Tag Archives: voting

107. How Voters Find Truth

20 Aug

While politicians are the immediate cause of our country’s problems, the primary, ultimate cause is bad decisions by voters.

One problem may be that our government and social system have evolved faster than the general skill of voters. Highly educated people probably do a good job, but the most poorly educated can make disastrous mistakes. It’s similar to the ordinary person trying to understand current technology.

I suspect that many voters have a difficult time deciding who is telling the truth. In the past, great newspapers like the NY Times and Washington Post, for example, were highly trusted. And also certain news people, like Edward R. Murrow, Walter Cronkite and several others were considered authorities.

Compare Trump with these traditional sources. Trump never apologizes or corrects errors. The best he can say is that he was joking or being sarcastic. Major newspapers, on the other hand will print corrections if necessary, and the record shows that they do. They never state after a few days, that they were joking or being sarcastic. It is incredible that I have to say, that the words of a US President must be serious and correct. And yet, some voters just don’t care.

Here is a list of ways to determine whether a leader is truthful:
1. Is there a reasonable amount of consistency in similar statements made at different times? (See Trump’s reasons for firing FBI James Comey.)
2. Is there consistency between himself and his staff? (Trump’s attack on NATO was not supported by his staff.)
3. Does he correct errors. Everyone occasionally makes a mistake. (No corrections.)
4. Are his promises realistic (“Mexico will pay for the wall”, really?)
5. If a leader says the press is always “fake,” and he is the only source of truth, isn’t that a little suspicious. After all, the press includes a wide variety of orientations from way left to far right (even alt-right).
6. It is easy to check (with a little bit of searching) how he quotes other people.
7. Does he accurately portray established historical facts? (See what Trump says about the childhood of ex-president Obama.)
8. Does the leader appear to have a good understanding of complex issues.
9. Does the leader tend to avoid directly answering questions by the press.

I know that the voters that really need to read this, probably will not, but this may be helpful for anyone who is trying to promote citizen education.

Advertisements

69. The “Deplorable” Fans of Trump

13 Sep

The Google definition of “deplorable” is: “Disgraceful, shameful, dishonorable, unworthy, inexcusable, unpardonable, unforgivable”. Hillary stated: “half of Trump’s supporters belong in the basket of deplorables.” I applaud her for her courage. Most of the press seems to be afraid to really challenge him.

Trump’s response is that she called American voters deplorable. NO! only HIS supporters, and not all of them (at first “half” and then “some”). My speculation is that his original core membership was the deplorables, then later, others joined in simply to get on the bandwagon.

She clarified: They are “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic—you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up.” David Duke, former KKK Grand Wizard is a Trump supporter, and well qualified to be called deplorable.

How can it be wrong to say that if a candidate, like Trump, has established deplorable characteristics, then at least many of his supporters have the same traits — and he does give them encouragement (see rally speeches).

Is Trump deplorable? Examine these facts, which are supported by words in his speeches. He has insulted women, Mexicans, NATO allies, Muslim nation allies, many Republican leaders, disabled people, our military, and others. His emphasis is on revenge rather than on making productive alliances. He believes in violence and torture more extreme that water-boarding. Regarding “terrorists, you have to take out their families.” All his plans for the country are vague and most are either obvious or impossible. As for military plans, he will to consult with the generals — a brilliant idea that no previous president has thought of.

Recent polls on Trump supporters show that a third or more of them believe that whites are superior to blacks, in many different ways.

Nothing above is an exaggeration. Of course Trump, after reviewing all of his gaffs, backed off a little from the worst, but NEVER apologized for any. In fact, he has changed his mind on so many issues that it is amazing that anyone who reads could support him. On the other hand, Hillary has gone overboard to apologize for several remarks — a sign of her better attitude and effort to be responsible.

68. Why Distrust Hillary?

6 Sep

There are three important facts to note:

1. If Republicans never existed or Hillary Clinton did not run for President, there would be little or no distrust . The repeated and fruitless investigations would not have been made. Republican leaders, such as Mitch McConnell, have dedicated themselves (in actual recorded dialogue) to destroying Pres. Obama, and now Clinton.

