by Eze Emelogu

Early Wednesday morning, a storm of surprise and utter disbelief swept Nigeria. The half that didn’t keep vigil had just received the news that Donald Trump, the much vilified candidate, the man that had suffered numerous labels including  ‘narcissist’, ‘racist’ , ‘misogynist’, ‘good for nothing’, ‘post World War II neo Nazi Hitler’ and ‘radical’ won the American presidential elections by wait for it… a landslide!  Beating the hugely appealing, populist and by far much more qualified candidate Hillary Clinton.

Everywhere I went that morning it was the matter at issue and subject of fierce debate. People were baffled! They could not understand why ‘evil’ would ‘trump’ good. The night before, Clinton supporters in their deluded cocksureness had all but delivered her victory speech despite the fact that swing states like Florida, New Hampshire and Ohio, home to primarily conservative Americans that shared a sort of ideological affinity with Mr. Trump were still very much in contention. For God’s sake they were called swing states for a reason! They had expected Mrs. Clinton’s pacifist and people pleasing policies during the campaigns to comfortably edge out Trump’s much more logical ripostes but boy! Did they get what was coming to them?! When she stood to deliver her concession speech that morning, she seemed to her supporters the biblical Esau whose blessing was usurped last minute by Jacob.

As I revel in my ‘I told you so’ moment, I must say that I saw this coming. I saw the outcome from the onset. Why were they surprised? Why did Hillary Clinton the seemingly ordained child of destiny and potential first female president of the United States of America lose out to ‘an undesirable element’? Two words: Political correctness! How did this narrow Hillary Clinton’s chances?

Firstly, while Donald Trump’s fiery speeches spared no blushes; Clinton shrank from speaking contrarians that would hurt public sensibilities. She opted for the wagon of political correctness- the non invasive, safe and predictable policy stances that caressed public emotions but disregarded the reality of today’s America. The reality of terrorism, illegal migration; its attendant social and budgetary strains and biases of the main citizenry. Mr. Trump spoke bitter truths that even his fiercest opponents would relate with in a quiet moment of sober reflection.

A good example was their positions on terrorism and migration from terror prone countries. While Clinton moved for America as capable big brother, stressing our collective humanity as the basis for not refusing migrants, Trump firmly advocated a halting of visas to travelers from said nations until a comprehensive and capable vetting mechanism is put in place. While Trump’s alternative may sound like reactionary overkill, it provides the surest solution to security problems when held in contrast to the Clinton alternative. Homeland terrorism in the U.S has become a real threat in recent days with numerous mass shootings linked to terrorist elements in certain countries. While it was politically correct for Madam Hillary to refuse the urge to advocate a cessation of travel from these hotbeds arguing that many innocent travelers on innocuous business and social voyages would be cast in the same light as terrorists, it was also political suicide because it suffered badly when compared to Mr. Trump’s common sense approach. This is because it simply meant that Hillary Clinton, if elected president would sit on her hands while potentially terrorist elements trickled into the country disguised among innocent visitors and migrants fleeing conflict because she felt everyone was entitled to the ‘American dream’. When you pitch her big brother argument against Trump’s security and safer borders argument, I wonder how it can beat his pragmatic solution.

There are over 42.4 million legal immigrants and 11.4 illegal million immigrants in the U.S today, most of which are Mexicans. This number continues to rise every day as more and more migrants from Mexico and other Hispanics come into the U.S due to porous borders with Mexico. Do not get me wrong, I do not intend to justify Mr. Trump’s assertion that Mexican are rapists and drug addicts or his proposed ban on Muslims or deportation of unregistered migrants. Those are at best horrible policy stances that reveal inbred ignorance and a fundamental character retardation on the part of Donald Trump. But while Trump’s views are downright condemnable, they also manage to reveal that Mr. Trump realizes the urgency and enormity of the migrant situation and the need for serious reform. In hindsight, If Hillary Clinton had demonstrated an understanding of the direness of the situation and the urgency of reform by balancing her lofty ideals of common humanity with pragmatic solutions (and better still solutions more humane and workable than Trump’s alternative), maybe Wednesday morning would not have been a day of shock. In the sincerest terms, America can no longer continue to cater for such huge numbers of undocumented foreigners at the expense of much needed social services for her own population. The migrant situation presents severe strains on yearly budgets, healthcare, public utilities and law enforcement as crime rates in migrant dominated states are relatively higher. Madam Clinton knew this yet she chose to side step the issues that stared her in the face. Because she courted the votes of Hispanics, she chose emotion over critical reasoning. She was slowly going to relinquish America to foreigners because at least it was the correct thing to do politically.

