At no time in U.S. history was globalist rule challenged more than in the 2016 presidential election, in both major political parties. Democratic enthusiasm clearly went to Bernie Sanders (not an establishment candidate) and not to long-term establishment candidate Hillary Clinton, who is believed to have used the DNC to eliminate opponent Sanders who had three times the crowd attendance. Had the race been fair, it is plausible the Democrats would not have had a globalist candidate.
Republicans kept electing more Republicans to undo the perceived blunders of the Barack Obama administration but nothing ever changed. They had a long list of things that should have been corrected as Republicans retook, first the House of Representatives and then the U.S. Senate, but they weren't. The Republican base felt betrayed and establishment politicians, justly blamed, became toxic to voters. That is why Jeb Bush, John Kasich, Chris Christie and Mike Huckabee were not able to get traction despite vastly outspending those not considered the establishment. They were viewed as the problem.
Immediately, outsiders -- those said not to be the establishment -- skyrocketed in the polls, notably Donald Trump and Ben Carson. Ted Cruz was able to rise because the establishment hated him even more than Trump and he was seen by the Republican base as one loyal to the Constitution. Rubio was seen as having sold his soul to the establishment and Democrats on immigration as a member of the so-called "gang of eight" and thereafter could not be trusted. Polls soon showed Donald Trump and Ted Cruz, collectively holding almost 60 percent of the expected voters, as they were seen as the most believable and likely to make the changes demanded by the Republican base. Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina (also an outsider) began to fade.
The globalist establishment media only covers two of the more than 20 political parties in every presidential election that put forward a presidential candidate. Informed voters must get the names of other party candidates from the Federal Election Commission directly, which I have always provided to my students. The establishment picks winners and losers long before public exposure and guides them through the election process to victory by the money and exposure it allocates.
This group has been the most powerful force in elections since Mark Hanna financed William McKinley for president 122 years ago. Payback for the group is its ability to guide the nation as it sees the need, immunity from any negative influences on its financial empires, and market favoritism should it need it. Benefits include being well connected, and the largely secret power it holds over the government and its crowned candidates.
The crowned 2016 Democratic candidate was Hillary Clinton and had been since 2008. For Republicans, it was Jeb Bush since 2013. Both the establishment and Bush were shocked when Trump entered the race and Bush could not ignite a movement for the reasons cited above. More than $100 million dollars were used to entice a following, to no avail. Jeb returned to Council on Foreign Relations headquarters on Jan. 19, 2016, but could not get additional traction. Nobody in recent presidential elections spent this kind of money as early as he. Nobody was more establishment than Bush and Clinton. They were to be the 2016 presidential contenders. This strategy had always worked; no matter who won the election, the globalists won.
By early November 2015, the moneyed establishment was pulling back from Bush and coronating Marco Rubio. He too flooded the airways with millions in attack ads against Trump to raise his poll numbers, which worked to some extent. Still, Trump supporters dwarfed his numbers and the establishment knew it had to destroy Trump at all costs and by any means. Its media attempted to show Donald Trump as a joke -- certainly not a serious candidate, not a real conservative, a flip-flopper on the issues, anti-women, anti-immigration, insulting to everyone, a braggart, only into himself, least likely to beat Hillary Clinton, only attractive to white males, not in touch with reality with respect to the Middle East and more. Certainly, the constant barrage of but a third of these charges would have easily destroyed previous candidates.
Virtually everything was tried and failed. The establishment conceded that, barring a major misstep by Trump, one of two men, Trump or Cruz (neither owned by them), was going to be the Republican nominee for president. The globalist establishment hated Trump but despised Cruz. But there existed a big difference, Trump, although formerly not a team player for it and a bit of a rogue, could be counted on to make deals to get things done. Cruz could not. For the first time in a century, it would have to work with someone not fully in its camp. But Trump is of the wealthy class, so some of its goals he could be counted on to support.
From that point on, the vilification of Trump by the globalists was non-stop. Still, they managed the media who would keep their "little globalist secret," and felt confident they could make Hillary Clinton the next president anyway -- too confident. Trump removed 16 Republican contenders and won the nomination despite incredible opposition from the globalist-establishment forces in both parties, probably the most opposition in U.S. history. For the first time in a century, the globalists were denied their Republican presidential candidate.
Harold W. Pease, Ph.D., is a syndicated columnist and an expert on the United States Constitution. He has dedicated his career to studying the writings of the Founding Fathers and applying that knowledge to current events. He taught history and political science from this perspective for more than 30 years at Taft College. To read more of his weekly articles, visit www.LibertyUnderFire.org.Editorial on 04/11/2018
Print Headline: Globalists denied their Republican 2016 presidential candidate