Published on Alternet (http://www.alternet.org)
Home > Why Right-Wing Oligarch Charles Koch Doesn't Seem That Concerned
About a Hillary Presidency
________________________________________
Why Right-Wing Oligarch Charles Koch Doesn't Seem That Concerned About a
Hillary Presidency
By Charles J. Reid, Jr. [1] / Huffington Post [2]
April 25, 2016
On Sunday, April 24, billionaire Charles Koch - by some estimates the
ninth-wealthiest person in the world - gave an interview to ABC News. It
was, I must confess my grudging respect, brilliant political theater. Koch
struck a high-minded pose where Donald Trump was concerned. He was
profoundly disillusioned with Trump's many personal attacks on opponents and
on the press. He found Trump's proposal to create a national registry for
Muslims "monstrous" and "reminiscent of Nazi Germany."
Nor was Koch finished. He agreed that the "system is rigged" in favor of the
wealthy. He conceded that the tax code subsidized the rich. He even
acknowledged that his business has been the recipient of "corporate
welfare." To the barricades! Charles Koch has joined the new left! Maybe he
has been reading Thomas Piketty.
Koch still had more to say. The topic arose: Who was the more disappointing
president, the interviewer asked, George W. Bush or Barack Obama? Koch did
not want to make the comparison. He preferred comparing George W. Bush to
Bill Clinton. Bush was "a fine person who tried to do the right thing," Koch
suggested, but he was in over his head. His invasion of Iraq was
ill-advised. And the size of government increased substantially on his
watch.
No, Koch suggested, the better comparison was George W. Bush and Bill
Clinton. There was much, Koch said, that he found appealing in Clinton's
presidency. Especially in the area of government regulation and federal
spending, Bill Clinton was good for business. When asked about Hillary
Clinton, Koch said it was "possible that another Clinton would be better
than another Republican" although he insisted that Hillary Clinton would
have to govern differently from her "rhetoric."
Why this interview, and why now? There are at least four possible answers to
that question. I shall move from the most to the least cynical. First, most
cynically, Koch might wish to damage Hillary Clinton's standing with
Democratic voters. The Democratic primary, after all, is still ongoing, and
Bernie Sanders is still polling well nationally. He is not likely to win the
Democratic nomination, but a string of late primary victories would leave
Clinton in a weakened position. Huff Post Pollster shows Hillary Clinton
with a single-digit lead over Sanders in the California primary. Imagine the
havoc if Sanders prevailed. Surely, Charles Koch has pondered the
possibilities.
Second, he may wish to gain some standing on the Democratic side of the
aisle. Koch is a shrewd man and surely he has considered the possibility
that the Republican Party may be in the process of consigning itself to the
wilderness. If that is the case, if the Republican Party is marginalizing
itself, if it will be out of power for a number of years, then one must play
ball with the winning team. He may well have concluded that he has no chance
of attaining his policy objectives with a Republican Party that could spend
years on the sidelines and so he is sounding out opportunities on the other
side.
Third, he may genuinely fear the coming turmoil in the Republican Party.
Certainly, he gave voice to this concern in his interview. Donald Trump has
pandered to the most dangerous passions in America - fear, foreboding,
racism, xenophobia. He has taken a hostile view of the world. He speaks and
acts like a bully, He has no patience for constitutional restraint. World
leaders are rightly alarmed. As are many others. Charles Koch may quite
rightly worry about a Trump ascendancy and what it means for the future of
the Republican Party. If Trump succeeds, if he recreates the Republican
Party in his image and likeness, there will be an exodus from that Party.
Charles Koch may simply be the cutting edge of a coming wave of departures.
Or, he may simply be hedging his bets.
Fourth and finally, Charles Koch may see Hillary Clinton as someone he might
be able to do business with. And so he has decided to send a visible and
public signal through his interview. He stated in the interview that he has
so far refrained from giving money to the leading presidential candidates.
And, he added, he might not. And, furthermore, he indicated that he thinks
highly of Hillary's husband Bill and his policies towards business. Thus,
Koch volunteered some things that might or might not gain him some access in
a future Clinton administration. In the end, Charles Koch, whatever his
protestations, is like most high-end contributors. He wants public policies
consistent with his interests. He wants access. So you open the dialogue
with a favorable television interview.