On the great wall of Mexico poser, Nigerians who would come for me after reading this piece should remember the 1983 “Ghana must go” situation and resist such hypocrisy. It is quite simple. If Nigeria receives 11.4 million immigrants from Chad and Cameroun and these migrants begin to drastically drive down the cost of labour due to their willingness to work at a cheap price and if all low income jobs begin to go these migrants, If crime rates begin to spike uncontrollably in migrant settlements and public services are stretched thin, Nigerians will surely panic and 1983 may repeat itself again. This is the reality on the American situation. Mr. Trump should build a wall if he must and in fact all well meaning Mexicans should support this idea because it means only registered or legal travelers who have met the requirements can access the U.S through the provided gateways. What must be condemned is his dictator style rant that Mexico would be made to pay for the wall but to condemn the idea of the wall is to ask him to sit on his hands and ignore a viable option for the security of his country’s borders. Whoever feels entitled to unfettered access to the United States should understand that America belongs to Americans first, before others and their will must be done. They should have the power to control their own destinies and outcomes. Americans want their America back and that was exactly what Trump offered them.

On a personal scale, Donald Trump presented himself clearly. You can call him names: ‘uneducated’, ‘rash’, ‘vulgar’, or ‘uncouth’, but you cannot call him secretive. He spoke all his truths. He came clean. He showed you who he was. He showed you his cards. His ties were clear so were the sources of his campaign funding. You knew what to expect from him and there was nothing left to discover. This was the singular reason why American voters were not totally surprised and still went ahead to vote convincingly for him despite the fact that a damaging recording with heavily misogynist and sexist content suddenly surfaced just weeks to D day. It just couldn’t mean much because this was something you would expect from a Donald J. Trump.

Hillary Clinton on the other hand, had questions to answer on different fronts. From campaign funding, Clinton Foundation finance, Wall Street ties to a relentless private email server and campaign email saga. She was never fully understood. She never confronted these issues convincingly. Consequently when a certain batch of emails emerged in the public space suggesting that she had received some debate questions from Donna Brezille before hand, the once fierce, amazing and brilliant Hillary Clinton was demystified and worse still a few days to final elections. At the culmination of things on Wednesday morning, all her woes had taken their toll. Americans were put on the horns of a dilemma, a decision between the clichéd devil and an imprecise angel and they chose! They threw their support behind Donald Trump the underdog against the other candidate who was widely tipped for the job. All the populist sentiments, the tailored speeches, policy egg walks and political correctness during the Clinton campaign had manifested the reverse effect and insidiously betrayed something American voters dreaded- Appeasement! Clinton exposed a willingness to bend backwards for popular appeal, a willingness to compromise to avoid derision. But the other guy was anything but cowardly. He spoke his mind and damned the consequences.

Many observers likened the elections to the BREXIT situation. Millennials, illiterates and ultra Nationalists forced Britain out of an age old union while baby boomers, senior citizens, sexists and illiterates allegedly pushed Donald Trump into power. I beg to differ. While that may be partly correct, I strongly believe Trump’s positions simply spoke to the larger portion of voters. In an increasingly sexist America where people were still trying to swallow the idea of a female president given their notions of women as soft and appeasing, Clinton would have fared better if she demonstrated strength of character, pragmatism and an ability to take on issues dispassionately rather than appeal to grand ideals of humanity, philanthropy and benevolence- qualities she should have saved for her private life. She would have attracted support from all sections of society even the sexist sections. The statistics of voting patterns and the argument that illiterates and senior citizens combined to give Trump the white house therefore becomes immaterial at this moment. Moreover Donald Trump won by a landslide, exceeding the 270 electoral college votes benchmark by 9 EC votes which means that a significant number of what was considered to be Mrs. Clinton’s supporters actually voted for Trump. This also means a good number of what was considered to be her support base only campaigned for her at face value because she ran the most politically convenient campaign and they couldn’t openly identify with the other side to protect their public persona. Innate personal biases and well hidden racial tension finally found expression in the privacy of the voting booths. If it was possible to determine what candidate each voter chose, the discoveries would be shocking! While some Clinton  supporters publicly occupied the streets in anti-Trump protests and celebrities and social media gladiators ‘publicly’ burnt down his cities, in the secret sobriety of private thoughts, an army of common sense was rising, an army that would later give the world a rude shock and render the punditry of pundits worthless. While pundits smugly dismissed Trump’s chances and argued in Clinton’s favour based on subjective notions of good and bad, voters were having a last minute sober reflection, a dispassionate weighing of pros and cons, an objective emotion versus reality check. This last minute sober reflection became the root cause of the huge 47 EC votes difference.

