Posts Tagged politics
endorse> to declare ones public approval of. Oxford dictionary
Trump or Clinton who has received the endorsements? Why are we endorsing? Now that the primary season is over the endorsements are rolling in. From Bernie Sanders to Scott Baio to the AFL-CIO public declarations of approval. Yes, approval! New Jersey Governor Chris Christie did it way back in February for Trump. Christie has been rewarded for it as an “advisor to Trump”. As of today Christie will be in charge of his transition team, that is if Trump wins. After, who knows what Governor Christie will get from a President Trump. Trump lists many endorsements on his campaign web-page, some meaningful and some meaningless as in Scott Baio.
On the Clinton side, she has rolled up endorsements from the beginning of the campaign. Bernie Sanders recently capitulated and endorsed, with his intent being to unify the party. Sanders endorsement upset quite a few of his loyal supporters (myself included). With some time to digest his endorsement, I did some thinking, “why endorse?” In many cases as in Scott Baio’s , most people don’t give a shit about an endorsement. To be honest, outside of my small circle, many don’t give a shit what I think and that is fine. Declaring ones approval publicly, seems to be rather easy for many. The AFL-CIO endorsing Clinton, she is a Democrat and nearly all the time they endorse Democrats regardless if they truly support their cause. The why, crumbs do fall from the table. Clinton’s record toward the working-class is not all that good but it probably will be a shade better than Trump.
The definition of endorse is short and to the point, declaring approval. Endorsements don’t have an asterisk next to them with “she or he is the best we got” The endorsement goes down in history as YOU or your organization supports what the candidate stands for, what their platform stands for. Endorsing for the sake of endorsing, doesn’t that devalue the endorser? Or are the endorsements just self-serving? It may be time that organizations like the AFL-CIO look long and hard at the practice of endorsing for the long-term interest of their supporters. Sitting one out may be a benefit.
Is it time for Sanders and Clinton to soften their tones? The upcoming California and New Jersey primaries are important for both Democratic candidates. Clinton can seal the deal with wins and Sanders needs landslides to make his case for the nomination. Sanders has been tough on Clinton as has Clinton on Sanders. While the Democratic nomination drags on Trump had began to sharpen his attacks on the front-runner Clinton. With a slim chance at securing the nomination should Sanders soften his tone? He has been very critical of Clinton on trade, the minimum wage and her support of war. Continuing the harsh tone does it only benefit Trump? Trump leading in some polls. another indication it may be time to play nice.
Sanders has come a long way in his attempt to win the nomination. Softening the blows will hurt him and he can ill afford lost opportunity. With the last of the primaries coming up we will know by the tone if Sanders really believes he can win.
Early voting, good or bad for democracy? Today, we are witnessing a historic push back against the establishment. Hillary Clinton being the sure thing Democratic nomination no longer looks like a sure thing. (Though the Democratic Party would like you to believe differently). Way back when Bernie Sanders first declared he had little name recognition. Clinton was the anointed candidate from the beginning with support from all in the Democratic Party. Winding down the last of the primaries, Sanders has won enough delegates to still be in position to win the nomination (very small chance). Sanders has done well on the day of voting. Connecting to the people with his message, and winning despite poll numbers (Michigan).
Early voting, the issue, are getting uneducated votes. 18 months ago who outside really knew and understood the platform of Bernie Sanders? With single digit support to start the election he was considered a fringe candidate. So the early voters cast their ballots up to 45 days before election day depending on your state. with limited to no information on lesser known candidates. Does the early voting change projections by the media? One assumes that the counting hasn’t begun and information on early voting is not leaked. But what of polling? Can a poll ask the right questions and get a cross-section of early voters? Sure can!
Access and getting people to vote is the goal for early voting. And YES, participation is and always should be a goal. How we vote and when? This is what needs to be addressed. National voting standards also needs to be an objective. Just getting someone to vote shouldn’t be the only goal. Informed voters also should be an objective. As time moves on we are discovering that the more information a voter has they tend to lean away from the anointed of the party. Would Sanders have benefitted from no early voting? Does the early voter have any buyers remorse? So is early voting bad for democracy? Yes and No. What do you think?
If you don’t vote for Hillary Clinton it is a vote for Donald Trump.
The above bold print will be stated many times, by many people, between the Democratic Convention and election day this fall. The accuracy of the statement quite honestly means nothing to me at this point. Who I vote for in November I am uncertain. What I am certain of, it will not be Hillary Clinton (if she is the nominee) or Donald Trump.