So, what does this interview mean for Hillary Clinton? If the Republican
Party truly is heading for a crack-up this summer over Donald Trump, Charles
Koch will not be alone among prominent Republicans in opening up a dialogue
with Hillary Clinton. Indeed, in February, Robert Kagan, a neoconservative
publicist of George W. Bush's war on Iraq endorsed Hillary Clinton.
How Clinton handles such endorsements, or even the occasional kind word from
Charles Koch, is important. She already has a problem with perceptions.
After all, she earned millions of dollars in speaking fees from
strategically-situated business groups and has refused to release the
transcripts of those talks. Her vote on the Iraq war in 2003 was a true and
monumental misjudgment. Still, she will likely be the Democratic nominee.
(And I should add that if she is the nominee, I am likely to vote for her
myself).
What is crucial right now is that Clinton must maintain distance between
herself and the Charles Kochs and Robert Kagans of the world. Their policy
prescriptions have been proven wrong for America. The political winds,
furthermore, are moving in a different, more refreshing direction.
Progressivism is catching fire and and it is not likely to be extinguished
anytime soon. This is the reason behind Bernie Sanders' improbable success.
A critical mass of the American public knows that unrestrained capitalism
has failed, just as they understand that Middle Eastern militarism has been
a mistake. Hillary Clinton should avoid associating herself with figures
like Charles Koch or Robert Kagan. She should accordingly be very suspicious
of Charles Koch's blandishments.
Charles J. Reid, Jr., has degrees in canon law and civil law from the
Catholic University of America; and a Ph.D. in medieval history from Cornell
University. He was raised in a union household in Milwaukee, Wisconsin and
graduated from the University of Milwaukee with degrees in classical
languages and history.
Share on Facebook Share
Share on Twitter Tweet
Report typos and corrections to 'corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx'. [3]
[4]
________________________________________
Source URL:
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/why-right-wing-oligarch-charles-koch-d
oesnt-seem-concerned-about-hillary-presidency
Links:
[1] http://www.alternet.org/authors/charles-j-reid-jr
[2] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/
[3] mailto:corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx?Subject=Typo on Why Right-Wing Oligarch
Charles Koch Doesn't Seem That Concerned About a Hillary Presidency
[4] http://www.alternet.org/
[5] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B
Published on Alternet (http://www.alternet.org)
Home > Why Right-Wing Oligarch Charles Koch Doesn't Seem That Concerned
About a Hillary Presidency
Why Right-Wing Oligarch Charles Koch Doesn't Seem That Concerned About a
Hillary Presidency
By Charles J. Reid, Jr. [1] / Huffington Post [2]
April 25, 2016
On Sunday, April 24, billionaire Charles Koch - by some estimates the
ninth-wealthiest person in the world - gave an interview to ABC News. It
was, I must confess my grudging respect, brilliant political theater. Koch
struck a high-minded pose where Donald Trump was concerned. He was
profoundly disillusioned with Trump's many personal attacks on opponents and
on the press. He found Trump's proposal to create a national registry for
Muslims "monstrous" and "reminiscent of Nazi Germany."
Nor was Koch finished. He agreed that the "system is rigged" in favor of the
wealthy. He conceded that the tax code subsidized the rich. He even
acknowledged that his business has been the recipient of "corporate
welfare." To the barricades! Charles Koch has joined the new left! Maybe he
has been reading Thomas Piketty.
Koch still had more to say. The topic arose: Who was the more disappointing
president, the interviewer asked, George W. Bush or Barack Obama? Koch did
not want to make the comparison. He preferred comparing George W. Bush to
Bill Clinton. Bush was "a fine person who tried to do the right thing," Koch
suggested, but he was in over his head. His invasion of Iraq was
ill-advised. And the size of government increased substantially on his
watch.
No, Koch suggested, the better comparison was George W. Bush and Bill
Clinton. There was much, Koch said, that he found appealing in Clinton's
presidency. Especially in the area of government regulation and federal
spending, Bill Clinton was good for business. When asked about Hillary
Clinton, Koch said it was "possible that another Clinton would be better
than another Republican" although he insisted that Hillary Clinton would
have to govern differently from her "rhetoric."
