic well-being, and who blame their plights on globalization. These people will be back if Hillary Clinton doesn’t figure them out.
In her candidacy, Clinton has acquiesced to protectionism to curry voters who fear job loss or who point the finger at villains abroad – something she borrowed from Sanders and never abandoned to differentiate herself from Trump. In so doing, she has set back the Trans-Pacific Partnership and even planted some doubt about the sustainability of the North American Free Trade Agreement.
In her presidency – and let’s assume she’s getting one – a task is to heed the signal and not the noise of a country that is uncomfortable with excesses in success.
Kirk LaPointe is Business in Vancouver’s vice-president of audience and business development.
