It's not just Hillary - the entire nation got Trumped!

Image courtesy of Global News

Well, well, well, the rather "interesting" world we live just got one helluva lot more interesting after the Presidential election we all witnessed (into the wee small hours) last Tuesday night! To say that the Trumpster shook the world would not be overstatement; in fact he maybe even caused the entire planet to spin a little faster, or shifted the Earth off it's usual 23 degree axis by a few degrees! He's most definitely not standing behind her today, and some actually believe that SNL helped him get there - the exact opposite of their apparent intent! 

Irrespective of which candidate one preferred, democracy had its day, and this was no George Bush-Al Gore repeat, chads and all. That 2000 election came down to the voters of Florida, with barely hundreds separating the candidates out of almost 6 million votes cast. This time it became clear that Florida was falling quite early on, and fall it did before Tuesday even became Wednesday. That was an essential state for each to win, and its falling caused aftershocks that reached high into both Trump Tower and the Peninsula Hotel in downtown Manhattan. 

The dominoes of key states such as Ohio, Michigan, New Hampshire and Pennsylvania then all fell into each other and firmly into place for Trump, and the reality began to kick in for one and all - not least Donald Trump himself - who seemed somewhat bemused or even tranquilised by (the gravity of) what he had just achieved. It was an astounding, unpredicted victory but one which was met with rather subdued celebrations by the victor, unlike (ironically) what would have transpired had it been Clinton. 

There are a few key points that are at the root of all of this and one was most definitely the media who misguided America (the world?!) into a false sense of security that all was right with the world, and Clinton was a sure-fire winner. Maybe that was true in the cityscape towers and territory that the media inhabit, but it was far from reality in the inner cities and suburbs where raging discontent was festering. Ultimately the nation played their Trump card, beautifully, regardless of the candidate's actual merits. 

The meddling of FBI director James Comey during the last days of the campaign simply raised further (excuses for) distrust of Clinton, and some pundits claim he cost her the election. Whether he also sensed a Trump victory and wanted to assure his job is unclear, but for sure he's probably safer under Trump. Clinton would likely have savaged him had she won, and I think his departure would have been inevitable. 

The overarching (perceived) arrogance of Clinton was a huge turn-off to the American electorate, and even early polling had shown that, but she appeared sure she still had it in the bag, maybe until a day or two prior to the election itself. Sadly for her - as a career politician who has a family legacy of White House and senior political office experience - if she couldn't beat the likes of Donald Trump to the highest elected office in the land, then that career is now over. Her defeat by Trump makes even her 2008 primary loss to Obama look more significant than it appeared at the time, i.e. she would have lost to almost anyone. 

As much as the sycophantic media and Clinton's fawning entourage claimed they had victory in their grasp,  it was Trump's thermometers that were spot on in terms of their guaging it as way too close to call in key battleground states, and the needle firmly in the red in many others. While all around her shuffled nervously and avoided questions, early in the evening Kellyanne Conway (Trump's campaign manager) calmly predicted Florida would fall, as would Michigan and Pennsylvania, and she was clearly confident that the Republicans would win - and she was right. However, what's not so clear is whether the Donald was so sure he would win, or whether he even truly wanted that job at the end of the day. And a very long day it was. 

The big question is of course what happens next?! In my opinion, Trump is gonna learn exactly what it means to make a bunch of promises, outrageous promises in his case, as a means-to-an-end to get elected POTUS, and then actually win. It's quite trivial to say one will do this and one will change that, when one barely believes it's ever going to matter. Suddenly thrust into power, and into the hotseat, is quite another thing entirely, and that famous hair is likely to get singed by the burning spotlight that will now be focused on it, 24/7.

He's now between a rock and a hard place. He spoke out for the working man and the disenfranchised and the crumbling inner cities, promising to build walls, expel illegals and repeal Obamacare, and on and on and on. If he chooses to become all soft spoken and presidential now, because he shockingly won, there will be a rebellion amongst the electorate who put him there and just like Obama, he will become a lame duck by mid-terms, in 2018. 

