Vote for Supremes and Congress
The impossible happened last week. The weirdest Presidential campaign in recent history just got weirder.
There has been little discussion or debate about issues of importance like national security, the national debt or deficit, the unemployment rate, the future of ObamaCare, etc. All the talk has been about personal looks and traits of the two candidates.
Then the bomb was dropped last week. The Washington Post published incontrovertible evidence that Donald Trump is a male homo sapien. Gasp!, just read or listen to that vulgar language Trump uses in talking about women with another man.
This sent women into a hissy fit. Some apparently believe that it would be much better for women to return a documented woman abuser to the White House as First Husband than to send a man there who talks dirty.
Making a snippet of a conversation between two men an issue in the campaign is a sad commentary on the media. Any heterosexual male over the age of 15 who claims that he has never engaged in sexual banter with other males is less trustworthy than Hillary Clinton.
Possibly aggravating this unpleasant situation are the studies about the sexual attitude differences between women and men. There is a wide variance among the studies on the number of times a day men and women think about sex. All the studies are consistent, however, in the findings that the rate for men is double that for women.
That abiding interest naturally leads to recurring talk about sex, sometimes very bawdy, when men meet for a ball game, poker party, or other men only events.
So, in the remaining three weeks of the campaign, let’s confine the debates and discussions to issues that really matter.
A novel scenario for the final debate between Trump and Clinton would have each of them seated in a comfortable, sound proof cubicle. Their microphones would be controlled by a switch in the hands of the moderator.
The only mike that would be on at any given time would be the one for the candidate who has been asked a question or given the floor. That mike would be cut off if the candidate began straying from answering the question that was asked or began talking about what the other candidate did or would do on the same question. If a mike had to be shut off twice under those circumstances, the question and floor would shift to the other candidate.
Imagine the results of requiring the candidates to answer questions directly, not to interrupt their opponent, and not try to say what the opponent had said, done, or would do.
Hillary Clinton would probably do fairly well under such conditions. Donald Trump, however, probably would not participate because he would not be in charge and that would make it unfair in his mind.
Here are some questions that might prod some real, useful information out of the candidates in such a forum:
Mr. Trump, how would you make Mexico pay for your fence?
Mrs. Clinton, is the U.S. at war with radical Islamist terrorists?
Mr. Trump, how would you vet immigrants from countries that are in turmoil and where most public records have been destroyed?
Mrs. Clinton, would you help arm the Ukraine in its war with the Russia with whom you pushed the reset button?
Mr. Trump, would you exempt any category of illegal immigrants from deportation?
Mrs. Clinton, under what authority would you provide tuition free admittance to universities not under federal control, and who would pay for the books, meals, and housing?
Mr. Trump, what would you do to stop the hemorrhaging of the national debt, and what would you do to begin reducing that debt?
Mrs. Clinton, what would you do to fix or replace the broken Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare)?
So here’s the perspective.
Both presidential candidates are morally bankrupt. Neither is minimally qualified to be president. But vote, we must.
With such poor choices, the only reasonable path is to consider the coattails. The next President will change the orientation of the Supreme Court for generations and his or her coattails; i.e. the House of Representatives and Senate candidates down the ballot of his or her party, could change control of the Congress for several years.
So when you enter the polls on November 8, cast your vote for the Supreme Court and Congress.
enough
