Wednesday, April 20, 2016

Election 2016: The Rough Beast Is Smelly, Too

     Indianapolis will get smeared with a little Trumpening today, over to the State Fairgroundss, where the mighty boor will honk and bleat, fresh from his triumph in New York state.

     I've made no secret of not being impressed with the candidates and as the pool has narrowed, I am even less so.  Mr. Trump is a clod in a bespoke suit; I'd call him a gangster if I didn't harbor suspicions la Cosa Nostra finds him appallingly crude, too.

     On the other side, his old friend Ms. Secretary Clinton came out on top, too, with the gleam of madness in her eyes and a blood-thirst worthy of a Disney villainess.

     Of all the possible pairings among the four frontrunners, I think this one is the worst -- a brute and a vindictive madwoman, both extremely polarizing.  Hillary Clinton knows the levers of power far too well and Donald Trump, much as I might wish Congress will loathe him (or his take on the job of POTUS) as cordially as they would Bernie Sanders, I suspect he's much too typical of the banksters and captains of industry who butter the Congressthings bread -- or their feet, if they get out of line.  Both candidates have preposterously high negatives and neither bodes well for the country, if you ask me.

     The also-rans, interestingly enough, strike me as less vicious and perhaps only a cynic would speculate that was why they came in second.  Ted Cruz certainly plays sincere but to my eye and ear continues to have a whiff of Elmer Gantry -- or perhaps Pat Buttram as "Mr. Haney" from Green Acres.  He has the charm of being an Congressional insider who never quite got inside and who would keep that howling mob-in-office howling and likely not doing much. And then there's Senator Sanders, who manages to radiate the precise kind of left-wing avuncularity of that friendly, happy-go-lucky draft-dodging uncle to whom you were warned to never, ever mention the name "Nixon," lest he fly into a three-hour rant.  He, too, would keep Congress busily engaged in internal debate and we could count on hearty mutual dislike between the two branches with even some hope of it being bipartisan.

     But from where I sit, what all four have in common is they've got no business in the Oval Office.  Senator Cruz comes closest to showing some understanding of what the job actually entails -- which is probably why he's got the least chance of attaining it.  The other three appear positive they're actually running for God-Emperor and will rule by decree, the Constitution being just some old bunkum only geeks and fools bother to read and no sane person would attempt to apply.

     Got plenty of popcorn right here next to my Libertarian straight-ticket ballot for the general election.  Y'all can vote for whoever you like and chide me for refusing to pick a possible winner but I'll bedamned if I'll vote for any of these four.   The winner's going to spend four years beating up on civil liberties and the economy and at the end, why, we'll look back on the crash of 2008 with bittersweet nostalgia for the Good Old Days.


Anonymous said...

Last things first, you get points for standing on principle. I mean that quite sincerely. And we have had it up to here with voting for the lesser of two evils. This is especially so for them who have been of voting age for several decades. The lesser of two evils is still evil.

As much as I dislike to complain without also offering a solution, I nonetheless will offer up my complaint. It's two fold and of the nature it's your soapbox and all; you complain about Trump and the others. But where is your solution, who do you see better?

A 3rd party is DOA, it's time if it should ever come is not yet. This especially because this election is more dire than ever since I have been voting. Yes, yes, I am aware that the same is said every election cycle. I admit I am somewhat aghast to find that I myself have joined that chorus. Of course, there is more to be said (you can probably guess what it is). It is that every vote for a 3rd party is one less vote to keep the beast or commie away from the office. There it is...yes I said it. Whew! This is heady stuff. But why isn't it the truth? Why shouldn't we declare that any vote not for an R candidate is tantamount to a vote in favor of the D?

I'm no fan of Trump and I Cruz seems too slimy to earn my trust. Actually, I like Trump for the precise reason that this country needs a damn good shaking and I think Trump is most likely to succeed in that respect. I reckon I could say it's because the storm is coming (a question not of if because that time is past, but of when) but if we could control it in some manner then we could engineer the outcome to our advantage. By 'our' I mean those in favor of a small government, those who seek the limitations of the US Constitution as originally written. This government has become so corrupted by those who seek how, why, when, upon who the law should be enforced.

Sorry, the only solution I foresee is that with an R in the office we could have some sway. Otherwise, I do believe the nation will go full retard as it is currently confined to screwed up states like CA, NY, and the like. While President may seem a nightmare, the she-beast would be absolutely horrifying. And Sanders, well, I guess we could all reread The Gulag Archipelago as we each hunker in a fantasy wooded safe zone.

Oh, one other possible solution; an intense campaign to bring into the public light a legitimate 3rd party candidate. It would have to be intense because at this late date much must be done in so short a time. Waving the libertarian banner does not cut it for most people have little to none clue what libertarian party is about. And, even amongst the stoic faithful under that banner there is dissension even about the basic tenets of that platform. If the true believers are not of one body then why expect a nation? Too, or perhaps, two; to put forward the cause for a 3rd party it is a disservice to the interests of that party to comingle or disguise it with or under the dislike of current front runners. I suggest that the message would be more cleanly heard if it stood unfettered by complaint and discord of the current 2 parties.

Jeffrey Smith said...

Did you ever hear the (Anne) Barnhardt Axiom? "In this era, the desire to run for political office is a sure indication that one is unfit to hold office."

If it is T v C, I may vote for Hillary. Because I think Trump is that bad...and because the GOP will be ready to go into full gridlock made by November 10, if she is elected, but that won't be the case if he wins

Or I may get sensible and vote LP again....

Anonymous said...

I'm still supporting Nobody.


Roberta X, remotely said...

Anon 9:13 asks, "But where is your solution, who do you see better?" So, didja *miss* the part about me voting LP?

Oh, no, I see you did: "A 3rd party is DOA, it's time if it should ever come is not yet." Know that. Don't care. This isn't a horse race and I am *not* going to be coerced into voting for the shit sandwich that seems to have the least about of shit in it -- because you're still voting to eat shit, and feed the same to everyone around you. Also, where does it say it's *my* job to fix it? That's group effort and most of the group are not into systemic fixes.

R, D -- they really are the same thing with slightly different emphasis and in neither case is it a thing I can support. I will vote my conscience.

As for Mr. Trump giving this country "a damn good shaking," don't dispute that -- it's just that I think he'll shake it the same way Mussolini shook Italy. He's Stormfront's pet candidate, which is enough to disqualify him on the spot for me.

Our republic is well over. I intend to ride the damn thing down voting for what I believe to be right. No vote I can cast will change the inevitable but I can have the satisfaction of not having egged it on.

You do as you like, and welcome to it.

rickn8or said...

Trump might turn out to be an effective leader simply because he will please no one group.

As for Cruz, I'm voting for a President, not a Pope.

H->illary! is evil on the hoof, leave alone her ideas about higher taxes and more gun control.

And as regards Bernie, I refuse to vote for someone that can't pass Economics 101.

"None of the Above" is looking better and better.

Joe in PNG said...

I've decided that Pink Floyd's "Animals" album should be the official soundtrack for the rest of the primaries.
"Dogs" is fits the Donald, while "Pigs (3 different ones)" works for Hillary, and "Sheep" fits Bern.

james said...

To voice my sentiments I had a nice patriotic themed bumper sticker made that says:

Vote 'None of the Above'
For President 2016

Which is probably how my write in vote will read.

James Johnson, N3JTM

Roberta X said...

Thank you all for your contributions!