On the other hand, if he maintains his hard line and goes (further) rogue, he will keep the support of the electorate but will put America into very dangerous territory and lose America further support globally. If there's a fine line to tread between his extremes and the reality of governing a land as massive (in more ways than size) as the USA, I am not sure he knows how to either find or tread that fine line. Only time will tell, and it's an experiment that could go either way, including horrifically wrong. 

His first post-election interview on "60 Minutes" with Lesley Stahl was more the former, with him all soft focus lens/soft spoken, and already backtracking on some major promises made in the run-in - remind you of anyone? I think he's gonna understand Barack Obama a whole lot better, in a very short time! But if he starts to sound and act like him?  Good luck beyond 2018. 

As much as disruption and innovation are buzz words adored (and perhaps overused) in our life science ecosystem (or the economy in general), we don't seem so fond of it when it comes to the election process! There is no doubt that Donald Trump is a disruptor, and in fact he disrupted the entire election process by fighting his way through not only the lengthy Republican primaries but also a general election against a darling of Wall Street. He didn't do it by taking money from special interests or lobbyists or big banks or Wall Street, because he didn't have to - he had the money - which is a truly unique and innovative way to become POTUS! 

It's stretching the point I know, but unquestionably he chose to forgo any normal route to such power, and used his wealth and considerable fame/notoriety as the primary driver of any political validity. Some would argue that he had and still has no political validity whatsoever, but he himself would readily counter that by arguing back that he is currently President-elect of the United States and that makes him pretty politically valid, like it or not! 

What does a Trunp government mean for our business, and in particular for the world of pharmaceuticals? Well, I think they are probably a bit more excited than they were under Obama. He actually referred to the stashing of offshore profits as "Un-American", even if he was simultaneously in bed with many of them, in particular the tech giants such as Apple, Google and Microsoft. But the Trumpster is offering big tax breaks to big business and that could make him the darling of big pharma. 

If he follows through on allowing a one-time tax holiday on repatriation of offshore funds, this could have big pharma dancing in the aisles with their bottom lines overflowing in cash. And what do big pharma do when there's billions in the bank? Well they merge, of course, and so a Trump presidency could trigger some mega mergers, inside the USA, given the potential future redundancy of tax inversions under a Trump regime. 

While not as vocal as either Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders on pricing wars in pharma, Trump is going to exert some influence there, but it is believed that the generics marketplace is where he will be toughest. He wants Americans to pay the lowest price available, and if that means allowing a foreign competitor to do well on American soil, so be it, because he believes in that type of competition being both fair and very good for business. This parallel market is being held back under current regulations, but Trump will facilitate it. 

It's most definitely a brave new world when the President of the free world is a real estate tycoon most famous for shenanigans on a reality TV show, who has never been elected to any political office and has essentially zero experience (or comprehension) of national politics never mind global politics, nor international diplomacy. It's going to be both fascinating and occasionally frightening to watch, but you know, by as early as 2018 and potentially no later than 2020, if he screws it up then the American electorate will be the people invoking his most famous line, informing him, "Donald, you're fired!"

Millennial malaise or simply mass media marketing?!

Whither the Millennials? What's going on with this new generation, and what's at the root of their generationally unique malaise? Why's the why in Y? I've had quite a few conversations on this topic of late, most recently with a few individuals I met at the Gairdner Awards Lectures last week, and it's pretty accurate to say that opinions are pretty divided along chronological and thus generational lines. 

The Baby Boomers and even a lot of the Generation Xers, don't know what all the fuss is about, and yet Millennials don't know Y there isn't even more fuss - over themselves - while Generation Z thinks of Millennials as "Heard enough about them already" or simply "They're so yesterday, already!" Maybe given the "Z", this will be the last "generation" we will have to categorise (and tolerate!), and we can all get back to just being human beings once more? 

