Posts Tagged ‘election’

A Trumpence For Your Thoughts?

November 7, 2016

Tomorrow’s the big day we have waited most of an eternity for: election day!!

Yes, we can finally put the excruciating anguish behind us int time to compose ourselves and have something, hopefully, to be thankful for as that holiday approaches. Most people seem to just want this painful extraction to be over with.

As an historian, I looked back through the years and – though there have been a few rather nasty campaigns in the past – this one is by far the most bizarre and bewildering event I have ever seen.

We have the outsider who acts as though he is in some reality popularity contest and then the ultimate insider who assumes to have the victory nailed down already… and judging from the treatment Bernie Sanders got, I think Hillary may be right about that. The fix may already be in.

One pundit I heard claimed that Hillary should not be elected for another term as she already ran the Presidency for two terms at the end of the last century – “who do you think ran the country while Bill was busy chasing skirts?” But that is just a minor technicality.

A friend in England – the “old” one across the pond, not the “new” one still nursing the grudge from Deflategate – asked me quite seriously, “Are you telling me that you have three-hundred-million people there and these two clowns are the best you can field?”

My reply, with a straight face, was, “Apparently so.”

The outcome would not be the travesty it certainly appears or the generalized CF it also appears to be were it not for one small, teensy little problem:

The candidate who will be elected will not be voted for.

Yes, you heard that right: the candidate who wins this election will not do so because the majority of the voters want him/her. They will only win because the vast majority of the electorate is voting against the other candidate.

A friend of mine said he was voting for Johnson, the Libertarian. Someone piped up immediately with “A vote for Johnson is a vote for Trump.” I overheard someone else claim “A vote for Johnson is a vote for Hillary.”

No one seems to get it: a vote for Johnson is a vote FOR Johnson. The same for those voting for Stein. The people with the “voting against” mentality cannot conceive of someone actually voting for a candidate because they are better. No, they would rather let evil win, even if it be the lesser of the two.

Yes, there are people who really, really support Hillary, and many who really, really support Trump, but the vast majority this year are voting against someone. When did the system get so broken?

And on Wednesday, two days from now, we can hear the people asking their friends: “So, who did you vote against?”

And that seems to be the only thing of importance this year: being against what you don’t want it the White House.

Imagine what might happen if everyone who really did not want either Hillary or Trump actually voted FOR someone?

Or would that make a little too much sense?

Which Sign Should We Be Reading?

November 6, 2012

Well, today is the big day: selection day!!

Before the Sun eases over the horizon, the polls will open and the last lap of the race will be run. And we won’t know the results until well after sunset.

When about 1% of the precincts in any state have reported, the network will tell us who won the state and the appropriate number of electoral votes.

So, I suppose only 1% of us need really need to drag ourselves to the poll after all, huh?

As to who is actually going to win, I won’t hazard a guess!!

I do know that I am in one of the dreaded “battleground states” where each candidate (as well as the First Lady) has appeared recently and truly messed up the traffic during the evening rush hours. But it was not too bad. The highway was opened up again about an hour after the rally finished so we sat parked on the pavement only about three hours.

As this is such an important decision – unlike some pundits or conspiracy theorists would have us believe – I like to stay informed and up-to-date on the issues… really, and I will probably check the news again as I drive to the polling place.

Anyway, CNN had a story the other about all the signs pointing toward economic recovery and they spent quite a bit of time on the subject. (They barely glossed over the idea that there were a few signs pointing in the opposite direction: toward continued depression. But, this being a selection cycle, nobody wants to go there.)

They talked about the GMP and the value of the dollar in foreign markets and the falling unemployment figures and… well, you know, all those sorts of things.

Still they did not mention the most important sign, one we see usually about now, three-and-a-half years into a President’s first term: the scale of his popularity.

Yes, it is a leading indicator. And he has the power to nudge it either way but at this time in the election cycle, he’s going to be nudging it toward the side that pleases the electorate.

He has been doing anything and everything to please the electorate, coaxing them into another four year run under his leadership.

Of course, after the re-election, watch out!

As far as the job Obama has been doing… not as President but as to improving his popularity by doing all the “right things” before the election, I would say he’s done a pretty good job.

But, we won’t know until later today for all those who love to stay up late and watch the returns.

Or early tomorrow morning, for the rest of us.

Divide and Conquer

January 11, 2010

Joe Lieberman had lost his place in the race for the Senate. The Democrats had chosen his opponent, Ned Lamont. So, did Lieberman bow out gracefully? Hell, no! He was going to remain in the running “for the good of the people of the great state of Connecticut”.

Who the heck does he think he’s kidding?