This writer does not intend to excuse the damning short comings of Mr. Trump or accord him a moral high ground above his opponent. This is not the case. The objective here is to point out the damaging role that political correctness played in Mrs. Clinton’s defeat. Mr. Trump’s mannerism indicates that he might be a war monger president. Everybody understands what a man of his temperament in such a sensitive office portends for world peace. Everybody knows his shameful views of women, his pre Martin Luther era racist proclivities even in the midst of race motivated police brutality and his radical views which were sadly were reflected in the polling numbers as 87% of African-Americans and over 70% of Hispanics went Clinton’s way while the white Caucasian majority went for Trump. This buttresses the role that his overly racist utterances during the campaigns played and the inherent racial divisions in the American state. It is clear that Donald Trump was by no means the better candidate but he ran the better campaign.

Thus, the question here is why the seemingly easy-to-beat, suspected racist and infamous candidate got the better of the most qualified candidate to ever run for President of the United States of America? In Barrack Obama’s words, “there has never been any man or woman, not me, not Bill, more qualified for the Office of the President of the United States of America”. It might be correct to attribute this to a moral decay or an erosion of the known ideals of the American society. Also, You can attribute this to the hypocrisy of the American populace and you won’t be wrong. But you will be more correct if you added that Mr. Trump notwithstanding his faults, did not fine tune reality to caress public sensibilities. He confronted issues dispassionately and though his alternatives seemed disastrous and laughable, his pragmatic understanding of sensitive issues was not.

A man who several publications saw his candidacy as such a joke that they promised to feature his campaign on the entertainment segment, rose up, defied the odds stacked against him and emerged leader of the free world because he spoke hard truths and avoid this guillotine called political correctness.

Nigeria and her politicians must realize that we are in a season of political surprises as evidenced in the sweeping outcome of the 2015 general elections. This wave of political awareness is steadily awakening the political consciousness of what was once a naïve population. Words that were once excused have now assumed a new kind of illuminating and punitive power. Exhaustive consideration must now be given to campaign speeches and policy positions because they not only reveal their intended message but also what they try to conceal. Policy positions however cleverly crafted reveal their true intent and weaknesses. Vagueness and indistinct opinions no longer signify neutrality but rather a well hidden susceptibility to constant compromise.

The electorate on their part, now possess the discerning power to distinguish between Eldorado and cold blooded reality. Any attempt to fine tune reality or to assume vague centrality in order to command wide appeal from all sections of society despite contradicting status quo will fail! Nothing short of the truth will prevail. Although the Donald Trump truth that prevailed comes with an age-old baggage of racist and misogynist colouration and a likelihood of setbacks on the moral and humanitarian gains of the American nation, Nigerian politicians must  create our own truth based on the realities of our ailing economy, our infrastructural deficits, the healing of our religiously and ethnically charged society and our general development concerns. These truths are what I believe will determine the outcomes of Nigerian elections in the future and not empty promises or politically correct statements. Every politician of Nigerian stock must know this. The Donald Trump effect will spread. Even the most popular of candidates must learn to confront Nigerian truths sincerely and unpretentiously, lest Jacob usurp Esau again.

Op–ed pieces and contributions are the opinions of the writers only and do not represent the opinions of Y!/YNaija

Eze Emelogu is a young Nigerian. He lives in Abuja and is currently studying for a master’s degree in International Relations. He can be reached via ezeemelogu@gmail.com or via twitter @emelogu_eze and 1stsmoking_gun on Ig