While I doubt that totally, it would be progress of sorts. I don't recall seeing so much discussion about the particularities of a particular demographic as the Millennials; it's as if they are in fact a different species, a different breed of humanoid. Employers and managers everywhere are being lectured to by talking heads about how one should attract, engage and retain such types, as if the rule book had suddenly been rewritten specifically for them!

Well, it sort of has, and there is a clear reason for that. It's marketing/advertising trends that were forced to change so as to address the way in which Millennials (and any others embracing the brave new world of all things digital) gather information and make purchases (of almost any kind), and those changes have sort of bled over into the work marketplace as well, correctly or not. We always get to blame the media for all sorts of things, and this is no exception, because they seem to have given Millennials the impression that the workplace should cater to their wants in the same way that You Tube, Snapchat or even Apple does.  

I think it's both a good thing and a bad thing, because while it may force some old dinosaur companies to upgrade their thinking and approach to the workforce and workplace, it also perpetuates the inappropriate sentiment that Millennials are in some way "special" and "unique". Frankly, when it comes to rolling one's sleeves up and getting on with some genuine hard work rather than fussing over what the conditions are, agonising over being stuck in an open cubicle and not a fancy office, and whether snacks are free, previous generations win hands-down. And they never felt entitled to well-paying jobs for which they didn't have (any) experience, either. 

It's all very well that the individual thinks of him/herself almost exclusively when considering working for this company or that start-up, however, some fundamentals have not nor will ever change. It's not about you, when you are an absolute beginner! You simply cannot have built up sufficient professional reputation or experience in your twenties, to matter that much. No one cares whether your office is too small, or the chair's not comfy enough, when you haven't achieved anything yet. The media may care, your parents may care, but no one working in that place does! 

Unquestionably, the current generation have been way more mollycoddled on their journey through high school and university, and they exit with a mindset very, very different from earlier generations. Even if they haven't yet exited home - and therein lies part of the problem methinks. While baby boomers, and to a lesser extent Gen Xers, would have been slapped around the head and told "You need to get your feet back on the ground, son, you ain't no different than the rest of us!" it seems the Millennials got a friendly hand on the shoulder and informed "You can be anything you want to be, don't let anyone tell you otherwise! You are special!". 

I think there is probably a middle ground that is the best approach, but for those who swallowed the anything-is-possible Kool-Aid too literally, they are almost predestined to turn out discontent with their lot in life. You know, there can only be one POTUS at any given time, sometimes for 8 years in a row. And look at just who is currently believing "Yes, we can!" even if they have about as much political experience as the average domestic housecat. It's not always a good thing to think one can do anything, and the trophies-for-everyone mindset that permeates our culture today is not realistic and is not helping.  

Some political expressions do last a lifetime, though, and a timeless one will always be JFK's rallying call at his inauguration to be the 35th POTUS, where he used the now historic "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country!" line. It's a classic line with enormous significance, but one with a sentiment sadly lacking in today's generation. It is all about me-me-me, and what you can do for me. But for every Mark Zuckerberg or Sean Parker, there are tens of millions of unknowns, and they need to get their feet firmly (back) on solid ground. 

Some of the old timers that hang out in a local bistro near where I live have their own solution - "They should all be made to do some military service, that will stop their whining!" - which even if probably quite accurate, is not the way out of the predicament in today's world. Having said that, the state the world is in right now, with precarious choices about to be made south of the border, might imply that conscription is gonna have to be brought back at some point! 

I hear the predictions that Millennials are going to make up 50% of the workforce by 2020, and 75% by 2030, but guess what, that does not inandof itself guarantee them jobs! Another problem they face is (brand) loyalty. While the average job tenure of a Baby Boomer was pegged at 7 years and Gen Xers at 5, it seems that two years is the likely duration of a Millennial after you hire them. Their message is that if you don't continue to engage and benefit me, I am gone, but the other side of that coin is a demonstrated loyalty score of more or less zero, and commensurate zero staying power. As an employer, this would scare the hell out of me. 