Why this interview, and why now? There are at least four possible answers to
that question. I shall move from the most to the least cynical. First, most
cynically, Koch might wish to damage Hillary Clinton's standing with
Democratic voters. The Democratic primary, after all, is still ongoing, and
Bernie Sanders is still polling well nationally. He is not likely to win the
Democratic nomination, but a string of late primary victories would leave
Clinton in a weakened position. Huff Post Pollster shows Hillary Clinton
with a single-digit lead over Sanders in the California primary. Imagine the
havoc if Sanders prevailed. Surely, Charles Koch has pondered the
possibilities.
Second, he may wish to gain some standing on the Democratic side of the
aisle. Koch is a shrewd man and surely he has considered the possibility
that the Republican Party may be in the process of consigning itself to the
wilderness. If that is the case, if the Republican Party is marginalizing
itself, if it will be out of power for a number of years, then one must play
ball with the winning team. He may well have concluded that he has no chance
of attaining his policy objectives with a Republican Party that could spend
years on the sidelines and so he is sounding out opportunities on the other
side.
Third, he may genuinely fear the coming turmoil in the Republican Party.
Certainly, he gave voice to this concern in his interview. Donald Trump has
pandered to the most dangerous passions in America - fear, foreboding,
racism, xenophobia. He has taken a hostile view of the world. He speaks and
acts like a bully, He has no patience for constitutional restraint. World
leaders are rightly alarmed. As are many others. Charles Koch may quite
rightly worry about a Trump ascendancy and what it means for the future of
the Republican Party. If Trump succeeds, if he recreates the Republican
Party in his image and likeness, there will be an exodus from that Party.
Charles Koch may simply be the cutting edge of a coming wave of departures.
Or, he may simply be hedging his bets.
Fourth and finally, Charles Koch may see Hillary Clinton as someone he might
be able to do business with. And so he has decided to send a visible and
public signal through his interview. He stated in the interview that he has
so far refrained from giving money to the leading presidential candidates.
And, he added, he might not. And, furthermore, he indicated that he thinks
highly of Hillary's husband Bill and his policies towards business. Thus,
Koch volunteered some things that might or might not gain him some access in
a future Clinton administration. In the end, Charles Koch, whatever his
protestations, is like most high-end contributors. He wants public policies
consistent with his interests. He wants access. So you open the dialogue
with a favorable television interview.
So, what does this interview mean for Hillary Clinton? If the Republican
Party truly is heading for a crack-up this summer over Donald Trump, Charles
Koch will not be alone among prominent Republicans in opening up a dialogue
with Hillary Clinton. Indeed, in February, Robert Kagan, a neoconservative
publicist of George W. Bush's war on Iraq endorsed Hillary Clinton.
How Clinton handles such endorsements, or even the occasional kind word from
Charles Koch, is important. She already has a problem with perceptions.
After all, she earned millions of dollars in speaking fees from
strategically-situated business groups and has refused to release the
transcripts of those talks. Her vote on the Iraq war in 2003 was a true and
monumental misjudgment. Still, she will likely be the Democratic nominee.
(And I should add that if she is the nominee, I am likely to vote for her
myself).
What is crucial right now is that Clinton must maintain distance between
herself and the Charles Kochs and Robert Kagans of the world. Their policy
prescriptions have been proven wrong for America. The political winds,
furthermore, are moving in a different, more refreshing direction.
Progressivism is catching fire and and it is not likely to be extinguished
anytime soon. This is the reason behind Bernie Sanders' improbable success.
A critical mass of the American public knows that unrestrained capitalism
has failed, just as they understand that Middle Eastern militarism has been
a mistake. Hillary Clinton should avoid associating herself with figures
like Charles Koch or Robert Kagan. She should accordingly be very suspicious
of Charles Koch's blandishments.
Charles J. Reid, Jr., has degrees in canon law and civil law from the
Catholic University of America; and a Ph.D. in medieval history from Cornell
University. He was raised in a union household in Milwaukee, Wisconsin and
graduated from the University of Milwaukee with degrees in classical
languages and history.
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.
Report typos and corrections to 'corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx'. [3]
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.[4]
Source URL:
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/why-right-wing-oligarch-charles-koch-d
oesnt-seem-concerned-about-hillary-presidency
Links:
[1] http://www.alternet.org/authors/charles-j-reid-jr
[2] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/
[3] mailto:corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx?Subject=Typo on Why Right-Wing Oligarch
Charles Koch Doesn't Seem That Concerned About a Hillary Presidency
[4] http://www.alternet.org/
[5] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B
