Before I give my thoughts on the current group of presidential candidates running, lemme give a 'broad strokes' summary of my political stance.
I am not a Democrat. I am not a Republican. I don't particularly like either political party and believe that both are far to big and unwieldy to ever really bring me into their fold. I most often vote Democrat because more often than not they are on the liberal side of any social issue and that's where I tend to sit.
I'm pro-choice. I believe that allowing gay marriage is a step forward to our country. I believe we spend way to much on our military and not nearly enough on our people. I think education should be a priority and that the people deserve protection from businesses and not the other way around. I believe that there are many other views than mine and that 'my' views will never be our country's views. That the best I can hope for in government is a lean toward what I want and like and good compromises be made so that neither 'side' goes away empty handed or angry. Going backwards in presidential elections I have voted for:
- President Obama 2012
- Senator Obama 2008
- Against President George Bush 2004
- Vice President Gore 2000
- President Clinton 1996
- Governor Clinton 1992
Yeah... Democrats all. Please note that I did not vote FOR Senator Kerry in 2004. I just thought that he would be better than four more years of President Bush. Senator Kerry got my vote that year only because I thought he was the most likely to take out President Bush. A vote for some other third party candidate would have been a more traditional protest, but was trying to be more practical.
Now the two major political parties define themselves of course. But here is how I see them:
Republican. The desire to let people be as free as possible. To keep all governments (federal, state, local) as small as possible and do only the bare minimum to keep us free and safe. In general they are conservative.
Democrat. The desire to help as many people as possible. To use the government's power to reign in the capitalist greed. To force forward social issues and have the bigger 'us' include more and more people. In general they are liberal.
Now... I can see the good in both parties. I want to be free. MY freedoms are important and the government shouldn't get all up in my grill. The government SHOULD be as small as possible while still able to perform all of it's needed function. At the same time I realize that I'm a white male. I am the very definition of 'privileged' and that other groups may need protection from 'me'.
Both sides are right. Both sides are wrong. There is room in the middle, but it requires the middle to stand up to the fringes. Recently it seems that the Republican party has been giving up to the fringes. It's not just the conservative Christians rallying against social issues.... it's now the Tea Party fighting tooth and nail against the thought of even having a government. But it looks like the Democrat party may be doing the same thing. Giving up to the fringes.
So... that kind of lays out the broad strokes of how I think and how I see the political world. Lemme give you my take on the candidates that are currently in the race. I should add for time capsule clarity that it is the morning of March 5th, 2016. I'm sure a lot will change between now and November 8th.
I like the fact that she's a politician. Here me out on this. She knows how government works. All of it's goods and ills. She's been in the white house as first lady, she's been in the legislative branch as a Senator, and she's been the Secretary of State. On the same side though, it feels as though she's been running for President since 2000.
I never really saw Barack Obama as a politician. He didn't seem to know quite how to interact with the legislative branch. This is on top of the opposition doing everything they could to stop any agenda that he mentioned. Put these together and we have had 8 years of ineffective government. So I kind of like the fact that Secretary Clinton is a politician. Yeah, the opposition will still be there but maybe she'll be more effective at wielding her bully pulpit and get some action out of congress. Maybe she'll be able to rally the Democrats to action and bring enough Republicans in to make that action take hold.
I think her biggest problem for me is... I don't know what she wants to do as President. Seriously. It's clear that she wants to be President, but I don't think there's any identifiable issue that she's championing. At least issues that aren't already planks in the Democratic party. I think her best asset is her experience. Especially as Secretary of State. I think she did a very good job there
For example, Universal Health Care. Yes please! I think a 'Medicare for all' style approach could be the best thing that has ever happened to health care in the United States. It's WAY better than the Affordable Health Care Act. Education, oh dear God something needs to be done. An average child shouldn't go into near lifelong debt to get a college degree. Income Inequality. Yup. The rich have gotten far more rich, the poor have gotten far more poor, and the middle class is sinking into the 'poor' category. Taxes are far too low across the board but that favors the rich a lot more than it does the middle class or poor.
And it's not as though he's new to these ideas. Look at his record... Senator Sanders has been this way his entire life. He's fought for his liberal ideas ever since he started government work. So I don't get any sense that he's riding these issues just to get to be President. In fact I see his desire to be President as just the obvious extension OF his ideals... it's the only way he can get into a position to do something about them.