The kids don't seem to realise that in almost any job, achieving something real and of true significance rarely happens in two years. Those of us who started our careers doing PhDs and postdocs learnt that the hard way, but you know, that makes us better employees. Yes, we probably need a crash course on being more selfish, and thinking of ourselves even a little more, but when it comes to getting stuck in and showing a company we are in it to win it, and will be in it for the long haul, we are light years ahead. 

The Generation Xers were not exactly a bundle of laughs, and they had their own railing against the system - as all young generations should, to an extent - but they were primarily studious navel gazers who realised there was nothing to be done. "Despite all my rage, I'm still just a rat in a cage" sort of said it all, from none other than Billy Corgan. Guess what, they all grew up and got over it, rolled their sleeves up, and made their contribution in the end. 

Millennials seem a little less sure about that approach. They are fussed over so much by the marketing media world we live in, that when it comes to profession and career, they seemingly want to separate themselves from the rest of the world. As absolute beginners. "I've nothing much to offer,  there's nothing much to take, I'm an absolute beginner" is a line from legend David Bowie that should be deeply analysed by those malcontents who insist on asking for more before it is merited. How did Bowie get everything he wanted?! By sheer genius, yes, but coupled with an incredible work ethic and absolute dedication to his craft. 

It is the case that it is probably the Millennials, via their consistent communication and engagement on social media in particular, that have educated/changed the world we live in, with their total impatience for segregation or bias of any type, whether it be based in race, xenophobia, gender, transgender issues, sexuality or anything else. They have opened up many doors, including some bathroom doors! So apparently they are for a total melting pot of everything mixed in together, for a better world. 

And yet, it is this same generation that seems hell bent on separating themselves out from everyone based on age and chronology, and their unique needs? So they are against segregation, just most of the time? The proliferation of "next generation" or "young (insert any white collar profession) network" associations/gatherings underlines a need for separation and secret handshake exchanges, to ensure their career development? I hear a lot of comments about Millennials sticking together like (lost) sheep in the workplace, presumably as some form of identity sharing or safety in numbers. There is incongruity in the approach and I sure don't intend to figure it out, but I know I preferred to confer with people senior to me, who knew more than me, and who could do more for me. Just common sense to a non-Millennial! 

The bottom line, sadly, is that even Millennials are no different from anyone that came before them. They are the same people in the same old s**t, except they now have smartphones in their hands. They are still forced to go work for the man, and that man is gonna be considerably older and richer than they are, and they are still gonna have to roll their sleeves up and get on with some decades of solid conscientious hard graft. Whether that be in 7 years here, and 3 there, or five 2 year stints - it doesn't matter - a decade is still a decade! 

Nothing can trump experience, and even Trump can't trump experience! That's the ticket to advancement, since the sun first rose, and no amount of demanding special treatment or feeling unique can take the place of thinking of your employer's needs first, then getting what you want, second. The earth may indeed have shifted a few points on its previous axis, but the world has not changed that much yet, and Millennials are going to have to get on board on this one, and settle for being little different after all. Maybe by the time Generation MMM (Me, Myself, My; aka Generation 3M!) or ZZZ comes around,  the business world will be run by young adults - until then - it's business as usual, folks! :) 

PS The musical references included above are of greater significance than just lyrical examples of the situation. It's my belief that this generation's almost total lack of brilliant alternative (to the bland pap on the radio) music with which the generation's cool kids could identify, is one part of their malaise. They didn't live the rebellion (and you can't really rebel while still wanting to live at home as an adult!) of early 70s rock that annoyed the hell out of Baby Boomer parents, they didn't experience the bliss that was the shattering of that rock by late 70s punk, they never lived the new wave of the 80s, nor the navel-gazing guitar band movement of the Gen Xers in the early 90s. They got lumbered with Justin Bieber, Miley Cyrus, Michael Buble, and even the Kardashians: a fate worse than death itself!