I made the mistake of
watching the news this morning. I should have turned it off as soon as I saw
the graphic for a presidential election poll flash on the screen. The poll was
a CBS News poll that showed Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton tied – 40% each.
Think about that for a minute – 40% each. Twenty percent of respondents (1)
wouldn’t say for whom they intended to vote; or, (2) don’t want either
candidate. Then, I heard Speaker Ryan say that we have a choice between two
candidates, and therefore, while Trump isn’t his first choice, he’s choosing
Trump over Clinton.
We’re on a collision
course with our own stupidity. We are in lock step with ignorance.
For good or bad, there
will be no Mexico paid for wall, no new coalmines will open, companies will not
be forced to bring back jobs from overseas, the Affordable Care Act will not be
rescinded with the stroke of a pen. For good or bad, millions will not get free
college tuition or healthcare, the rich will not pay their fair share, and Wall
Street will not be required to pay for anything it doesn’t already.
Why not?
No one person, even the
President of the United States, has the power in this country to either ruin it
or make it great. Sorry. Our government is specifically designed to prevent
that. Remember how the election of President Obama was going to usher in a new
era of change, or completely devastate the nation, depending on how you viewed
him? Raise your hand if your life has been so drastically changed by President
Obama’s work that you no longer recognize the life you lived eight years ago…
Yeah, that’s what I thought.
·
The President cannot introduce legislation.
That is a function of the legislative branch. POTUS wants legislation, a
Representative or a Senator has to do that. And it has to pass both houses.
·
The President cannot create national
infrastructure without a bill that passes both houses of Congress.
·
The US cannot invoice another nation for
US projects, unless, an agreement has already been made with said other
country.
·
The President cannot revoke, in his or her
sole discretion, a treaty signed by a previous President and ratified by the
Senate.
Checks and balances. And
the ultimate check and balance? The Supreme Court. The Supreme Court can pretty
much wipeout anything that violates the Constitution.
So, let’s go back that
deadlocked poll above – 20% of people did not pick a candidate. Both candidates
also have very high unfavorable numbers. There’s a good chance that 10% on both
sides could be swayed away if they saw a viable 3rd party candidate.
What does that mean?
If that poll is accurate…a
viable 3rd party candidate could easily win.
Let me say that again…
If that poll is accurate…a
viable 3rd party candidate could easily win.
In order for a 3rd
party candidate (3pc) to win, however, 3 conditions must be met:
1 – People have to
realize that a 3pc could win. The Rs and the Ds will fight against this with
everything they have. The mainstream media will help them. They will say:
a) A
vote for the 3pc is a vote for the opposing R/D candidate.
Truth:
No, it’s not. It’s a vote for the 3pc. Get enough of those votes, and the 3pc
wins.
b) 3pc
isn’t a viable option. They can’t get enough votes to win; they’re a fringe
candidate; they won’t get any support in office…blah, blah, blah.
Truth:
Most folks actually identify with the platforms of 3pcs more closely than Rs
and Ds at this point. When you find yourself saying, “the lesser of two evils,”
that’s the sign that you don’t actually align with a candidate, you just align
less with the other. Once in office, again, the POTUS can’t introduce
legislation. With our Congress squabbling over party power, could it get any less
productive? No. So, a 3pc is exactly the message that needs to be sent.
2 – We have to accept
that the one of the two mainstream candidates could still win. Yeah? And?
Without a 3pc, doesn’t an R or a D candidate win anyway? Right now, there’s an
equal chance, if you believe the CBS News poll that your “lesser of two evils”
will not win. That being the case, and, the fact that neither party is running
a dream ticket, makes this exactly the time to vote for a 3pc.
This is not
Clinton-Bush-Perot. Bill Clinton was a wunderkind for the Democrats. Bush was
lackluster. Perot was…Perot. Kinda goofy. Perot called it on NAFTA though;
remember his, “that giant sucking sound” comment? Gonna bet there are some
folks who’d like a re-do on that one.
There is a viable Libertarian
ticket with two former governors. You have a viable Green Party candidate whose
platform closely resembles Sanders’s in many ways important to liberals. Go
look them up. You may be pleasantly surprised.
3 – This is the most
difficult condition: People need to understand that if we don’t actively pursue
a 3pc, even if that candidate is defeated, the only other way to change our
government will be drastic measures. Look at how much power is invested in a
handful of people. If you think you’re wasting your vote by voting for a 3pc,
think of how little your vote counts for an R or a D. The two parties are
arm-wrestling over small patches of territory, and doing nothing big in the
process. Let’s look at one issue:
Abortion – Why are
candidates still debating this? We have the ultimate stare decisis on this
issue – the Supreme Court has spoken. Abortion is legal. No legislation will reverse
that. What are the parties fighting for when they fight on abortion? Money and
power.
Money, because the only
way to restrict abortion at this point to is to restrict funding. That’s it.
However, when you tack on unrelated funding to an abortion bill, there’s where
the real money comes into play.
Power, because this is a
polarizing issue. Personal beliefs are strong influencers when it comes to the ballot
box. So, if a candidate can make you believe that she/he shares your personal
conviction regarding abortion, you’ll assume that other areas of their platform
match your other personal convictions, and you will vote for them.
Enough! It’s time to set
this aside for what it is – a ploy. A vote-grabbing ploy. No one candidate will
change abortion law in this country.
If we don’t challenge the
system at the ballot box, the only way we have left is on the streets. We see
some challenge to the existing powers going on already, and it’s not pretty.
Changing a government in ways other than at the ballot box is even uglier.
In order to change the
way in which politics are run and used in this country, we have to change the
way we vote. It’s that simple. We have to be ready to accept the pyrrhic
victory of losing the election to send the message. At this time, there are
enough people not choosing, not happy with, one of the two candidates that this
can be done. In addition, even if the
3pc candidate isn’t elected and the greater of two evils is elected, think
about how little is actually done by the most powerful person in the world, and
breathe easy. The world didn’t end 8 years ago, nor did America reach Nirvana.
We have every chance this year truly to change things. We just need to be
smarter than we have been.
