A short comment on “Why Donald Trump Should Not Become President And Why I Disagree” by Angel Vigil, November 04, 2016.

Obviously the post was published 4 days before the election in support of Donald Trump and I would like to congratulate Angel for the victory of her presidential candidate, however I respectfully disagree with her arguments for the following reasons:

·      A healthy and constructive methodology in any election should be choosing the best and most qualified candidates for the job not voting for someone because we dislike his/her opponent.

·      The statement: “she is a criminal and should punished for the crimes she has committed” seems to be inaccurate. Hillary Clinton had only been under investigation and never been charged with any crime. We cannot call a person criminal unless he/she has been formally charged by the prosecutor and found guilty by the court of law. As Democrats are not supposed to call Donald Trump a criminal while he is not convicted in “Trump University Fraud Case”, yet.

·      Angle has a valid point about minimizing America’s involvement in the conflicts around the world and spending the resources in our own country, however we need to remember: 1- the effects of globalization is a reality of modern world and we are part of it, 2- it was a republican president who started two massively expensive wars. It was a Democrat president who brought most of our veterans back home.

·      Lying (to some extend) has become part of politics, we like it or not. So, in response to the statement in the post: “Anyone that lies the way Hillary Clinton does doesn't even take pride in herself, so she can not take pride in her country”, I refer Angel to “POLITIFACT” or many other fact checking institutions who have compared two candidates during their campaign and debates. A diagram from “Politifact” in below shows a comparison between president-elect Trump and secretory Clinton:

U.S. Presidential Election System

Expensive, outdated, and inefficient

History tells us that the founding fathers had legitimate concerns about the political system they were developing after achieving independence and they explored different options for replacing monarchism with a “government by consent of governed” for the new “Republic.” 

The Constitutional Convention of 1787 considered several methods of electing the President, including selection by Congress, by the governors, state legislatures, special group of members of Congress, and by direct popular election, however as a result of that convention and few amendments later, we have inherited our current Election system with some unique and often obsolete elements.

•        Voter Registration: this requirement of the voting process is a perfect example of outdated regulations. In the old days, you needed to register for voting so the state could verify your eligibility with certain criteria which some of them don’t exist anymore. It’s easier to provide U.S. citizens with a national identification card (like many other nations), which could be used for many ID purposes including voting eligibility verification.

•         Electoral College: in a historical context and with all the challenges that Founding Fathers had to solve, it was easier to appreciate the Electoral System but in the 21^st century it’s less complicated and more democratic to implement a “Direct Vote” and value the popular vote for the highest office of the land.

•         Election day: many of citizens don’t know why should we be voting on a business day (on a Tuesday in November), and it seems there isn’t a willing power to change it. Yes, historically we were an agrarian society traveling by horse and needed a day to get to the county seat without interfering... but we are not that society anymore. We are living in a different world.

   These are not the only problems our election structure is suffering from. The American presidential election process is very long and therefore expensive. There is no starting point limit for campaigns. Long campaigns don’t necessarily increase the participations, and often have negative effects on public affairs when people get tired of too much political noise. Here is a diagram comparing U.S. elections with some other democracies:

           It seems trying to change or improve the entire system of the presidential election might be a long shot, and perhaps hard to reach in one step, but replacing the voter registrations by using a national identification card and changing the Election Day to weekend or making it a national holiday makes it much easier for the voters and we can expect a higher participation rate.

Trump’s Debate Performance Showcased His Worst Qualities

Politics page of the “Washington Monthly” on October 20, 2016 had featured an article from Michael O’Hare on the Republican nominee, Donald Trump and his performance on the last presidential debate. The writer believes that not only Trump isn’t in the normal range of aspiring political leaders, but also it’s unthinkable to see him as the president of the United States. O’Hare continues by pointing out some of the reasons he believes are enough for disqualifying Donald Trump even as a runner for the office. Here are some of the reasons in brief:

·      Ignoring the most fundamental American democracy principal, which is accepting the outcome of election.

·      Threatening to imprison his political opponents if he wins.

·      Lack of practical policies and presenting the pops up ideas when facing a crowd or Twitter windows.

·      Surrounding himself with advisors, those obey him not people who dare to give him unpleasant advices.

·      Hateful, spiteful and racist personality.

·      Demonstration of corrupt business activities.

As media have been discussing, take the article of “The Huffington Post” as an example, both candidates are seriously suffering from unpopularity in general. It seems for the first time in modern history none of the candidates are the first and favorite choice of many Americans. 