2. Even if she were inclined to do something untrustworthy the constraints of the Presidential office would keep her respectable and honest. The Presidency is constantly observed and reported on. Hillary will rely heavily on Pres. Obama, Bernie Sanders, other responsible Democratic leaders, her Vice President, past cabinet members, military leaders, etc. She will be relentlessly observed by the Secret Service, White House staff, other employees, friends and colleagues. Communications will be monitored for security classification by designated experts. Any favoritism for campaign donors would be obvious and very unlikely to be pursued.

3. Hillary has a long history of serving our country in responsible positions. You may not agree with her politics, but you cannot argue with her genuine efforts to help people and be responsible. With Hillary you can be certain that nothing radically wrong will be done and there is a good chance that she can make improvements.

If you simply distrust all Democrats, remember that our country prospered under Bill Clinton and was very financially responsible. Under President Bush (the 2nd), the country was committed to two major and expensive wars. Hillary as a Senator, did not vote for war, but merely to give Pres. Bush the right to make the decision. It could have been a bluff to show that we were serious. Remember also that she and the rest of the country were told incorrectly that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Her vote at that time was understandable and cooperative with Presidential foreign policy.  She also had no way of knowing that Pres.Bush would engage in nation building and occupy the country for many years.

On the other hand, Trump now has a history of hiring sleazy characters to run his Presidential campaign.  He originally emphasized his wealth and indepence from rich donors — but now pleads for donations.  He has told hundreds of lies, is racist, believes in internationally outlawed torture, and engages in petty revenge. He insulted his Republican colleagues, world leaders, news-people, the family of a fallen soldier, a judge born in the USA, and many others. He incites violence and uses foul language. He is self-centered, crude, and has a long history of the selfish pursuit of wealth at the expense of others.  All of these traits are well documented.  As a political strategy, he now accuses Hillary of the very traits that characterize him, such as bigotry, and thinking of people simply as votes.

He is NOT presidential in demeanor, attitudes, or actions. None of his skills as a real- estate developer are particularly applicable to the demands of a USA president. How could he be president when that requires broad knowledge, diplomacy, and coordination? He could cause international, military, and domestic financial disasters. For example, if he were to carry out one of his middle-east bombing plans, he could create more terrorists than he kills, and change ally nations to enemies. Financially, policies such as keeping minimum wage low and abolishing ObamaCare, can lead to more poverty, crime, and acts of rebellion.

Please see my previous blogs — especially no. 65 — for further discussion of these topics.  If you are a voter, please research what the candidates have written and examine other objective info. Please don’t just rely on what they say.

Addendum:   I just read a very relevant article in the Washington Post today, 9-6-16 by Paul Waldman entitled: Trump’s history of corruption is mind-boggling. So why is Clinton supposedly the corrupt one?   The main theme is that the media covers Trump’s corruptions once or twice while Hillary’s issues are repeated many times.  And often when Hillary is exonerated  by a new fact, the fact is presented without mentioning the exoneration.

64. Profit by Creating Fears

31 Jul

Sub-title: Trump and Davidson, similar despicable methods.

For a year or so, many political leaders in both parties have recognized that Trump is fear-mongering voters as a method to get elected — and judging from past behavior, also to make copious profits. Personal profit has always been his goal and why should we believe otherwise now. Often his plan is to distort facts (like our military is a disaster) and then to say that he alone can solve this (made-up) problem. (Hillary, on the other hand, has a long history of helping people.)  Please see my previous blogs for more details on these issues.

I just listened to a video clip by James Dale Davidson about a future financial disaster for the USA. For many boring minutes with lots of repetition he described a stock market crash, massive unemployment, food lines, devalued houses, worthless U.S. dollars, hurricane destruction, etc. The whole world will be against us and will get revenge for our long control of global trade. Along the way, Davidson promised to tell how each of us can be protected by reading his publications free of charge. As the clip progressed it became more and more clear that he would finish by trying to sell profitable literature. In the end, little was free, and his advice would cost hundreds of dollars.

Davidson should have learned his lesson many years ago. In 1993 he co-authored a book The Plague of the Black Debt where he made some dire predictions about President Bill Clinton (will have one term) and the U.S. economy, all of which were dead wrong.  Our future U.S. economy will go through cycles of success and failure, but we don’t need self-fulfilling doomsday prophecies.

Billionaire Michael Bloomberg (former NY mayor) called Trump a CON man and I am sure it would be the same for Davidson — fear-mongering for profit. I am writing this blog because I was struck by the similarity in manipulation.

