Carles Comiskey ran a tight ship: he paid his star players “Shoeless” Joe Jackson and Buck Weaver only $6,000 per year. He refused to launder the White Sox players’ uniforms as often as other teams. In 1919, they were called the “Black Sox.”
If you can’t see the comparison to Donald Trump, you’re blind. This is a man who campaigns for president and spends (literally) nothing on television advertising. His staff is a low-paid group of twenty-somethings working in a dusty corner of the building Trump already owns (and his campaign pays him rent for it). Trump’s jets are rented to the campaign with money he loaned, so he gets paid back with a profit.
In 1919, the only way to play professional baseball was to accept the contract offered by the team who “owned” you. If you refused, you were blackballed from the
race game. This led to cheating for money. Eliot Asinof’s 1963 book “Eight Men Out” details how the White Sox threw the World Series.
Of eight Series games, at least two were thrown, Games Two and Eight. Notably, however, if the Sox had won Games Two and Eight, they–and not the Reds–would have been 1919 World Series champs. There is also evidence that Game Four was thrown and a failed attempt was made to throw Game Three. In general, people who were looking for suspicious plays in the Series found them, while others saw nothing that looked out of line.
For months, we’ve been suspicious. Erick Erickson called it a conspiracy theory–but a very believable one–and one he embraced. It’s really not a conspiracy, because it’s a conspiracy of one. Donald Trump is throwing the election for President of the United States.
I normally don’t quote Gawker’s conspiracy hive “Black Bag” as a source, but J.K. Trotter there has done a good job compiling the evidence for Trump’s fix.
The idea that Trump is running an elaborate interference campaign on behalf of Hillary Clinton may sound absurd. But there is enough truth to Raimondo’s theory—it makes just enough sense—that it’s already begun to infiltrate, and inform the mainstream voices of, the mainstream Republican Party. On July 23, for example, the popular conservative writer Allen Ginzburg distilled Raimondo’s argument into a vexing thought experiment:
Erick recently echoed this sentiment. Wonks like Thomas B. Edsall writing in The New York Times, uncover the footprints of a Democrat trying (if you see it that way) to make old-school Democrat policies popular again.
If liberal public policy intellectuals are unable develop “a clear program to refashion capitalism and globalization for the twenty-first century,” Rodrik warns, “the field will be left wide open for populists and far-right groups who will lead the world – as they always have – to deeper division and more frequent conflict.”
If current trends continue, not only will there be a class inversion among the white supporters of the Democratic Party, but the party will become increasingly dependent on a white upper middle class that has isolated itself from the rest of American society.
Instead of serving as the political arm of working and middle class voters seeking to move up the ladder, the Democratic Party faces the prospect of becoming the party of the winners, in collaboration with many of those in the top 20 percent who are determined to protect and secure their economic and social status.
Oh my God.
Edsall, in arguing that the Trump phenomenon is harming Democrats, is also saying that Trump’s populist appeal is reinvigorating the Democratic Party, opening up seams in Republican support, and allowing Hillary Clinton to move her party as far left as she wants. Because Trump is gathering those traditional Democratic voters to himself, then throwing the election, when Clinton takes office, far from having a split base, she will claim a massive mandate–she will assume the populist message Trump A/B tested for her.
In the long run, then, the significance of the Trump campaign may well prove to be the changes he has wrought in the Democratic Party.
As Trump flails in every self-destructive fashion conceivable, the odds increasingly point to a Clinton victory. But if she wins, how well will Clinton be able to govern with a base split between the well-to-do, many of whom seek to protect their enclaves against the interests, needs and classically American ambitions of the other half of the party — low-to-moderate income African-Americans and Hispanics and the truly poor?
There is sufficient evidence, in everything Trump has done and continues to do, to make a solid accusation that he is throwing the election to Clinton. There’s enough evidence that he is doing it to help the Democratic Party move toward an unstoppable winning streak. There’s enough evidence that Trump is actively helping to make America into a one-party system like Mexico was for 70 years.
If throwing the World Series was the biggest scandal in baseball, and FIFA soccer officials were indicted for corruption, and Pete Rose was–and forever will be–banned from the Hall of Fame for gambling on his own games; then Trump’s actions should forever ban him from politics. He should be hauled before a judge.
Forget Watergate. Forget JFK, Pearl Harbor, the Gulf of Tonkin, Lincoln’s assassination, and 9/11. If this election is permitted to continue on the course Trump has placed it on, we are about to have box seats to watch the biggest scandal in American history.