a couple of weeks ago, i wrote a mostly facetious article about six events that could occur to flip the polls in favor of donald trump over hillary clinton, and then i assessed how much each would matter. no single occurrence, apart from the preposterously unlikely event of barack obama endorsing trump, seemed to have a ton of power on its own. non-silly scenarios included the release of new and questionable clinton e-mails, a month of passable behavior from trump, and a serious health setback for clinton. what the column failed to consider, however, was the power of a few of these incidents occurring at the same time. we<u+2019>ve now seen new unfavorable e-mail stories (this was inevitable), two weeks of moderately controlled behavior from trump (the previous record had been about two days), and a genuine health issue for clinton (a near-collapse during a 9/11 ceremony). we also saw a small but foolish gaffe from the democratic nominee on friday night, when she dismissed fully half of trump<u+2019>s supporters as part of a <u+201c>basket of deplorables,<u+201d> which she defined as <u+201c>the racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, islamophobic, you name it.<u+201d> at a time when trump should have been further on the defensive, contending with almost comically devastating revelations about his approach to charity (more on that in a bit), he is instead pulling even with his rival. rumors of clinton<u+2019>s failing health<u+2014>which had been easy to write off because they were so obviously orchestrated<u+2014>have become legitimate concerns. there<u+2019>s no use in discussing clinton<u+2019>s e-mails here, at least for now. it<u+2019>s not just that there are plenty of other outlets that will further beat that horse<u+2014>so much so that the washington post editorial page has hollered <u+2019>nuff. it<u+2019>s that nothing we<u+2019>ve learned is likely to move anyone<u+2019>s opinion. the general narrative out there, whether that<u+2019>s fair or not, is that clinton is untrustworthy. the bottom line, in horse-race terms, is this: the drumbeat persists. there<u+2019>s only slightly more use in dwelling on trump<u+2019>s streak of good behavior. yes, he has kept his impulses under control for a couple of weeks, a near-miracle, especially given the rise to power of campaign chief steve bannon, widely viewed as the high priest of full-freak trumping. (while trump has said plenty of recent things to appall the sober-minded, like resurrecting a promise to steal the oil of any place we bother to invade, he has said them calmly, rather than in a way that makes news.) so this is an important development, especially if trump starts to notice how big a friend he has in silence. but one ludicrous outburst changes that, and those used to come at about one per cockcrow, so we<u+2019>ll have to see if he can keep the lull going. unfortunately, the near-collapse of clinton on sunday from feeling <u+201c>overheated<u+201d><u+2014>now diagnosed as pneumonia<u+2014>does call for some sentences. (clinton<u+2019>s line about the <u+201c>basket of deplorables<u+201d> might have caused a blip, but it has now been overshadowed.) the video of her seeming to buckle is terrible and heartrending, and it feels almost indecent to witness. but now the rumors of clinton<u+2019>s failing health<u+2014>which had been easy to write off because they were so obviously orchestrated, with help from rudy giuliani, no less<u+2014>have become legitimate concerns. it<u+2019>s easy to dismiss symptoms like extended coughing, especially with a candidate who must endure countless hours and speeches on the campaign trail. it<u+2019>s impossible to dismiss being overcome at a commemoration for 9/11, the sort of event during which every political bone in your body is telling you, <u+201c>do not make news. do not make news. do not make news.<u+201d>









the setting for clinton<u+2019>s overheating was especially unfortunate. you could argue (and i have) that clinton<u+2019>s health doesn<u+2019>t matter that much, politically, because not many of those who favor her over trump<u+2014>a split viewed by many of clinton<u+2019>s supporters as akin in severity to god versus satan<u+2014>will suddenly prefer him instead. but voters do think a lot about national security, and, if you believe scott adams, <u+201c>when a would-be commander-in-chief withers<u+2014>literally<u+2014>in front of our most emotional reminder of an attack on the homeland, we feel unsafe.<u+201d> is adams right? he might be<u+2014>or at least right enough that two out of a hundred voters could change their minds, which is all that it takes. clinton<u+2019>s health problems are just the latest example of how fortune so often works in favor of trump. they hit just after the publication of a remarkable piece of reporting by *the washington post<u+2019>*s david a. fahrenthold, who revealed that the candidate<u+2019>s record of philanthropy seems to be close to nonexistent. apparently, trump is so pathologically stingy that even organizations to which he claimed to donate had received no money. worse, his own family foundation took in nothing from trump himself after 2008, relying instead on funds from outside donors. even worse: trump illegally redirected $25,000 of the money toward the fund-raising committee of florida attorney general pam bondi, who was deciding on whether to pursue a lawsuit against trump university. even worse than that: donald trump spent $20,000 of his charity<u+2019>s money to purchase a six-foot-tall painting of<u+2014>maybe you guessed it?