2016 Presidential Election

First off, I offer my congratulations to President-Elect Donald Trump. As I did with Obama, I hope that Mr. Trump has a successful presidency that benefits the United States.

I don’t particularly like Mr. Trump, but then I rather disliked all the candidates of this election cycle. I did, however, pick Trump to win the election back in March 2016. I think he won largely due to those “long political shadows” I mentioned in that post (i.e. decades of declining middle class, Mrs. Clinton’s ongoing political and legal woes, associations with unpopular organizations, individuals, and legislation, Benghazi, etc., etc.) combined with the arrogance and dismissiveness of the Democratic Party, Clinton’s election machine, and the main stream media towards Middle America.

So naturally, the public (Middle America) decided to remind everyone that they were still a force to be reckoned with.

Don’t get me wrong. Clinton won the popular vote, but lost the far more important electoral college vote to Trump. Of course this has liberals gnashing their teeth and calling it unfair. Obviously, they failed their social studies classes or need a refresher. The electoral college system has worked (and continues) to work as it was intended: to prevent a small number of highly concentrated population centers from being able to dictate to the rest of the nation by simple majority rule style democracy.

Typically, the majority vote would coincide with the electoral counts, but as we have seen in the past occasionally that is not the case. And in those cases was ultimately a result of the arrogance of the losing party thinking they could ignore certain members of the citizenry in favor of others.

Hubris was Mrs. Clinton, the Democratic Party, and the so called political elite’s analysts and polls downfall this election cycle, and I admit I am smiling from ear to ear about their comeuppance. Don’t take that to mean I’m particularly giddy about Trump and the Republicans, but they played it smart this campaign cycle being notably less presumptive about victory when dealing with the American public.

Advertisements

News Commentary 17.04.2008

Military Denied Benefits to Surviving Son It infuriates me that bureaucrats still are able to screw over soldiers for doing their duty by twisting policies that were put in place to protect and help soldiers into a means of punishing them. Was nothing learned from the neglect and abuse older war veterans from World War II through Vietnam suffered and, in some cases still suffer? It’s my sincerely hope that the Hubbard Bill passes and prevent what happened in this particular incident from recurring. Congress also needs to fully fund veteran’s benefits and then get rid of the penny pinching autocrats more concerned about their budget then meeting their responsibility.


Olympic Flame Carried Through Quiet New Delhi
Anyone who thought the controversy over the Olympic Torch run was over, you’re wrong. It’s just repressive means are now being used to quash any public dissent. How representative of this years Games, no?

Zimbabwe Opposition Accused of Treason And so begins the final efforts of Robert Mugabe to remain in power forever. Already Mugabe’s thugs are harassing, beating, arresting and otherwise intimidating all his opponents into submission to his future dictatorship. If the election is as close as Mugabe claims as to force a run-off election then why has the electoral commission not released said results? Given Mugabe’s activities it only leads people to assume that he has in fact already lost and is now clinging to power and looking for a way to remain in power while still appearing to be a legitimate democratically elected official. The situation isn’t improved any by foreign governments allowing in weapons into the tumultuous region.

Democratic Debate I’ve been quiet on the democratic campaign given they are doing such a fine job of self destructing. Obama just solidified my opinion that he’s contemptuous and condescending of the American public with his ‘bitter’ remarks. Worse, to me, is he shows he’s hypocritical (again) in that these bitter people are “anti-trade”. Did not Mr. Obama say he is against NAFTA, the Columbia FTA, and CAFTA? So is he ‘bitter’ as well?

My biggest disagreement with both Democratic Party candidates in on raising taxes on the “wealthy”, which for Obama means any one in the $200k-$250k range and over, while lowering taxes for those under $75k. The problem is that only about 3% of the U.S. population make over $200k+ by U.S. Census numbers (2005 if I remember the report correctly). The $75-$100k group’s (about 10% of the population) income tax would not change, and the remaining 87% would get tax cuts (something Obama has criticized Republicans for suggesting/implementing). The numbers do not add up to a sustainable income tax for government programs, especially when taking into account the numerous new programs Obama wants to implement that require, according to his own website, tax increases. It sounds too much like a socialist wealth redistribution program that would punish those who worked hard to become “wealthy” and to discourage people from becoming “too successful”.

A more reasonable approach is a legally binding balanced budget, elimination of unneeded government subsidies, trimming the budgets of over bloated government programs, eliminating tax breaks and credits to profitable industries and companies (e.g. oil companies) or those who export American jobs oversees and other fiscally responsible activities and regulations be put into place. Another approach would be to encourage development of technological and manufacturing jobs, job retraining for those whose job may be eliminated by obsolete jobs being replaced by advances, and support innovative ideas and technology. High-tech and manufacturing garner more income than lower wage service side economies.

