I haven’t had much to say during this excruciating political season. One reason it has been excruciating is that I have friends on almost every side of the four-sided presidential battle. I don’t know that anybody is totally enthusiastic about the options this time around, but as I said in an earlier post, I haven’t been totally enthusiastic about any Republican nominee since 1984 (What about the Democrats, you ask? Not a chance! They have moved so far left that JFK wouldn’t recognize his party).
But I will vote, as I always do. As usual, it comes down to the lesser of evils (or incompetents!). You can rage against the injustice and cry, “Is this the best we can do?” all you want, but on election day we all have to decide among the choices on the ballot, unless we just stay home and let everyone else decide for us. Then we have no right to complain for the next four years.
So, what’s the bottom line?
For me, it’s about playing the odds. Who is more likely to do the things I think need to be done? I’m only going to consider Trump and Clinton. Sorry my third-party friends, but Johnson (Libertarian) and Stein (Green) will only play a spoiler role; there’s no chance either of them will be elected.
There are a few things that are important to me. Which of the two major-party candidates will be more likely to do what I think needs to be done? Below is the way I score it. It’s not the least bit scientific. I’m just giving you my gut feeling.
- Defeat the Islamic State savages and end the Christian genocide around the world: Trump 48%; Clinton 22%. I put Trump below 50% because fighting Islamic extremism is pretty much a game of Whack-a-Mole, but I believe he will try. Clinton may try also, but I believe she would be less effective because her political correctness hamstrings her.
- Stop the bleeding and reduce the national debt: Trump 25%; Clinton: minus 10%. I only gave Trump 25% because reducing the national debt will be very difficult even if you want to, since there are so many programs like Social Security and Medicare that are huge revenue hogs. Clinton will not only NOT reduce the debt but will certainly increase it.
- Simplify the tax code and reduce taxes on small business to reboot the economy and create jobs: Trump 65%; Clinton: 0%. Another big job, but I think Trump will try. Clinton doesn’t have a clue how the economy works or how jobs are created.
- Turn back the tide of onerous regulations from the un-elected, unaccountable, byzantine Federal bureaucracy: Trump 30%; Clinton: 0%. I’ve been gratified to hear Trump mention cutting the bureaucracy; it would make me very happy, but I know that the interests are deeply entrenched and powerful, so it will be very difficult. Clinton, are you kidding?
- Repeal and replace ObamaCare: Trump 45%; Clinton minus 30%. Again, it won’t be easy, but I believe Trump will try. Clinton, who tried to put us on the road to socialist health care when she was first lady, will definitely make things worse.
- Actually enforce existing immigration laws and once again honor immigrants who enter the country legally: Trump 75%; Clinton:0%. Trump has made getting control of our porous borders and following existing immigration laws a centerpiece of his campaign. As for Hillary Clinton, in spite of Trump’s position on immigration being identical to her husband’s when he was president, she is totally committed to a borderless, lawless society.
- Once again make America’s friends trust us, our enemies fear us and our citizens proud: Trump 45%; Clinton 10%. Why did I score Trump so low, when his campaign slogan is “Make America Great Again”, you ask? Simply because Trump means well, but he does say embarrassing things, so at times he will make us very proud; other times not so much. Clinton will continue Obama’s legacy of apologetic timidity. The only reason I gave her 10% is because she is at least culturally an American, unlike Obama.
- Appoint federal judges to the circuits and the Supreme Court that will follow the Constitution and uphold our founding principles: Trump 70%; Clinton 5%. This won’t be hard for Trump to try to do, but even when you try, sometimes you get David Souter. Clinton might accidentally appoint a good judge.
I could go on, but you get the idea. As I see it, the choice is clear. Not ideal, but clear.
