I would not vote for Hilary Clinton, I simply do not trust her. I am sure her heart is in the right place but, I do not like the ideas of dynasties. The only dynasty I support is the House of Windsor. If a society or civilisation is to concentrate power into the hands of subsequent generations of the same families then it becomes necessary to incorporate those traditions within a constitutional framework. Those families pick up responsibilities to go with great wealth and power, we refer to this institution as the aristocracy and while it is much in decline today in places such as the United Kingdom and Ireland it has in the past been an important feature of governments from the Greeks to the mid-twentieth century when Lord Home renounced his peerage to become prime minister of the U.K. as Sir Alec Douglas-Home.
America was designed as an aristocratic republic on the Roman model by a group of wealthy eighteenth century country gentry. Many of those aristocratic features remain in America's democracy today and it is those features that perpetuate the dynastic legacy of American politics. The primary system is designed so that all states hold equal weight in the process hence a small state like New Hampshire can not compete with California in terms of population so, they hold the first primary of the season and in this way their influence far exceeds what their population, economy or social influence would normally entail. The electoral college is another example over-rewarding small states relative to their share of the population and disregarding the popular vote entirely-Does anybody recall that Al Gore received more votes than Dubya? He did not that it matters.
So it is that to become president a campaign will need to raise at least a billion dollars. To be senator from a large state such as California or New York costs well in excess of one hundred million dollars. To be a humble congressperson will cost in the millions even more if the race is highly competitive and so it goes down to state governors, state senators, state houses, county executive, sheriff, county clerk and judge. Money wins elections and at these prices only the aristocracy can afford to compete. So we have it that the multi-millionaire Hilary Clinton, graduate of Wellesley, spouse of a former president, public speaker for Goldman Sachs, sometime senator for New York will go up against multi-billionaire Donald J. Trump graduate of Warton, thrice married, property developer, reality T.V. actor, celebrity, producer, non-traditional politician. Will go head-to-head in the 2016 general election in November.
It is kind of like when Baseball goes on strike and one must pick a side between the billionaire owners of baseball teams and their multi-millionaire employees-the players. At the end of the day the strike will ruin the season and the fans are left to wonder; do they(Major League Baseball) care about us at all? In the end the owners usually win because at the end of the day making several hundred thousand dollars a year or earning millions of dollars per year to play baseball is a very good deal and a good life. The fans instead of punishing the owners always return. No punishment is meted for cancelling the baseball season or truncating it. Spring training rolls around shortly after Christmas and all is forgotten. Clinton should heed the message though: billionaires rarely lose to millionaires.
This is not the corrupt-influence peddling, cliquey semi-aristocratic oligarchy most Americans want. The success of Bernie Sanders and Donald J. Trump demonstrate how divided the American people are when it comes to their political system and politics. A majority of voters, Trump+ Sanders want major even radical change and believe only a non-establishment type can meaningfully change the paradigm to make it more accessible, equal and democratic for Americans. Nobody believes Hilary Clinton can deliver such reform. In a Hilary Donald match-up my money is on Trump. Not only will he hit below the belt, by commenting on Whitewater, Monica Lewinsky, Benghazi and more,he has a better record: Hilary Clinton as First Lady did not succeed in healthcare reform, As Secretary of State she made life-costing errors on Syria and Libya, the evidence of several hundreds of thousands of dollars suggest she has too close an association with investment bankers. Her credentials are what exactly? She married well? She will only secure the a majority of Democratic delegates through her aristocratic connections known as "super delegates" she may not win a majority of elected delegates. In an anti-establishment year the anti-establishment candidate should be favoured-that's Mr. Trump not Mrs. Clinton. He has more money, a better message "Make America Great Again"!, and is more believable given what the American people know about Hilary Clinton her role in Benghazi and her personal e-mail server-never mind Whitewater or what she really knew when in the Monica Lewinsky affair. All these things could easily be overlooked had Hilary put together a message and reason why she should be president-instead people are left to vote for her simply because she is a women. Had she put it as articulately as Justin Trudeau that it is time for a women president "because it is 2015" she may have a claim but, she fails to do so time and again and we are left with the proposition that she deserves the office and title due to family connections not merit or skills or vision. It is very sad but, it is the truth, Hilary is just not very likable. She will lose to Donald J. Trump. I do not care what the polls say at the moment. Americans passed their verdict on Hilary way back in 2008 and Barack Obama won. Times have changed of course but the sentiment the unlikability of Hilary as a candidate for president have not dissipated. For the good of the Democratic Party Hilary Clinton should take the honourable course and suspend her campaign and allow Bernie Sanders become the nominee as he has better general election poll numbers and a stronger chance of winning against any and all Republican candidates.
