The Chaos Candidate
Impeachment will change everything. And no one knows how.
Jeb(!) was right. Donald Trumpās pitch to the American people in 2016 was that he would destabilize the status quo and change American politics as we know it.
Mission accomplished.
With the opening of an impeachment inquiry against Trump we have entered a new political reality and it is likely to be marked by total, utter chaos.
Anyone who tells you that ackshually impeachment is good for Actor X is bluffing. We have no idea where this impeachment inquiry will go. What other information will be divulged. How the various parties will react. Or what the downstream effects will be.
Just consider, right off the top, some of the known-unknowns:
Will impeachment result in an eventual leadership fight within the House Democratic caucus and bring an end to the Pelosi era?
How will it alter the dynamics of the Democratic primary race?
Will the Dems rally around Biden, or use Trumpās attacks to take subtle shots at him?
Will it spur disaffection amongst GOP primary voters who already have three alternatives to Trump?
Will the political uncertainty have any effect on the economy?
How does it influence the thinking of Americaās adversaries? For example, does it alter Chinaās thinking about the ongoing trade war?
Will it increase the vulnerability of already-exposed Republican senators who are up for reelection this cycle? Remember: The GOP is defending 20 seats.
Forget the first-order effects: These are all second- and third-order questions and nobody has the slightest idea how theyāll work out.
This is chaos. And itās not even maximum chaos: Imagine what it will be like if some foreign adversary decides to use this unstable moment to test America. Never forget that Trump has destabilized our political system during a period of peace and prosperity.
Time after time during Trumpās administration, people have warned that this is not normal.
Itās not normal for a president to:
Laugh when one of his supporters suggests shooting migrants.
Conduct policy via Twitter.
Unilaterally decide to meet with the worldās worst dictator without getting anything in return.
Have a high rate of turnover in key administration positions.
Ask one of his former campaign managers to pass notes to his attorney general.
Have another of the presidentās former campaign managers wind up in jail.
Claim that he's never known a lawyer who takes notes.
State that heād welcome the interference of a foreign power in an American election.
Specifically invite foreign action against his likely political rival.
There are literally dozens and dozens of items that can be added to this brief sampling. For many of them, if you are well-disposed to Trump you might argue that they represent positive changes to the status quo.
Maybe presidents should use Twitter as their primary instrument of communication. Maybe having an entrenched staff is bad. Maybe itās helpful to take meetings with every world leader who will have you.
But there is a price to be paid for destabilizing the status quoāeven when the net effect is positive. That price increases geometrically when you destabilize everythingāboth the good and the badāall at once. Because that is not mere "destabilization." It's chaos.
In any stable systemāno matter how sub-optimal it may beāthere is a price for creating chaos.
We are about to start getting a look at the bill.
