The Women’s March was politics as usual, but…

The Women’s March in Washington D.C and associated Sister Marches in other cities were the largest protests of President Donald Trump’s inauguration.  If the marches are to be anything more than a onetime spectacle it will require more than rallying committed constituency groups that are disappointed and disgruntled with the election result.

The March organizers partnered with nearly a thousand left leaning constituency groups (e.g. NARAL, Planned Parenthood, NRDC, Moveon.org, Transgender Law Center, AFSCME, AFL-CIO, and Free the Nipple) in an organized effort to disparage and protest Donald Trump’s inauguration.

The “Unity Principles” of the March were the staples of the left’s coalition focusing on abortion rights, LGBTQIA rights, open borders, race and organized labor.

The protests were concentrated in metropolitan areas of Blue dominance where Hillary Clinton won by extreme margins (e.g. Boston 85%, Washington D.C. 90%, NYC 79%, San Francisco 85%, Chicago 84%, Austin, TX 66%).  One should not be surprised that large crowds could be mustered to protest the election result in these heavily Democratic strongholds.

Economic headwind for Trump

The President of the United States has far less power over the economy than most assume.  Blaming or applauding administrations for economic performance during their administrations is largely misplaced.  The Federal Reserve and energy costs have a far greater impact and are largely outside the control of the president.

President Barrack Obama entered office in 2009 at the precipice of an economic collapse.  By a range of measures the economy was declining as banks failed, housing collapsed, stocks tanked, GDP declined and unemployment rose from 4.5% to nearly 10%.   By the end of the Obama Administration stocks are setting records, GDP has risen (though at a slow pace) and unemployment is below 5%.

Drilling into the details, things are not as rosy as those indicators suggest (e.g. national debt at $20 trillion, median incomes sluggish, labor participation sank to 1970 levels, etc.), but things are measurably better economically than they were at the beginning of 2009.  The credit for surviving the crisis and the improved economic state (and the blame for the negatives) can only marginally be ascribed to Obama.

Thank you Russia

According to President Obama and the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) a foreign government penetrated presidential campaign computers and stole files and emails.  The method used was spear phishing in which a harmless appearing email is sent with an attached file that, if opened by a user, installs software that gains access to the network in which the computer is connected.  The foreign government used the information obtained not only to gather information, but to influence U.S. policy.

This didn’t happen in 2016.  It happened in 2008.  Both the Obama and McCain campaigns were penetrated by China in the same manner used by Russia in the 2016 campaigns.

The two events are not fully alike.  In 2016 only one Party was successfully penetrated though attempts were made against both.  The Russians released their take to the world through WikiLeaks and other paths while the Chinese used the information privately – boldly confronting Senator John McCain about a letter he wrote to the president of Taiwan that they stole through the penetration.

The intentions were also likely somewhat different.  The Chinese do not like to be surprised – just like every other government.  So they make attempts to collect information in nearly every sphere to inform leaders as accurately as possible in order to formulate policy.  It is called espionage and we do plenty of it.

Can the “art of the deal” rein in defense procurement?

President-elect Donald Trump is going to be an unconventional president as he was an unconventional presidential candidate.  Trump has now turned his Twitter account against two of the largest defense contractors – Boeing and Lockheed Martin.  Both are reeling and the defense industry in general must be nervous.

On December 6, 2016 President-elect Donald Trump Tweeted, "Boeing is building a brand new 747 Air Force One for future presidents, but costs are out of control, more than $4 billion. Cancel order!" Boeing stock immediately dipped after Trump’s Tweet and Boeing’s Chief Executive Dennis Muilenburg arranged for a call with Trump.

On December 9, 2016 Trump Tweeted, “The F-35 program and cost is out of control.”  Since then Lockheed Martin and the U.S. Air Force have been jumping through hoops to mitigate any potential immediate damage and begun building their case to present to a newly empowered Trump Administration.

Russian hacking - misplaced outrage

Much of the media is repeating Washington Post reporting that alleges Russia tried to help Donald Trump win the 2016 Presidential election.  As is the standard for our time this issue too has been politicized with Democrats screaming outrage and Republicans skepticism.   The average citizen doesn’t know what to think, but may better be advised to focus their outrage not at Russia, but at U.S. officials that move the country toward greater and greater digital dependence while failing to protect critical infrastructure, financial, economic, and government systems from hacking, cyber theft, and cyber attacks.

The Washington Post reported on December 9, 2016 that a “Secret CIA assessment says Russia was trying to help Trump win White House.”  As the principle drafter of a major National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) for the Intelligence Community while temporarily assigned to the CIA I have detailed personal knowledge of the strengths and weaknesses of Intelligence Assessments.  I am skeptical of the Washington Post report conclusions, but I am not surprised that the Russians may have hacked the DNC.

The real issue that should spark outrage throughout the citizenry is the fact that systematic hacking of critical U.S. systems has been rampant for decades. Our government and political leaders speak of it as if it is inevitable and we are powerless to do anything about it except complain about it when it suits a political purpose.

Hillary is ahead by 2.5 million votes - so what

Donald Trump won the 2016 presidential election. Hillary Clinton lost.  Many who are dissatisfied with the outcome are latching on to immaterial and irrelevant efforts and discussions that will not or cannot change that fact.

One theme says it is unfair or even immoral that Clinton won the national popular vote yet Trump won the election.   Memes appear on social media as Clinton’s national popular vote tally increases to near 2.5 million.   The disgruntled anxiously await the next tally announcement.  The press continues to report the count in daily headlines as if it means something to the election.  It does not.

The United States of America was founded as a representative republic under a federalist system - NOT A DEMOCRACY.  The sovereign states joined in a federation under specific rules embodied in the Constitution.

Don't get in the way of the pendulum!

The surprise result in the 2016 presidential election was driven by a large segment of the citizenry feeling overlooked, ignored, and insulted by the political and media establishment.  The powers-that-be are shocked and surprised, but the common citizen once again demonstrated that power originates from the people.  Our constitution and its framers continue to inspire awe.

Hillary Clinton wished President-elect Trump success and told her supporters they “owe him an open mind and the chance to lead.”  President Obama, while announcing he had invited Trump for a meeting at the White House said, “the peaceful transition of power is one of the hallmarks of our republic” and committed to an orderly and professional transition such as he received from George W. Bush.  Again, the power of our democracy is awe inspiring.

Many are not happy with the outcome of the election.  Their values and expectations for the direction of the country have been disrupted.  Understandably, they are disappointed.  But to expect one’s views and preferences to dominate uninterrupted in a democracy is foolhardy.