The Rejection Election

By Pat Buchanan

Pat Buchanan
Patrick J .Buchanan

USA –  -(Ammoland.com)- With the Iowa caucuses a week away, the front-runner for the Republican nomination, who leads in all the polls, is Donald Trump.

The consensus candidate of the Democratic Party elite, Hillary Clinton, has been thrown onto the defensive by a Socialist from Vermont who seems to want to burn down Wall Street.

Not so long ago, Clinton was pulling down $225,000 a speech from Goldman Sachs. Today, she sounds like William Jennings Bryan.

Taken together, the candidacies of Trump, Sanders, Ben Carson and Ted Cruz represent a rejection of the establishment. And, imitation being the sincerest form of flattery, other Republican campaigns are now channeling Trump's.

This then is a rejection election.

Half the nation appears to want the regime overthrown. And if spring brings the defeat of Sanders and the triumph of Trump, the fall will feature the angry outsider against the queen of the liberal establishment. This could be a third seminal election in a century.

In the depths of the Depression in 1932, a Republican Party that had given us 13 presidents since Lincoln in 1860, and only two Democrats, was crushed by FDR. From '32 to '64, Democrats won seven elections, with the GOP prevailing but twice, with Eisenhower. And from 1930 to 1980, Democrats controlled both houses of Congress for 46 of the 50 years.

The second seminal election was 1968, when the racial, social, cultural and political revolution of the 1960s, and Vietnam War, tore the Democratic Party asunder, bringing Richard Nixon to power. Seizing his opportunity, Nixon created a “New Majority” that would win four of five presidential elections from 1972 through 1988.

What killed the New Majority?

First, the counterculture of the 1960s captured the arts, entertainment, education and media to become the dominant culture and convert much of the nation and most of its elite.

Second, mass immigration from Asia, Africa and especially Latin America, legal and illegal, changed the ethnic composition of the country.

White Americans, over 90 percent of the electorate in 1968, are down to 70 percent today, and about 60 percent of the population.

And minorities vote 80 percent Democratic.

Third, Republicans in power not only failed to roll back the Great Society but also collaborated in its expansion. Half the U.S. population today depends on government benefits.

Consider Medicare and Social Security, the largest and most expensive federal programs, critical to seniors and the elderly who give Republicans the largest share of their votes.

If Republicans start curtailing and cutting those programs, they will come to know the fate of Barry Goldwater.

Still, whether we have a President Clinton, Trump, Sanders or Cruz in 2017, America appears about to move in a radically new direction.

Foreign policy retrenchment seems at hand. With Trump and Sanders boasting of having opposed the Iraq war, and Cruz joining them in opposing nation-building schemes, Americans will not unite on any new large-scale military intervention. To lead a divided country into a new war is normally a recipe for political upheaval and party suicide.

Understandably, the interventionists and neocons at National Review, Commentary, and the Weekly Standard are fulminating against Trump. For many, the Beltway rice bowls are in danger of being broken today.

Second, Republicans will either bring an end to mass migration, or the new millions coming in will bring an end to the presidential aspirations of the Republican Party.

Third, as Sanders has tabled the issue of income equality and wage stagnation, and Trump has identified the principal suspect — trade deals that enrich transnational companies at the cost of American prosperity, sovereignty and independence — we are almost surely at the end of this present era of globalization.

As in the late 19th century, we may be at the onset of a new nationalism in the United States.

A vast slice of the electorate in both parties today is angry — over no-win wars, wage stagnation and millions continuing to pour across our bleeding borders from all over the world. And that slice of America holds both parties responsible for the policies that produced this.

This is what America seems to be saying.

Thus, given the deepening divisions within, as well as between the parties, either an outsider prevails this year, or Balkanization is coming to America, as it has already come to Europe.

For the Sanders, Trump, Cruz and Carson voters, the status quo seems not only unacceptable, but intolerable. And if their candidates and causes do not prevail, they are probably not going to accept defeat stoically, and go quietly into that good night, but continue to disrupt the system until it responds.

Unlike previous elections in our time, save perhaps 1980, this appears to be something of a revolutionary moment.

We could be on the verge of a real leap into the dark.

Where are we going? One recalls the observation of one Democrat after the stunning and surprise landslide of 1932:

“Well, the American people have spoken, and in his own good time, Franklin will tell us what they have said.”

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of the new book “The Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority.