Let’s journey back in time for a moment, back to 1992. The free-wheeling billionaire, Ross Perot, throws his hat in the ring and runs for President as an “independent”. Not that anyone noticed, but Ross ran hot and heavy in the beginning, when George Bush was ahead in the polls, but when Clinton closed the gap… well, Ross had to take a little ‘family time’. And he was not heard from again until about two weeks before the election when Bush pulled ahead in the polls again. Suddenly, Ross was back in the fray slugging it out at every opportunity.

What was happening was clear to see, although I don’t recall any news organization mentioning the fact: Perot appealed to Republicans more than Democrats and was able to ‘draw off’ Bush supporters, so Clinton could win.

One of Clinton’s first acts was to invite Perot to the White House for a celebratory dinner.

So, Lieberman will draw Democratic votes away from Lamont in the general election and give another Senate seat to a Republican. (I am surprised the Democratic Party leadership has not stepped in to prevent such a thing.)

I knew Lieberman was a staunch supporter of the Republican Administration, but didn’t that make it a little too obvious? Today he is sort of a parttime Democrat and parttime Republican. It does rather blur the whole concept of it being a two-party system anymore, doesn’t it?

(As if it ever was.)

Election Reform

January 9, 2010

Hooligans waited near the voting areas to chase away any “undesirables”, people who were likely to vote differently than the powermongers wanted.

Ballots from precincts heavy in the opposition party somehow got lost.

Other voting records were outright falsified.

Does this sound like election day in some far away third world country, a hotbed of insurrection and anarchy? The picture presented is frequently heard about in the evening news of elections in war-torn countries run by military juntas attempting to gain a “stamp of respectability” by indulging the populace in what foreign observers would call “fair elections”, but are in reality anything but fair.

And unfortunately, this was not some third world country, this scene was of the last three elections in the United States of America. November 2000 saw those actions taken in Florida and November 2004 saw them reenacted in Ohio. In 2008 it happened in several locations but was not as heavily reported.

And Congress still wants the rest of us to move over to electronic voting machines with no paper trail.

There really is no more reason to vote, is there?

Another Illegal Administration

January 7, 2010

I heard a lot of groans about how the 2004 election was “stolen”. After looking over the evidence, it is obvious it was stolen. But so what? That is only the tip of the iceberg in the illegal actions taken by the previous administration… and condoned by a Democrat-controlled Congress. And five years after that travesty of a mock election, the now Democratic White House does not seem to be anxious to change anything.

America has proudly been the staunch defender of human rights worldwide, for generations… until now.

We have steadfastly denounced offensive military actions by the dictators of the world… until now.

Torture of captives and political prisoners has always been denounced by our leaders… until now.

Detaining political prisoners without due process has been declaimed from on high… until now.

The President swears an oath to uphold the Constitution, and pays dearly when he slips… until now.

And the American people, as guaranteed, have always been the ultimate decider… until now.

Practically any one of these should have been enough to have Bush removed, and yet he continued his blithe captaincy of the ship of state in very rocky and shark-infested waters until the bitter end of his term. And it is sad that the Democrats under the questionable abilities of Speaker Pelosi have fought off all attempts to have the man impeached (why? I suppose so their man could continue the same abuse off powers when he came to the office in 2008). But the saddest part of all, perhaps the most frightening of all, is that these huge crimes are only the tip of the iceberg, and I am certain we will be discovering for years to come the crimes George W. Bush and Dick Cheney have committed while in office.

And how has this been allowed to happen? Fear! When 9/11 occurred, our wonderful leaders pointed the finger and claimed Al Qaeda done it! Bin Laden denied any involvement in the action (and further investigations point the finger more squarely on this administration having done it themselves!), but we declared “war on terror” and advanced into Afghanistan to grab Bin Laden. Now we have gone into Iraq to fight terror but have succeeded only in spreading it further!

Whenever Bush needed something more from the American people, we heard more of the fear message. And the will of Congress and the people bow before the fear. One by one, we allowed the government (Republican President and Democratic Congress) to infringe on our freedoms. Once the power has been given away, do we really expect these people to give us back the power? Are you nuts?! Of course they won’t!

Human Rights commissions in Europe and those attached to the U.N. have denounced the governments of two countries in recent months for “war crimes”, “crimes against humanity”, and “human rights violations”: the United States and Israel. And that does not bode well for a universal form of democracy, does it? It seems more like a highly polarized political agenda. (The announcement of either should not surprise anyone. For more on Israel, see my previous post… same ol’ same ol’.)

Just like Lincoln’s goal of “ending slavery” only expanded it, Bush’s reported goal of “spreading democracy” will in actuality end it. I’m afraid that establishing “puppet governments” in the Middle East and refusing to recognize democratically elected governments (like Hamas) points to the extinction of democracy rather than its spreading.

Telling others how to govern is not democracy. It is creating a “territorial status” for these foreign nations under the guise of independent operations.

Its time for this nation to wake up, don’t you think?

Or our grandchildren will have to live without the freedoms we have so easily relinquished. Future generations will pay for our crimes of omission.