I, as independent liberal, believe that the current presidential election is about making an unpleasant or disgusting choice for the next term of the office. This presidential race has been full of shocking moments but Trump’s refusal to commit to accepting the outcome of the election was just stunning. His respond was so shocking and unprecedented that Chris Wallace, a conservative Fox News anchor and the moderator of the last presidential debate, felt obligated to help Trump to correct his response with a short history lesson and reminding him that: "there is a tradition in this country — in fact, one of the prides of this country — is the peaceful transition of power and that no matter how hard-fought a campaign is, that at the end of the campaign that the loser concedes to the winner”. 
Wallace added this tradition brings the nation together in part for the good of the country. But Trump’s response remained the same by saying he will decide at the time and he wants to keep us in suspense! 

        I believe that Trump’s “rigged election theory” is a perfect example of what president Obama called “Whining”. Trump needs a reason other than himself for losing the race, so he questions the integrity of the electoral process itself.

A Trumpism of the Left

On Wednesday October 5^th, Ross Douthat, a New York Times Op-Ed columnist wrote about Donald Trump’s post-debate raging about Alicia Machado, the former Miss Universe elevated by Hillary Clinton as proof of Trump’s misogyny. Douthat believes it’s the first time in this election that Trump has clashed with someone who actually resembles him. Other targets of Trump’s rage seemed handpicked for their uprightness and dignity. But Machado, like Trump himself, is a creature of the celebrity-industrial complex, a determined self-promoter with an interestingly patchy past. 

They share the same desperation for the spotlight and shamelessness in reaching for it. In an interview by Anderson Cooper she responded: “I’m not a saint girl”, when she was asked about her past. In a world where a playboy like Trump is a major party’s nominee for the presidency, why shouldn’t a playgirl like Machado be a character witness against him?

            Writer suggests that Trumpism represents the downfall of the world of politics by tabloid and the reality-television carnivals and argues that although still Democratic Party isn’t a dysfunctional entity, and some kind of celebrity (ahem, Oprah, ahem) might be able to win the Democratic nomination under present circumstances, but they would need to be respectable rather than disreputable. They need to run a campaign that accepted guardrails and gatekeepers rather than destroying them. He predicts that the demographic differences between the Democratic Party’s younger, poorer, browner base and its older, whiter, richer and more moderate leadership are in a potentially unstable balance. He believes that the new voice in Democratic Party would eventually  force the professional class to give way to a version of Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow Coalition and someday Machado’s wild, messy, “I’m not a saint girl” style might have its own claim on the American left’s future.

            Based on my 10 years experience of American life, I found it sad but true that the whole political system and the medias are coordinately shaping the campaigns more towards reality shows and competitions. Candidates being awarded for their theatric performances and attacking each other, rather than their true messages, values and decency.  This mentality would only drives the mainstream Americans to look at the political race as a show and amusement not a critical part of their lives, and the generations to come. On Republican side, we have the examples of presidential win by movie star, Ronald Reagan, which was much more respectable and wiser than Trump or elected governor for California, Arnold Schwarzenegger, another unfit official who led the state to it’s worse economy meltdown. In my opinion these examples strongly support the writer’s argument and the influence of excessive populism in politics. 

How the ‘Stupid Party’ Created Donald Trump

     

    Upcoming presidential election and the controversial personality and views of Republicans nominee have created a new political atmosphere and puzzlement to some extends, not only to the general public but also for Republicans themselves. "How The 'Stupid Party' created Donald Trump" is a great article was written by Max Boot published in "The New York Times", which briefly explains about G.O.P’s old days and the changes led to recent populism.  

     The writer of the article is Max Boot. A senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, foreign policy adviser to the presidential campaigns of John McCain, Mitt Romney, and Marco Rubio. He believes that historically Republicans rather than running away from their anti-intellectual label embraced it for their own political purposes. Boot explains that Republican leaders haven’t been demonstrably dumber than Democrats, so the embrace of anti-intellectualism has been, to a large extent, a put-on, at least until recent years.

     The article gives the readers examples from former Republican presidents and how G.O.P. briefly became known as the “party of ideas”.

     Writer at the end concludes that in the recent year's talk-radio hosts and television personalities have taken over the conservative movement that once belonged to thinkers and they caused the arrival of populism such as “Tea Party” or Trump candidacy.

Hello everyone,