  • 5 thoughts on “The Rejection Election

    1. i DO NOT THINK WE CAN WAIT TILL THE NEXT ELECTION TO PUT THE BRAKES ON WHERE THIS COUNTRY IS HEADED. I THINK TRUMP MIGHT WORK FOR US BECAUSE HE HAS DONE WELL IN BUSINESS AND OUR COUNTRY NEEDS TO BE RAN LIKE A BUSINESS. THE HANDOUTS AND FREE STUFF NEED TO BE CURTAILED. ILLEGALS STOPPED, PUT ON A IMPORT TAX THAT WILL LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD. LOWER THE CORPORATE TAX AND BRING BACK INDUSTRIES TO THIS COUNTRY. I THINK TRUMP WILL DO THIS AND MORE. WE CANT TAKE MORE OF OBAMA’S POLICIES AND THATS WHAT WE WILL HAVE WITH HILLARY.

    2. Thank you again Mr. Buchanan. This is the craziest of political and social times that I have seen since 1967. Something has to give. I will personally be dismayed and embarrassed for Mr. Trump to win and represent us to the world. I hope we have a third party emerge from this increasing division of political beliefs. I can no longer embrace either the Democratic or Republican Party as they are both now extremist in their ideology. It will be interesting to see if we have a viable middle ground party emerge. Then to see if the Republican party dies as a result of the further splitting of voter base. As you so plainly stated the voter base for Democrats continue to grow.
      Many followers will disagree but I think that a Trump Presidency dooms the Republican party. A Sanders victory will strengthen the Republicans if they can bring forth a more mainstream candidate in the next election.

    3. Yakkity Schmakitty, bla bla blah. It all boils down to the fact that the “party system” only exists to give the people a sense of choice where there is none.
      Consider the constant degradation of American rights and attacks on the US Constitution. The continual addition of needless and useless new laws that create victimless crimes and feed a criminal prison corporation. Meanwhile other laws exist on the books that are not being enforced. You KNOW like the whole illegal alien invasion dilemma that most every politician turns their head on. The Cloward – Piven Strategy is in full swing and nation destruction for the NWO is right on track.
      Meanwhile 43 states reported MASSIVE voter fraud and the elected criminal remains in office..

      THAT IS A SURE SIGN THE SYSTEM IS BROKEN….

    4. Dear Sir or Madam:

      RE: Obama’s latest executive decision on gun control

      I was reading an online newsletter called GunsAmerica, and the author Max Slowik brought up some very troubling information about Obama’s latest gun control executive decision. Redefining what a gun dealer is is not the most insidious and draconian facet of Obama’s latest effort. Please read the following excerpt from the article, and my comments which will follow.
      Federal Lawsuit Filed Against Gun Control Executive Orders
      by MAX SLOWIK on JANUARY 20, 2016
      The Freedom Watch is also challenging the lawsuit’s new standards for “prohibited person,” also on grounds of vagueness. The executive orders tap health records from the Social Security Administration to expand the list of prohibited persons beyond the scope of the original law.
      People who have been “adjudicated as a mental defective” are already considered prohibited persons and may not purchase firearms.
      “Obama is changing under such background checks a person prohibited from buying a gun from one formally adjudicated by a court of law to be mentally incompetent to anyone who — vaguely — has a mental health ‘issue,’” added Klayman. “Thus, the due process protection of a court ruling is being lost. Obama ordered the Social Security Administration to report to the firearm background check database people on disability payments for reasons that may indicate ‘issues’ of mental health.”
      “Obama is working to require doctors to report those with (poorly defined) issues. Everyone living in the same household may lose the right to possess a gun.”
      As you can see Obama is undermining the right to be innocent until proven guilty. He is also tarring everyone who has a mental challenge with the same brush. There are a wide variety of mental challenges having a wide range of effects from very mild to very serious. It is extremely unfair to infringe upon a person’s second amendment rights because of something they can’t help especially if they are doing everything they are supposed to do to manage their challenge. For example, I have been diagnosed bipolar. I take my medication every day, morning and evening like I’m supposed to. This condition did not stop me from serving in the United States Navy during Vietnam and later in the reserves during the latest war from 2001 through 2003 and retiring. This condition also did not stop me from teaching seventh and eighth graders language arts for 30 years and retiring. Please do something to bring this facet of the problem to light; because, it will be very difficult to change it back once the horses have left the barn so to speak.
      Yours truly,
      Wesley Tilson

    Leave a Comment 5 Comments