Every election is a negotiation, usually cross-cultural, between a candidate and the electorate. Succeeding in that negotiation means understanding what the electorate wants, which means understanding how symbols that surround a candidate are received and interpreted.<\/p>\n
One of the marvels to many of this election is that a man who is garishly rich, stiffs his contractors, and pays no taxes could be elected a populist hero of the economically disenfranchised. And that Trump voters would reject\u00a0Ms Clinton for being too rich!<\/p>\n
Actually it makes sense. Wealth has never been a big issue for Americans. Almost all of us \u00a0want to be wealthy. Our daily doses of television inevitably show us an American reality that is purely aspirational. Even \u201cworking class\u201d families on TV live in upper middle class houses and do things that most working class people can\u2019t afford. \u201cThe Honeymooners,\u201d or the later \u201cAll In the Family\u201d? Those were<\/i> the days. We\u2019re all about \u201cLifestyles of the Rich and Famous.\u201d<\/p>\n
And that is what Trump symbolized: what a lot of Americans think they would or could have and do\u00a0if they won the lottery. And what they can experience once in a great while for a weekend if they max out the credit card.<\/p>\n
Ms Clinton\u2019s wealth looked very different, and therefore had a different symbolic value. It wasn\u2019t a garish gold \u201cC\u201d on a hotel or golf course. It was a quiet voice in a corporate board room, the rubbing of shoulders at Davao or Jackson Hole, or the real \u201call in the family\u201d of Fortune 100 CEOs, sovereign wealth fund managers, prime ministers, and a plutoflock of oil sheiks and dictators. It was wealth hidden and thoroughly mixed with the invisible political\u00a0power that serves mysterious ends through even more mysterious means. And thus it came to symbolize the hidden\u00a0corruption at the heart of the political system. Bernie Sanders played on that, but didn\u2019t manage to win, leading to even more questions about who was running the game.<\/p>\n
Trump may not have released his tax returns, but he appeared to be as clear as glass. Ms Clinton\u2019s returns were there for all to see, yet pointed in a thousand ways at an alternative universe lived behind closed doors.<\/p>\n
Trump\u2019s wealth made him look smart \u2013 a guy that could play the game with the odds stacked against him. The Clintons have the kind of\u00a0wealth that makes them look like they<\/i> own the casino. Trump looked like a player. Clinton looked like she printed\u00a0the deck and shuffled the cards.<\/p>\n
Of course all of this is perception, based on the symbols visible to the eye of the voter.<\/i> But that is what counted in this election.<\/em> I note in closing that in the days after the election the US stock markets have risen by several percent. Apparently the oligarchs who run our economy feel a Trump win is a symbol of a\u00a0pretty good economic future.<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Every election is a negotiation, usually cross-cultural, between a candidate and the electorate. Succeeding in that negotiation means understanding what the electorate wants, which means understanding how symbols that surround a candidate are received and interpreted. One of the marvels to many of this election is that a man who is garishly rich, stiffs his […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":965,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,5],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1635","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-christian-identity","category-home-page"],"yoast_head":"\n