America was designed as an aristocratic republic on the Roman model by a group of wealthy eighteenth century country gentry. Many of those aristocratic features remain in America's democracy today and it is those features that perpetuate the dynastic legacy of American politics. The primary system is designed so that all states hold equal weight in the process hence a small state like New Hampshire can not compete with California in terms of population so, they hold the first primary of the season and in this way their influence far exceeds what their population, economy or social influence would normally entail. The electoral college is another example over-rewarding small states relative to their share of the population and disregarding the popular vote entirely-Does anybody recall that Al Gore received more votes than Dubya? He did not that it matters.
So it is that to become president a campaign will need to raise at least a billion dollars. To be senator from a large state such as California or New York costs well in excess of one hundred million dollars. To be a humble congressperson will cost in the millions even more if the race is highly competitive and so it goes down to state governors, state senators, state houses, county executive, sheriff, county clerk and judge. Money wins elections and at these prices only the aristocracy can afford to compete. So we have it that the multi-millionaire Hilary Clinton, graduate of Wellesley, spouse of a former president, public speaker for Goldman Sachs, sometime senator for New York will go up against multi-billionaire Donald J. Trump graduate of Warton, thrice married, property developer, reality T.V. actor, celebrity, producer, non-traditional politician. Will go head-to-head in the 2016 general election in November.
It is kind of like when Baseball goes on strike and one must pick a side between the billionaire owners of baseball teams and their multi-millionaire employees-the players. At the end of the day the strike will ruin the season and the fans are left to wonder; do they(Major League Baseball) care about us at all? In the end the owners usually win because at the end of the day making several hundred thousand dollars a year or earning millions of dollars per year to play baseball is a very good deal and a good life. The fans instead of punishing the owners always return. No punishment is meted for cancelling the baseball season or truncating it. Spring training rolls around shortly after Christmas and all is forgotten. Clinton should heed the message though: billionaires rarely lose to millionaires.
This is not the corrupt-influence peddling, cliquey semi-aristocratic oligarchy most Americans want. The success of Bernie Sanders and Donald J. Trump demonstrate how divided the American people are when it comes to their political system and politics. A majority of voters, Trump+ Sanders want major even radical change and believe only a non-establishment type can meaningfully change the paradigm to make it more accessible, equal and democratic for Americans. Nobody believes Hilary Clinton can deliver such reform. In a Hilary Donald match-up my money is on Trump. Not only will he hit below the belt, by commenting on Whitewater, Monica Lewinsky, Benghazi and more,he has a better record: Hilary Clinton as First Lady did not succeed in healthcare reform, As Secretary of State she made life-costing errors on Syria and Libya, the evidence of several hundreds of thousands of dollars suggest she has too close an association with investment bankers. Her credentials are what exactly? She married well? She will only secure the a majority of Democratic delegates through her aristocratic connections known as "super delegates" she may not win a majority of elected delegates. In an anti-establishment year the anti-establishment candidate should be favoured-that's Mr. Trump not Mrs. Clinton. He has more money, a better message "Make America Great Again"!, and is more believable given what the American people know about Hilary Clinton her role in Benghazi and her personal e-mail server-never mind Whitewater or what she really knew when in the Monica Lewinsky affair. All these things could easily be overlooked had Hilary put together a message and reason why she should be president-instead people are left to vote for her simply because she is a women. Had she put it as articulately as Justin Trudeau that it is time for a women president "because it is 2015" she may have a claim but, she fails to do so time and again and we are left with the proposition that she deserves the office and title due to family connections not merit or skills or vision. It is very sad but, it is the truth, Hilary is just not very likable. She will lose to Donald J. Trump. I do not care what the polls say at the moment. Americans passed their verdict on Hilary way back in 2008 and Barack Obama won. Times have changed of course but the sentiment the unlikability of Hilary as a candidate for president have not dissipated. For the good of the Democratic Party Hilary Clinton should take the honourable course and suspend her campaign and allow Bernie Sanders become the nominee as he has better general election poll numbers and a stronger chance of winning against any and all Republican candidates.
No comments:
Post a Comment