But that's also the rub. While I love his positions there are a lot of people that don't. There are a lot of people that not only disagree with him, but that think ideas like his are the problem. Those people vote. Those representatives and senators are working for their own ideals and they are often the polar opposite of Senator Sanders'. Where's the compromise? I mean, if the opposition worked so hard against President Obama when he was starting from a compromised position... how hard are they going to fight against someone who wants an incredibly liberal world view?
Oh yea... and while his ideas are those of a young kid, Bernie Sanders is freaking 74 years old. There are going to be honest to God health issues with a President that old. We've all seen the before/after photos of the young presidents.... Obama, Bush, Clinton... what the hell is going to happen when we start with someone who already LOOKS old!?
Take immigration. My belief is that he would be reasonable on that issue. That he sees the need to improve and streamline our immigration policy so that people that want to get in have an easy route to follow instead of just crossing the border. I don't think his core belief is that we need to round up the millions of illegal immigrants and just mass deport them. And I certainly don't believe that he wants to build a huge expensive wall. BUT to get the republican nod he has to play into those roles.
And that's his biggest rub. When push comes to shove I believe he'll follow the republican ideal. Kind of like Hillary Clinton. I don't know what he's running for other than the idea of having a republican sit in the oval office. I haven't heard his 'new' ideas.
Maybe if had something he was passionate about... I could follow him a little better. But if all he wants out of his presidency is to be a republican president, then the congress will run his time in office. He'll have ideas, I'm sure, but they'll be ramrodded down by the Senate and the House and he'll just sign the bills they send up to him. It's not that I don't think he has a spine... I just don't think he has anything to really stand or fight for. He'll be less of a President and more of a leader for the Republican Party.
But that doesn't give me a lot to work from. I don't know what he did as Governor, I don't know what he did with his other Government service, and I know he's a life long Republican. Hell... I had to Google him just to figure out how to spell is last name. I had to Google him to figure out what his FIRST name is!
So yeah... I don't know much about him. As Michigan is next up in the primary process I've seen a few of his television advertisements... but they come across as "Republican, Republican Republican. I'm a Republican who is going to republican be a good republican for all republicans." I mean... I guess that's what you do for a primary but I don't know that I see any value besides his ability to act like an adult.
I do know that he wants to bring jobs back to America. OOoookkk. That doesn't separate him from any of the other Republicans. Hell it doesn't separate him from the Democrats! I know he wants to cut taxes and stop regulations. Both of those statements are too broad to get a bead on him and both are simply translated as "I'm a republican". Again... not enough to give me an idea of who he is and what he wants to do as president.
I guess in that way... he's kind of like Marco Rubio. Unlike Rubio he does have a lot of experience so if he has any good ideas maybe he could work with Congress to push his agenda through. But I'd just have to know what his ideas are before I think that's a good or bad thing.
The problem is... he's smart. Seriously smart. And he uses that big brain of his to manipulate his audience like a master. The best example I know of his the whole gun control debate after Sandy Hook. He tweeted out that he would stop any bill that made a federal gun owners registry.
The bill he was blocking made it illegal and punishable by jail the creation of any federal gun owners registry.
He was very actively trying to block a bill that actually should have assuaged his vocal concern. My take-away from that is that he has his positions but holds them close to the vest and simply manipulates the voters in any way that he can. That isn't the only example... but it's the one that sticks out in my memory the most clearly.
Of his positions... he's a Christian Conservative. He's very pro life. He's anti gay marriage. He's anti-gun control. He thinks that the Government needs to balance it's budget and do so NOW no matter how much that may hurt the government or the country as a whole. He is almost the antithesis of my positions and compromise is something that I honestly wonder if he understands at all. A presidential election between Senator Cruz and Senator Sanders would be the fight of the left vs the right.
In short... he's a candidate that I would vote against. It doesn't matter who's running against him, that person would be a better president. I'd vote for George Bush over Ted Cruz.
No no no no no.
He seems to believe that negotiation can fix all problems. That our trade agreements are simply about shipping more of our products over seas and shipping less of their products over here. There IS a major trade imbalance between the United States and Mexico. But I think any reasonable person who looks at that trade imbalance will see that there SHOULD be a trade imbalance there.