For those who do not know how Trump will profit, here are examples:

1. His written proposed U.S. budget involves a substantial decrease in taxes for very rich people. But even worse, it will massively increase our national debt with very profound consequences for all of us.

2. He has stated that workers are paid too much and he will not increase minimum wage.  So, Trump can pay less in wages.

3. After leaving office, he can profit from books (he pretends to write) and by speaking fees.
Trump if nothing else, is an expert in profiting from the losses of others, so I imagine secret deals while in office will make him (and family) richer.  Of course, profit is probably not his only goal, I assume that power and ego are also of interest.

I have to add a comment on a recent Trump blunder (see my previous blogs for a detailed critique of his candidacy). He insulted the Muslim father of a fallen soldier. The father stated that Trump has never sacrificed for our country. Trump answered that his sacrifice was “working very, very, hard” and making lots of money. Actually, if he had worked very hard (like most of us) and earned little money I could be sympathetic. But what does Trump know about hard work. He started off with $1,000,000 and his employees did all the hard work. After his early business failures, he cleverly figured out how to greatly profit from such failures. He would obtain a large loan based on family wealth, make false promises, let the business fail with lots of lay-offs, and make money by paying himself a good salary, and by not fully paying employees and vendors. Evidence for this is hundreds of law-suits.

59. Email Issue vs Policy Disasters

6 Jul

The FBI just published its finding of innocent (July 5, 2016) on Hillary Clinton email practices.  So voters must decide how this issue and a few other trivial negatives compare with the questionable candidacy of Donald Trump.  Here is my summary:

Hillary Clinton:          The FBI found “carelessness by Hillary and her colleagues” in the use of emails, but no criminal actions. There were no serious consequences, just an ordinary imperfection in a few cases out of many thousands. No worse than the imperfection of the FBI director who violated neutrality and made political statements. Remember it is the job of the FBI to find criminals, the more found, the higher their ratings. Also, mistakes made could have been by State Dept. employees and not Hillary. There is no claim that any emails actually marked classified were sent by her, as she has consistently claimed. The classification of communications is not the job of the Secretary, but that of designated others. Hillary’s email server decisions were consistent with long-standing State Dept. traditions and in fact were the same as that of a previous Secretary, Colin Powell, a Republican.  (I have to add that careless emails would not happen when Hillary is president, as all communications are carefully monitored and sent by trained White House staff.)

All of the serious negative talk about Hillary began with her run for President. No one thought much about it before. Unlike Trump, she has many years of experience and service to ordinary USA citizens as First Lady, Senator, and Secretary of State. She is enthusiastically supported by the past President and is the most qualified candidate that we have ever had. True, for many years she has taken campaign contributions from rich people, but there is absolutely no evidence that she has supported their agenda. It takes a lot of money to run for office so her strategy is understandable.

Regarding the Benghazi issue, Hillary was accused by Republicans of lying, in her characterization of the attack. The GOP said it was a “terrorist attack” and at only one point she said it was part of a protest against an anti-Islam video. So it all gets down to speculation about what the attackers were thinking: simple terrorism or anti-video protest. How can we know what they were thinking — one captured suspect said the attack WAS revenge for the anti-Islam video. Republicans have no reasonable arguments, they are just desperate to find something negative to say.

Donald Trump:        Vengeful actions and childish name calling of colleagues and others, suggest an inability to deal with foreign nations. He already has damaged relationships with Mexico, Great Britain, and all Muslim majority countries. His written proposed budget includes tax decreases for very rich people. He thinks workers are paid too much and does not want to raise the minimum wage. He lies about past events to suit his political needs. He advocates torture, which the revered President Reagan was against. He disrespects women and finds their biological functions to be disgusting. He frequently changes his mind about major issues, depending on his audience.  As a businessman, he has filed four major bankruptcies and numerous other businesses, such as Trump University, failed.  But here is the kicker, in almost every failed venture, Trump personally benefited by $millions while workers lost their jobs and contracted companies were not fully paid.  Hundreds of lawsuits were filed against him regarding payments and promises unfulfilled.