North Korea At Risk For Famine Again. Is anyone really surprised the communist dictatorship of the DPRK allows it’s people to starve while maintaining a bloated military, ignoring offers of assistance from it’s neighbors, and denies that there even is a problem?

Raising McCain

McCain Clinches Republican Nomination – AOL News Ok, McCain’s nomination is not totally official yet, but he’s the de facto Republican nominee. Congratulations to Mr. McCain.

So allow me  a moment of glee and silly post titles:

Whoop! Whoop! Whoop! *virtual cartwheels and jigs*

Ahem.

 Now we simply have to wait for the Democrats to decide on their nominee. I’m still hoping Mrs. Clinton will pull off the nomination but too many seem to have been suckered by the Obama fluff and hype. Just have to wait and see what happens.

Who says politics can’t be amusing?

Obama a ‘blank screen’ I honesty started laughing upon reading the article and got even more chuckles from the posted comments. It’s a good reminder that what you say can come back and kick you in the pants.

Seriously, though, I wonder at Obama’s inability to handle being confronted by his inadequacies as a potential president, seeming to prefer to chant his fluff filled mantra of “Change We Can Believe In”. Simply dismissing valid points like national security as “fear mongering” makes me wonder if Obama’s possible presidency will take the Ostrich Principle to Governance: bury our heads in the dirt and hope the problems goes away.

McCain’s “I’m a proud conservative, liberal Republican” moment:

NAFTA Thoughts

While the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is by far no where near perfect I find myself becoming annoyed by the panderers and politicians who play upon the fears of workers and citizens and make promises they know cannot come to fruition. Despite what people think NAFTA has been good for the US, overall. Just go read the numbers. The facts are globalization is a reality and the US has far outstripped the rest of the world when it comes to succeeding in world trade.

So, why are the presidential nominees going on about how they’re going to pull out of NAFTA or get it changed to supposedly get American jobs back from those foreign lands? Do American workers realize that Canadians and Mexicans feel that the United States has unfairly taken away jobs and opportunities from them? In fact many feel the United States have profited largely at their expense, especially those in agricultural. What is often ignored in the US about lost jobs is that often these losses have nothing to do with NAFTA but instead incentives and tax breaks to increase productivity, the use of automation, investment in foreign nations, industries, and business, outsourcing jobs to foreign nations (like India), and so on. That being said that doesn’t mean measures could not be put in place to eliminate these incentives for companies to strip citizens of their jobs.

So then we come to the candidates: the indifferent, the negotiator, and the re-trainer.

Obama’s indifferent, utterly direction-less and vision-less campaign makes some bland promise about calling the leaders of Canada and Mexico in order to change the agreement. This shows his complete lack of sophistication involved with international politics and negotiation of treaties, not to mention giving an odd impression of one thinking he can simply crank up the charm and avoid the complexities involved. The other problem lay in Obama believing the government can make and control jobs that may or my not be well paying.

Clinton, being a (former?) supporter of NAFTA, at least understands the ramifications of the treaty and the need for all three nations to negotiate their concerns: United States – industry, Canada – environment, Mexico – agriculture. I like that she gives actual workable options to address US concerns in this area from both within the US by eliminating tax breaks and incentives for outsourcing, for example, as well as without. At least Clinton gives solid examples of what she would do versus the etherealness of Obama’s words.

McCain is a strong supporter of NAFTA. Despite efforts on some to demonize his support of free trade (NAFTA, CAFTA, etc) McCain has also proposed ideas to mitigate potentially lost jobs: educational opportunities, retraining, modernization, and overhauling unemployment insurance programs. All of these you would think unions would be supportive of since it ensures their members have some recourse in the event of lost jobs due to technological and trade advancements. He does seem weak on environmental concerns associated with NAFTA.

Poltical Round-up

Bush 2009 Budget Plan While it’s too early to tell how Bush’s 2009 budget proposal will stand it is concerning that the rumors are that said plan would once more harm the poor and middle class once more. But then I have a problem with any budget, from any party, that continues to have rampant needless pork barrel projects and tax-payer funded allocations while the government continues to go into debt and punish poor and middle class America in the process by gutting programs or allowing private companies to reap huge profits for “running them more cost effectively” through overpriced government contracts. It is inexcusable and irresponsible behavior that must end immediately.

Which leads to one of my favorite quotes of which today I was reminded:

The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the constitution so the second will not become a legalized version of the first! –Thomas Jefferson

Obama, Clinton Debate Entertaining to watch if nothing more than to enjoy the snarkiness. Still, my preference is for the experienced Clinton over the fluff of Obama. But then I am a moderate Republican so take from that what you will. I did like Clinton reminding all that she is as much an agent of change for the party and the country by virtue of her gender as Obama is for his race. It was a valid point.

McCain got Schwarzenegger’s support today which is a good boost for Mr. McCain in California.

I still think a McCain vs Clinton presidential race would be all sorts of awesome to watch and partake in.