What does Mexico make? Cheap goods. No one is going to call Mexico the luxury goods maker of the world. What do American's want to buy? Cheap goods. Most Americans want to go to Walmart and buy cheap food, cheap toys, cheap electronics, and cheap home goods. That's exactly what Mexico sends us. What does American make? Luxury goods. We sell our Luxury goods to ourselves and countries like our own. Europe and such. The people in Mexico (as a whole) can't afford out luxury goods. Hell, they can't afford their own cheap goods. Much of their own purchased goods are made elsewhere.
So... how exactly can negotiation fix that type of trade imbalance? It sounds good on paper. Identify a problem and say you are going to fix it. But sometimes those problems simply can't be fixed. American manufacturing simply put costs more than most other country's manufacturing.
I know many people love the fact that Donald Trump isn't a politician. But I see that as a major mark against him. He said in a recent debate that the military leaders would simply follow any order he gives... even an illegal one. I honestly don't think he understands what the president can or can't do. I don't think he has a good understanding of how government works. I may not like mechanics as a whole... they're shysters and rip off artists. But that doesn't mean I want a business man trying to fix my car.
I wholeheartedly understand that the primary process does not bring out the best in people. But I want to see bits and pieces of the candidates that look Presidential. I see Kasich, Rubio, and Clinton all as being Presidential. They're adults. They speak well. They argue and debate with passion but do so in a professional manner that gives me comfort. I may not agree with them, but I feel they could convince me. If I squint my eyes I can imagine Sanders and Cruz as being presidential... but they both argue too vehemently from their own ideals. I don't see the ability to discuss or debate... only argue. If you believe in their politics they may seem like the Messiah... but to everybody else they come across as harsh and argumentative. And then there's Trump. I CAN NOT picture him behind the resolute desk or at a presidential podium. When I try to imagine him addressing Congress for the State of the Union I picture him insulting them. Insulting the military, insulting the Supreme Court, insulting anybody and everybody. And getting absolutely nothing done in the meantime.
I would vote for Ted Cruz over Donald Trump.
So... who am I going to vote for in the Michigan Primary? Nobody. I'm not a Democrat or a Republican and just don't feel it's right for me to vote in their process. We have an open primary system here that says I can vote in one or the other (just not both), and all I have to do is declare myself a member of their party before I do. On my way out of the voting booth I can re-file as an independent. But again... that just sits wrong with me.
If I WERE going to vote... I'd probably vote for Trump. Yeah Yeah Yeah.... but here me out. I think either Democrat would make a better president than any of the Republicans. I may change my mind if Kasich or Rubio get the Republican nod, but given a blank democrat vs republican nominee I think I'd almost always lean democrat. So if I want to push that idea, I want the most inelectable republican to be running against them and I see that as Donald Trump. Donald Trump would get the far right "I ain't ever voting for a Democrat" type voters... and nobody else. I don't think he's going to get any moderate votes and I most certainly know he is not going to get any liberal votes.
Now most scenarios from this point going forward are looking at which democrat is going to run against which republican. But this year I think we have two scenarios that could bring chaos. The first is Trump. I don't think the republican party as a whole like him. If there's a chance to get him out of the race they'll take it. For example yesterday Mitt Romney gave his speech where he more or less said "Vote for anybody BUT Trump". He is trying to get a broken convention where someone else gets the eventual nod. I think if that happens and we get Rubio or Cruz or Kasich or some other republican (Romney 2016?) then we'll still get Trump. I honestly believe he's such an ego maniac that he'll run even if it ensures a Democrat in the oval office.
The other scenario? Bloomberg. I don't hear much about him on the news, but I am almost sure he's going to run as an independent. He's been a democrat and a republican. He's held political office. He's a wealthy business man. He has ideas that are both conservative AND liberal. Most third party candidates will take votes from either one side or the other. Perot took enough republican votes to make sure Clinton became president. Nader took enough democrat votes to make sure Bush became president. But I think Bloomberg will take votes from both parties. And if we have an ideologue fight between Sanders and Cruz, I think they'll both cede the middle ground to a candidate like Bloomberg.
Add those two scenarios together? What exactly would an election between Sanders, Cruz, Trump and Bloomberg look like?
No comments:
Post a Comment