Date: Jan 17th, 2017
Motion: THB that Russian hacking determined the outcome of the U.S. presidential election
Role: MP (opp.)
So far, my side of the debate has focused on the technicalities of hacking that seem to have disproven or questioned that the end result could have been hacked. Moreover, the 2nd speaker spoke about the Upper and Lower House being also under the thumb of Republicans. This would upend the idea that the helm would be in other hands, had the most important election not been hacked.
I’m going to take a different approach and claim that Trump would have been elected President in one of the biggest and greatest nations in the world no matter what, or regardless. What’s more, all of my reasons are trying to elude ”substance” or avoid ”weight”. Instead, I’m trying to show through reasons that are shallow, superficial or superstitious that what happened, had to happen.
- The Role of the First Family First of all, when they elect a president, they elect not only a president but a wife or a husband, a child or children, cousins, pets and others to inhabit the White House. In other words, the candidate who has a better assortment under his or her wing to offer has also a better chance of becoming elected. Donald Trump had Balkan-born wife Melania and a batch of grown-up and still growing children to show. Hillary Clinton had her aging husband, ex-president William and a grown-up, married daughter to like. Trump’s people were more numerous and they seemed normal to the casual eye. On the other hand, nobody is quite sure what is the real marital status of the Clinton couple after the controversial trials that marred the older Clinton’s last few years as President. The PR image of the Republican candidate simply weighed more on the scales to the people that chose to vote.
- Triumvirate of Boomer Births If you haven’t noticed, Trump is the 3rd president to come from a (certain) Class of Boomer peers. Bill Clinton (Dem.) was the first 1946 birth as President. He was followed by George W. Bush (Rep.), and now the third guy in the same series is Donald Trump. All of these men have been born in the summer months of 1946 — June, July and August — so their election has something of a silent, unwritten bond underlying it. Why 1946? It’s the first cohort that was born right after the war. Even though the U.S. was not ravaged by the war, the austere spirit after the war may have left its mark on the very first members of the very first postwar generation (in a good way). And in Europe, which suffered from the war much more and endured worse privation afterwards, this cohort has proven equally powerful and vigorous. Boomers have taken much, and they still seem intent to take some more.
As an aside, I want to put forward that it was claimed somewhere the NHL is lopsided when it comes to its player material. Allegedly, those boys and men who were born in the first few months of a given year have a statistical dominance in the League as players and goalmakers. What could cause this? My tentative theory is that because the birthday of these boys is in the winter or beginning spring and while they look forward to it, they are more cozy with a brutal, cold, hostile and masculine environment. This helps them win and put up with pressure. And so it is with these Boomer candidates, with the difference that they were born in an opposite season with a different set of qualities for a different environment.
- TV Trump had been on TV before his election victory, while Clinton had not. If someone had asked me, ”what do you know Donald Trump for?” pre-election, I would have answered that ”he is the guy who gives inexperienced rookies a hard time on the show that’s called Apprentice.” In Finland, the show was called ”Diili” or ’Deal’. Both candidates had a lot of money behind them. But, as much as Lady Clinton fraternized with the moneyed elites of the East and West Coasts, she couldn’t possibly have bought herself as much commercial advertisement time on TV as Donald Trump bought himself in appearing as the bossy host of the said show. That kind of air time doesn’t come cheap. You can have with less expense a full page in a quality newspaper, something Trump had done as early as the 80’s, when he was still only one of the countless tycoons in the U.S.A. So, it seems that the old adage, ”it’s the economy, stupid”, which has been oft-repeated as a form of saying that money, salaries, wages, jobs and job opportunities determine election outcomes, now becomes twisted and turned into ”It’s the Celebrity, stupid.”
These reasons, I think, are enough to dismiss the claims made by the gov. that the election was rigged and the result was a fraud. The roots for this current climate or crisis in politics go deeper. For all that, the coming months will give us more stuff to talk about, as befits the members of a debate society.
Puheen kesto: 5 min 58 sek
Arvio: Kesto jättää tilaa rebuttauksille, joita varmaankin sataa aiheen ”tulenarkuuteen” liittyen. Puhe on hyvin jäsennelty, interaktiivinen ja yllätyksellinen. Se on sisällöllisesti ja muodollisesti mallikelpoinen. Kuten hyvät popkappaleet, puhe rakentui tajunnanvirtana kahden istunnon aikana, yksi kirjaston kahvilassa ja toinen tietokoneella, joina ei ollut lainkaan miettimistaukoja.