Choices, choice, Choices... Elections Have Consequences!

As I've debated countless times about the incredibly important decision of choosing a president, let's remember that life isn't only about 1 issue, generally speaking. A president and a party in power make a million decisions about policies, hire or appoint people in vital positions, promote certain values and steer the country into a certain direction.

 

For the last several years, we have one politically responsible party--yes, it's the Dems--and one anti-democracy, anti-science, anti-environment, religiously nutty parry--the Repubs.

 

 

Biden promotes workers' rights, and has passed pro-environment/science important bills. The Chinese are hoping Trump will win and kill anything that's "green" ecologically, including electric cars. He wants to get votes from the auto industry workers, and he'll get some as many people are known to vote against their economic interests.

 

Speaking of China and its leadership has been open about it: they'll keep building coal-fired plants until 2050. By 2030, they'll built 300 of them. OK, the Chinese poeple don't have a choice, but in the US we get what we deserve over all*. No?

 

 

*except when a state is gerrymandered to prevent the majority from being the ..majority, and when access to the ballot is restricted. Republican state governments now want to decide themselves--not the voters--who should win their state!

Biden's VP Choice Won't Change the Dynamics of the 2020 Election. Any Sensible Adult is Preferrable to the Dangerous, Incompetent, Most-Indecent Current President

 

Biden will announce his VP choice this week, after months of speculation and "advice", which advice is mostly what the "adviser" wants but not based on any evidence that such choice is a "must" or "will bring more votes to the ticket." There's no evidence to suggest that VPs bring any significant boost. They're part of the narrative about the main actor, and even that it's mostly discussed among the elites.

I'm mostly annoyed by those people who proclaim they won't vote for Biden because their preference (Sanders, Warren, or whomever else) didn't get the nomination. Above all, if they are not sufficiently motivated to vote to remove the most dangerous and unqualified president, then they're part of the problem, every problem they want to solve through politics. I question the judgment of such people, especially when they want to talk politics or analyze a situation.

If you're not motivated enough to vote this vile president out of office, along with his kakistocracy regime, then I don't care about your concerns. This is not normal times, and we shouldn't normalize Trump's behavior as another flavor of politics; he's so far out. And, to those who argued, in 2016, the DJT and HRC were more or less the same, you should refrain from making important political decisions. Also, if you don't vote to throw this spoiled child out, then you are NOT a progressive, for you're setting the country to continue sliding backward.

 

Now, I don't think there are many people who will not vote because of a VP choice, as they aren't that many who do vote for a ticket because someone is the VP-designee. I'm talking about significant numbers who can swing a national election, or even a state. I'm not saying it's impossible, but there isn't evidence that this has happened in the last 100 years.

For me, Biden's VP will be the next president, and therefore I want to see a competent person, who has political experience, preferably executive, someone who has won a serious election. My first choice would be Gretchen Whitmer, governor of Michigan, and, secondly, Kamala Harris.  But, the bottom line is that I'd vote for Biden, even if he was in a comma, and his VP choice was any sensible adult.

This Election is About Satan. Make Sure You Pick the Devil You know, the Devil Who's Going to Be FOR America not His Own Casino

The DNC show is over, and in my opinion it was by far more enjoyable to watch and probably more effective than the GOP's. Great speeches and some good memes, the ones that may appeal to those on the fence. Hard core Hillary haters won't change their minds. The purpose of the negative advertising will be to discredit Trump and discourage people for voting for him, and to motivate the hard-core Democratic base to come out and vote. Voter turnout on election day is absolutely the most important factor.

The polls that'll come out later this week should show a bump up for Clinton, otherwise it'll be bad. Polls right after the conventions don't mean much, but when we get to later August, around Labor Day, then polls begin to show trends and at that point it's very important to be leading.

The elephant in the room is the high unfavorable rates of the two candidates. Some voters will vote for the Green or Libertarian parties and thus register their strong disapproval of the candidates, parties, and the US political system. Of course, this is allowed--that's what democracy is about--but will soon be forgotten. Third-parties and their candidates rarely are a force in US politics, and usually it's the role of a spoiler.  I know people didn't like Al Gore and may even liked Ralph Nader, but the effect of that was the disastrous presidency of one of the worst presidents ever, G.W. Bush.

Bernie Sanders said this much in his speech, that this is the real world and if you think the most unqualified candidate of a major party should not get near the White House, then the choice is clear: Hillary Clinton. I very much agree with Sam Harris's take on this election:

These are some of the points and highlights of recent worth remembering:

• Trump has not sacrificed anything for this country, nor has he helped anyone outside his family and his own interest
• Trump has no clue of foreign relations and how the economy works
• He doesn't have the character, experience, temperament, responsibility, ability, or willingness to learn/study complicated matters
• Trump is anti-science (and therefore he's an anti-intellectual)
• He has not read the US constitution
• He keeps repeating the same lies, bullying and belittling his critics; he's juvenile
• He's a racist, bigot, and a fear monger
• FDR: "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself"!!!
• Could you imagine the outrage of Fox News if Michelle Obama had plagiarized another first lady's speech, lied about her degrees, and then deleted her website with this information?...
• Bloomberg's takedown of the Donald: I'm from New York and I know a con when I see one! Plus, pointing out the trail of bankruptcies, defrauding of investors, students, and contractors by the man who wants to run the country as a casino or country club or a pyramid scheme. The same person who wants jobs in America but makes his products overseas...
• Stronger together. Yeah, I like this theme. Together also means a more equitable distribution of resources--wealth and power
• This election will determine the path of our country even after the next president leaves office, because of the Supreme Court. It's imperative that the high court become progressive. Many of the good things we appreciate today in our society have come via SCOTUS decisions.

What We Need is a Champion for the Middle Class and the Poor. Hillary Clinton Now Has to Articulate a Vision for the Future!

Hillary Clinton formally announced what it was already known. She wants to be a ..champion. "Your champion" as she put it. Yet, it's not all of us, because all of us aren't in the same place, on same plane, or even reality. Therefore, she can't be all things to all people; she better choose and choose well. 

Now if the populous were more aware of the actual conditions, the distribution of wealth, and what we're missing by not using our resources to benefit the 90% of the lower classes, then Ms. Clinton and most other leaders would be singing a different tune.


 
Anyway, there's a long way to go before the next elections, and hopefully this is going to be fun. There are several clowns who are throwing their red noses into the circus that's called the Republican selection process. Personally, I'd like to see a strong challenge to Hillary Clinton. It'll be better for her too. She's mostly vetted already--I don't expect big surprises to come out by her being more closely scrutinized now. The point is that she has to demonstrate that she has the energy to fight for the highest office in the land. She also has to have a vision for the future. It shouldn't be a coronation, nor a claim for tradition & the past--Bill Clinton's presidency happened almost a generation ago.