I am a registered Democrat and have voted Democrat consistently. The party has failed me and no longer will I just vote the column because they are better than the “other party”. They have failed in many areas:
Starting with the economy from NAFTA with Bill Clinton to President Obama’s trade agreements while in office and his pursuit of the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP). These trade agreements are why we have the current race to the bottom and such wealth separation. Hillary Clinton has supported the TPP calling it the gold standard. Pressured by Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton has reversed her position for now because it was a political necessity. Change a page number and a President Hillary Clinton will be on board.
Failing Organized Labor: What has a Democrat done for the labor movement? The past 8 years under President Obama we have seen the further push toward Right to Work, most notably in labors backyard Michigan. Hillary Clinton who promises a seat at the table for labor? Isn’t this what we have had since Ronald Reagan? President Obama and the Democrats had control of both houses when he was first elected. This was the time for legislation, card check for labor. Why wasn’t labor’s issues front and center? Why wasn’t legislation pushed through? Because President Obama’s legacy was priority #1 with the Affordable Care Act and there was no time for labor. Since, with no majority labor sits and waits for their death blow.
WAR> There isn’t one that Hillary Clinton doesn’t like. From the YES vote in Iraq to adding troops in Afghanistan Clinton’s been a supporter. Arming Syrian rebels was a plan that HC devised with CIA Director David Petraeus, ultimately rejected by President Obama. Hillary Clinton has been referred to in the past as Bush-Cheney Lite, which says it all.
Wall-Street> Paid speeches by Wall-Street is well known and disturbing on it’s own. But you not need look past her son-in-law. Co-founder of the hedge fund Eaglevale Partners LP. So Hillary Clinton will reign in Wall-Street and the poor behavior of Wall-Street? If Wall-Street’s not worried why should you be?
My colleague Shane Johnson said it perfectly, “the difference between the Democrats and Republicans is this. The Republicans want you to take the poison in one gulp. The Democrats just give it to you a little at a time.”
The death of the middle-class,and the ever growing ranks of those living in poverty cannot be blamed just on the Republican Party. Hillary Clinton is part of the problem NOT THE SOLUTION.
Super Tuesday, the make or break for many in this election cycle. On the Republican side, Ben Carson, John Kasich will most likely see the end of their runs. Ted Cruz, well he needs to do well and win some states, as does Marco Rubio.
Super Tuesday for the Democrats who are down to just Sanders and Clinton? Well neither will be bowing out after Tuesday but we the rest of the country will have a much clearer picture.
I am not a fan of the primary season. With states being left out of the process as a winner generally is crowned before the primary season has ended. But, the process is what it is as they say. “WE” still have a right to complain. More like an obligation to complain about the process of selecting the candidates who may lead our great nation.
Based off the rankings of the dumbest states in our union, ranked by The Street back in 2014 a few of our Super Tuesday states appear on this list. Arkansas, a Super Tuesday state is the highest ranking of dumb. With their average IQ coming in at 97.5 and 80% of the population with no degrees beyond high school. And why they are the 50th ranked state in the union for income. They will be involved in deciding the fate of our candidates :/
Alabama the Beautiful who ranks as the 7th dumbest state and another Super Tuesday participant. 95.7 IQ average. SAT scores average 1608. It’s no wonder the top 5 employers in the state are the STATE.
Oklahoma is 9th in the dumbest awards from The Streets list with a 99.3 average IQ and a mere 23% with educations beyond high school. Tennessee closes out the dumb voting states ranking 10th on the list, a 99.7 IQ but a whopping 24% with educations beyond high school! Good for them 🙂
All isn’t a disaster this coming Super Tuesday as we do have some smart states. Colorado, Vermont, Virginia will be voting!! And the SMARTEST STATE IN OUR UNION, Massachusetts. With their whopping 104.3 IQ’s will be helping decide the fate of America.
Some may feel that this post is mean-spirited. It is not. I wrote this to express frustration with our system. Should a handful of states decide for the entire nation who will be the respective candidates? We have heard complaints in the past of the delegate system. Bush losing the popular vote to Al Gore. Today we have the complaints in regard to Super Delegates and the ignoring of the voters will in Bernie Sanders case. Our election process is flawed. The popular vote should be the only vote that counts in the primaries and in the general election. With full participation of the dumb and smart.