<u+2014>donald trump. that would all be poor optics, as they say, except that news of clinton<u+2019>s health came in and dwarfed everything. but let<u+2019>s suppose that investigations of trump<u+2019>s charity come back to the fore, as they probably will. they will still have close to zero effect on most trump supporters. those who still believe trump is a benevolent fellow have already had to process several container ships full of cognitive dissonance and don<u+2019>t mind a few tons more. those who believe trump is a non-benevolent fellow<u+2014>and this includes many, probably most, of his supporters, to judge by what they write and say<u+2014>already know he<u+2019>s a rascal. they accept that. the thing is, he<u+2019>s their rascal. for those who find such loyalty hard to understand or accept, recall that trump, in the eyes of many voters, is the only candidate who has bucked the bipartisan globalist consensus and seemed to mean it. just imagine if you were on the left but, among both democrats and republicans running for office, nearly everyone in political life had long expressed indifference to climate change and had views on abortion that ranged from strongly pro-life to weakly pro-life. then along came one candidate who loudly insisted on combatting global warming and fighting for a woman<u+2019>s right to chose. on the minus side, he also said nasty things about coal miners and fetuses, repelling everyone. would you be tempted to forgive him?









this brings us, finally, to a much-discussed recent essay in the claremont review of books called <u+201c>the flight 93 election,<u+201d> written by one <u+201c>publius decius mus.<u+201d> decius<u+2014>who writes as if he were born in 1850, meaning he was probably born well after 1980<u+2014>is one of those intellectuals who, because of trump<u+2019>s positions on immigration, trade, and war, forgive trump for his many sins. the use of flight 93 is an allusion, of dubious taste, to the hijacked plane in which passengers heroically charged the cockpit on 9/11<u+2014>the point being that trump versus clinton is possible death versus guaranteed death. <u+201c>yes, trump is worse than imperfect,<u+201d> decius writes. <u+201c>so what? we can lament until we choke the lack of a great statesman to address the fundamental issues of our time.<u+201d> decius has not been alone in his mind-set. trump supporters know he<u+2019>s a uniquely risky candidate, but they make the case for gambling on him all the same<u+2014>no matter the poor track record of huge political rolls of the dice (our recent wars come to mind). they feel things are very bad, and many americans agree. this is why trump is again pulling even with hillary clinton. unfortunately, we understand one another less and less across this divide. one side says, <u+201c>i know how bad you think things are out there, but you have no idea how bad trump is.<u+201d> the other side says, <u+201c>i know how bad you think trump is, but you have no idea how bad things are out there.<u+201d> it<u+2019>s a conversation designed to fail, leaving only hardened factions. all that remains, at this point, is to wait and count up. the polls, while technically within the margin of error, still favor clinton. yet the energy, on balance, seems to favor trump. even when john mccain briefly led obama in 2008, he never attracted swooning and feverish supporters, at least not when he wasn<u+2019>t addressing a hospital. obama did, and trump does. many americans seem to want an excuse to vote for him, and the rise of bannon seems, ironically, to be leading to a more controlled candidate. if he keeps cool and collected during the debates, even if he calls for plundering the globe<u+2019>s energy supplies, he probably comes out ahead. so no one can relax anymore. on the plus side, we<u+2019>ll enjoy the extra oil. full screenphotos: the art of the donald: alison jackson pictures trump<u+2019>s <u+201c>me time<u+201d> the torch will be passed, and a new leader must be capable of gripping it securely. will he prove equal to the challenge? as commander in chief, would the candidate use military force responsibly<u+2014>and tastefully? above all, success in the oval office requires an ability to sit still for long hours of exacting prep work. america needs a leader who won<u+2019>t flinch under fire, whether literal, metaphoric, or tonsorial. there is not a black america or a white america or a creamsicle-hued america (waterproof and evenly applied). there is only a united states of america. when the candidate looks in the mirror, a president should stare back. with newfound confidence, he is now ready to fill lincoln<u+2019>s mittens.
sorry, america, but trump can actually win
noauthor