A showing of weakness in an election about strength

There’s no denying the video of Hillary Clinton being thrown “like a sack of potatoes” into an SUV looks awful. Something was very, very wrong with Hillary’s physical well being. It could be something a simple case, as the campaign claims, of woman who should have been in bed, recovering from a significant but temporary illness. Or it could be, as opponents claim as devastating as a serious, chronic medical condition. We do not know and that is part of the problem.

But while everyone on Twitter and cable news practices medicine without a license, diagnosing her exact problem or lack thereof, there is one thing that is undeniable about the video: It looks weak.

{mosads}Weakness is always a liability in the gladiator sport of politics, but even more so now. This is an election about perceived strength. With a country simmering in dissatisfaction and fear, the voting public seems to want someone who will stand up to international threats, calm the chaos in the Middle East, and get things done.

That’s normal, but a large portion of America wants a bully, an America First, stand up to PC nonsense, show ISIS what’s comin’ to ‘em kind of bully. The kind that tortures enemies, quashes dissenters, sends refugees packing, deports millions in an hour. Putin is strong, they seem to be saying, be like Putin, ignoring his history of murder and suppression of basic rights. Furthermore, even Evangelicals have gotten into the act, trying to leverage their “tremendous power” to force some future country in which everyone will say “Merry Christmas” even the secular and the non-Christians.

In this context, even Clinton’s slogan makes an appeal to strength: Stronger Together. She argues she’s the reasonable way to strength. Strength through diversity, through respect for others, and through allies. She’ll be tough on ISIS too, she says. She’ll be strong.

The irony here is that both Clinton and Trump have a long history of being bullies. Their styles of strength have some similarities. They both suppress dissent, neutralize rivals, strong arm the press, and refuse to answer legitimate questions. They both lie to the point nothing they say can be trusted.

Both, if reports are to be believed, leveraged position and power to line their own pockets or further their own ends. News reports put Trump in the questionable position of having illegally donated to the campaign of Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi who dropped a suit against Trump University. Hillary is accused of trading access to power for contributions. There are, as we all know, more examples for each. Many more.

Furthermore, both Trump and Hillary operated brutal campaign organizations that neutralized other candidates, even though neither was the enthusiastic first choice of the majority of their party. Trump bullies overtly by mocking and belittling his competition until they come bow at his feet, like Chris Christie. Clinton is more the silent knife in the back off camera, but has been no less effective at neutralizing her opponents, even, eventually, Bernie Sanders.

Just look at how Clinton treated the women who accused her husband of sexual assault. Hillary Clinton will stop at nothing.

Both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are “Putin Strong.” They’re strong in all the wrong ways: Conquest, not coalition ways; “my way or the highway” ways.

Another kind of strength altogether has disappeared from this election — a traditional American strength, a confident strength. It rests in the ideals of America, that the liberty given by the Constitution, the freedom enshrined in the Bill of Rights, is bigger and stronger than any one person, that ideas and values unite this country of immigrants and innovators, that in America every man and woman stands equal side by side in common cause.

Leaders who lead from this ideal serve others, as opposed to others serving the leader. They serve something greater than their own strength, their own power. This is what allowed Ronald Reagan to stand with moral authority and call on Gorbachev to tear down the Berlin Wall. Reagan was backed by the military might of America, but his strength came from his belief that American style freedom and democracy was the best, greatest chance for the world. American strength was used for the benefit of the world, not its detriment.

We were strongest, too, when we addressed the inconsistencies and errors inherent in our country, when African-Americans and their supporters demanded the rights that were promised by the Constitution, when women demanded full citizenship. These corrections flowed and flow from the common ideal and make the country stronger.

The lesson of confident strength is that strength does not have to be a zero sum game. Instead of winners and losers, there can be winners and winners. One person winning can mean that everyone wins. A nation pursuing its own interests and still standing for the freedom of all human beings can overcome an evil empire such as the Soviet Union and bring prosperity to the world. It was true then and it is still true now.

Hillary’s show of physical weakness will go to the gut of voters looking for strength, an irrational and yet on another level entirely reasonable reaction. The woman tottering in that video is much less electable than before. This physical weakness and her ongoing moral weaknesses put NeverTrumpers like me in an even worse place than before the video. We cannot vote for strongman Donald Trump who would turn America into a copy of Putin’s Russia. Hillary is better only in the sense she is more constrainable, more predictable, and more resistible.

There is a solution, however. Hillary could show some moral strength and drop out. She could be replaced by a Democrat who believes in the ideals of America. Such a candidate would take the wind out of Donald Trump’s sails. Such a candidate would likely win. If Hillary were to drop out and thereby save the country from Trump, it would be an act for the good of the country and not the good of the Clintons. It would force me to revise my opinion and consider her a patriot.

Rebecca Cusey is a writer based in Washington DC. She writes about movies, TV, pop culture, politics and faith. Follow her on Twitter @Rebecca_Cusey.

The views of Contributors are their own and are not the views of The Hill.