Strange, the idea of supporting the Libertarian Ticket elicits little negative feedback from Democrats. Maybe they’re just unaware of the Libertarian Party or they don’t realize that they take about an equal amount of votes from them. Not so from Republicans. Beyond the “but Hillary is worse” nonsense, they point to Trump’s policies presented in scripted and teleprompter supported major speeches. On Taxes, energy, healthcare, foreign policy and supreme court justices he appears to be reasonably inline with longstanding conservative ideas. Even if you have to hold your nose over his numerous disqualifications,if you support these you’ve got to vote for him. We suggest they look a little closer. In every case they reflect well known conservative thinking, just regurgitated by Trump. By taking Steve Moore’s and Larry Kudlow’s ideas on taxes,he gains both credibility and their active support. Same with John Bolton on foreign policy and the Heritage Foundation on the Supreme Court justices. He takes your ideas and you’re flattered and align with him. The bait is set and you and those who believe in you are hooked. Didn’t anyone notice in each area, he later left himself an out to go in entirely different direction? “I’m for lowering taxes but I may raise them, just an opening bid to negotiate with foreign powers, and I may add people to my list of judges later.” He can just change direction when he perceives it to be in his interest or go where he really wanted in the first place. Just wait for the Switch.
For instance,let’s take a realistic look his supporters main pillar,Trump and the Supreme Court. Trumpsters support their position with the mantra, “Hillary wins and the court will be ultra liberal for decades.” They may have to toss their principles on everything else but at least they’ll have prevented runaway government. Really? When has Donald Trump ever done anything that wasn’t in his own interest? He changes positions to align with his interests of the moment, even changing in an amazingly short time. Given his expressed positions, why would he appoint Antonin Scalia type justices? You can’t get past the 1st amendment without grave apprehension on where Trump would go. He wants to greatly expand the libel laws to prevent press criticism, threatened the owner of the Washington Post with anti-trust and would impose a religious test on who could enter the US. We’ve seen his lack of respect for the separation of powers when went after the judge in his Trump University fraud cases and mentioned he would be president when the case went to trial. He’s for greatly expanding eminent domain. Sounds like he would appoint judges favoring an expanded view of government and his presidency. Why would he appoint judges that would rule against him? The Trumsters are kidding themselves.
The Republican leaning media has convinced us that Hillary Clinton is totally unworthy to be President of the US. Just some of her failings such as Whitewater Billings, lying to the parents of the Benghazi victims, her private server and the Clinton Foundation are enough to disqualify her from ever occupying the Oval office . Of course, the list is much longer. How can we elect someone whose proper residence is a jail? However, we are also aware of the arguments of the Democratic leaning media proving Donald Trump shouldn’t even be considered for the top job. An authoritarian bigot who seems to think the Constitution is a suggestion and whose shady business practices might be punctuated by a jury finding him a fraud, Trump would be a disaster. Well, they’re right. Trump should never be president. Our two great political parties have given us unacceptable choices.
How did the Greatest Country on Earth get in this position? Duopoly. Without real competition our two major parties didn’t need to put forth the effort to insure they offered the best possible product. That’s the way it is with limited competition. After World War II GM and Ford dominated our auto choices. (yes there was Chrysler but they just followed along behind). By the end of the sixties we had cars where nothing fit and fell apart before their auto loans were paid off. The companies got big profits and their unions got outlandish wages and benefits. The consumer got screwed. Along came some foreign cars than actually were a value and the landscape changed. Cars like the legendary Datsun 240Z showed us what our money should buy. The Big Two had to either improve or go out of business. Under the gun of real competition they now produce cars that they can be proud. It’s time to look for that Datsun. Unless some people are willing to break ranks and and try something foreign to them nothing will ever change.
This election we have a real third choice, the Libertarian Ticket of Gary Johnson and William Weld. They will be on the ballot in all 50 states. If for no other reason than to punish the two major parties for giving us unacceptable choices and delivering the message, “never insult us again”, vote for this ticket. But there are many more reasons to take this action beyond penalizing the two party political establishment. Johnson and Weld , both have been successful two term Republican Governors in blue states. They actually have more executive experience than the two major party candidates combined and records of successfully working with the opposition. Having a President who is neither Republican or Democrat opens up possibility of tackling our most intractable problems. Entitlements and immigration are just two things we desperately need to confront now before we suffer real damage. The two major party candidates refuse to even entertain entitlement reforms even with the absolute knowledge they can’t be sustained in their present form. The fight over immigration is tearing the country apart. (actually as we pointed out in recent post “On the Move” entitlement reform is in part dependent on immigration reform). With someone in the White House that favors both, we’d have someone to mediate solutions. More importantly, the parties would have someone to blame for the benefit of their respective bases. In this endeavor, William Weld in the Senate would be invaluable in forging the needed compromises as no vice-president before him ever could. With a ticket that is fiscally conservative and culturally liberal, they simply would have far more room to horse trade. Just maybe it would give us a needed timeout from partisanship to achieve reasonable and needed outcomes.
This is supposed to be the year of the outsider and this ticket surely fits the bill better than the ultimate insider Hillary Clinton and the man who by his own admission paid often and well to obtain crony capitalist benefits, Donald Trump. Beyond change,we could actually solve some of our problems and bring the nation closer together. This would be tall order but for the guy who conquered Everest and cast 750 vetoes, Gary Johnson is tough enough to do the job. He and Bill Weld just might be inline with where the majority of Americans actually are. If you take a look and compare, you’ll buy the Datsun.
Humanity has always had a great migratory dimension. If it didn’t we’d still huddled in Africa. Whether it was out of necessity, to seek economic betterment or curiosity or some combination, we have always been on the move. Yet today the idea of people changing their national location is under fire from one end of the globe to the other. Even the great melting pot, the United States, finds immigration both legal and illegal under fire. The European Union is grappling with both internal and external migrations. Some nations such as Japan have never favored immigration. What a great time to determine what migratory policies are more likely to lead to “More”.
Throughout history a welcoming attitude towards “Strangers” seems to be associated an entity’s vibrancy and prosperity. Cross pollination of people benefited all. On the other hand those that cut themselves in self-contained entities remained stagnant backwaters. China and Japan limited contact with “barbarians” and lost their place in the upward march of mankind. Only when their leaders realized their own survival depended on a radical change of attitude did they crack open the door. Japan got the message looking down the cannon barrels of American “black ships” and the Chinese communist party when they saw what happened to their communist brethren in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. Opening up to the world while still not welcoming large numbers of “strangers” among them and without institutional changes that would attract them, they used lower wages initially and copying of other People’s innovations to gain “More” for their peoples. The jury is still out whether their restrictive policies can sustain them in the future. If history is our guide the future may be dim without greater opening.