With so many presidential elections behind us, one would think that we have seen it all. The 2000 “hanging chad” debacle, the embarrassment of “Dewey Defeats Truman,” and the 31 days of William Henry Harrison’s term before his death certainly represent a wide array of unusual outcomes.
Yet the 2016 event looks even more bizarre. The outgoing president’s fiercest rival from his first primary campaign is now his party’s nominee, with his exuberant blessing. Her opponent is a rough-hewn billionaire who seems to gain support no matter how many people he rubs the wrong way.
Historical records held by the Raab Collection give us a lot of insight into how things have gone in the past. They show us that there may have been nastier campaigns, but the bizarre demographics of each candidate’s base of support is very unusual indeed even in this historical perspective. Longtime Democrats are siding with Donald Trump, while staunch Republicans fear his recklessness and are taking up with Hillary Clinton.
What are the truly unique characteristics to watch for as we move toward November? Here are some thoughts.
Spirited Debates
There is absolutely no telling what could happen as Clinton and Trump face off in the next two debates. It is widely believed that Clinton won the first debate. Her extensive political experience trumped his brash interruptions.
Trump might do just about anything, hoping to bait his opponent into wandering off script and making a “basket of deplorables” type of statement that he can use against her.
This imbalance of political experience should drive a very interesting debate.
The End of Media Neutrality
It’s well-known that Fox News has a right leaning while CNN is more liberal. But Trump’s ongoing battle with Megyn Kelly reveals a whole new world of possibilities. Direct attacks on moderators, reporters, and anchors have been historically rare, so if Trump continues to push this strategy, it could be very interesting and certainly unique.
The impact so far has been a curious attempt by some in the media to provoke Trump into drawing them into the fray, with soaring ratings to result, of course. But so far only the Kelly tiff has had staying power.
Bizarre Funding
For years, the standard has been for political action committees and corporate donations to be a major part of a campaign’s funding. Once again, Clinton represents the old way of doing things as she follows the model. But with Trump’s independent wealth, his run for the Oval Office has been as unique financially as it has been in other ways.
Should Trump win, his lack of financial indebtedness to supporters could make his appointments for the cabinet and other high posts a very unique mix. Could he load up with more-qualified people instead of repaying political favors? There is no way to be sure, but the lack of quid pro quo could be interesting.
Every election has its quirks, but the 2016 edition could break the mold. Whatever happens, it’s already been a very different campaign.