His goal has always been to make as much money as possible — how does that help us? He brags about making money from bankruptcies.  If the USA goes bankrupt, you can be sure that he and his very rich friends will profit by it, while the citizens will suffer a disaster.  He argues against the TPP, but Democrats are already working on making such treaties better for workers. He says that he is a great negotiator, but does not prove that our problems are the result of bad negotiation. Negotiating with contractors is trivial compared dealing with a nation like China or Russia. Many contractors can do a job, but there is only one China and one Russia and our relationships with them cover finances, defense, treaties, boundaries, human rights, alliances, travel, industrial development, membership in international organizations, etc. (Please see my previous blogs for more information.)

So who should we vote for?          Hillary Clinton is a known quantity, who will at the very least move forward on the Presidents agenda in a reliable and safe way — and could make major improvements, especially if there is a Democratic Congress.  Donald Trump, on the other hand, is fully capable of causing major disasters for our country.  We don’t even know what he is really proposing because he frequently changes his mind about critical policies.  For example,  if his tax plan were implemented as written, there would be a disastrous increase in our national debt and heavy constrictions in basic services.  Can we trust him to make  complicated decisions, such as:  when to go to war, how to make a treaty, when to send in troops, when to withdraw them, when to apologize for killing innocent civilians, when to form a coalition, when to do nothing, etc.  You only understand all the many complications when you have the experience of a leader, such as Hillary Clinton.

 

57. Secret of Trump

16 May

(News flash: Mr. Incorruptible is now taking money from rich donors.)

As Trump started to loosen up on his various positions, I began to see him and the whole process more clearly. The secret of Trump is his ability to adapt. He observes contingencies and people’s needs and changes his approach accordingly. This has worked for his businesses and has worked in his political career so far. Adaptation in fact, is the way most enterprises do best (but alas, is not conservative).

Trump is a man devoted to success, not principles. He does throw out a few ideas, but a substantial part of every speech is concerned with various aspects of winning. He talks a lot about his winning in the polls, his number of delegates, the number of people voting for him, the states he has won, and the defeat of his enemies. He is now backing off many of his ideas suitable for the primary, and developing new ideas for the general election. So now lets see how Trump fits into the political realm.

Republican (conservative) leaders want everything to remain the same, because it is under the current (corrupt) system that they have succeeded. They do talk about some ideals, but mostly their motivation is to keep their lucrative positions,  hold on to their great wealth, and please their rich donors. They create laws that make rich people richer and if necessary, take benefits away from the general population (you and me). Republican leaders talk a lot about religion because religious people are generally more conservative and that keeps them in the party. Religion is also a diversion from questionable budgetary policies.

On the other hand, Conservative voters want things to remain the same, because they fear change. “Lets just keep doing things the same way because that is safer and new things are often hard to understand.” For some GOP voters, of course, religion is most important and they see Republicans as their champions, even though Republicans in practice, are not any more ethical or moral than Democrats, and are less Christian in terms of helping the poor.

Some Democrat leaders support the wealthy, but many genuinely promote programs to help the middle class and those in poverty. Democrat voters are more adaptable and support progressive principles, such as climate-change actions, LGBT needs, job creation, infrastructure improvements, research, support of social programs, etc.

Of course, I have over-simplified, but the main features are clear. By design or just by luck, Trump joined the Republicans because that party has a large group of fearful, traditional, and/or less-educated voters. He could present simple, forceful ideas, like building a wall and strengthening the military, that would appeal to that group.  And, of course, he can amplify the fear by talking about ISIS cutting off heads.

Now that he has achieved the nomination, he can adapt to what is necessary for the general election. He says that past ideas are only suggestions, just proposals. He is now clearly moving more towards the center and even liberal views because that adaptation is more likely to win.

So picture Trump walking along the top his giant border wall trying to stay balanced, but deviations too far to the liberal left or conservative right will make him fall off. Trump is a great adapter and that works well for businesses. But will the voters see him as principled or just opportunistic ??  And clearly, he has now abandoned his original fans.

56. Why: Not-Trump?

10 May

While millions of well-qualified people are unable to get entry-level jobs, Trump zooms into a viable candidacy, which for him is an entry-level position — the most difficult job in the world. In previous blogs, I have discussed Trump supporters and their rationale. Trump’s early success was his appeal to people with less general education and/or less political knowledge; those with prejudices against various minority groups; and those influenced by FEAR mongering. Most are looking for simple solutions (often violent) to very complex problems. The don’t accept life styles dissimilar to “American” ways. That said, I argue that most of his early supporters have these characteristics, but later supporters often simply join in with what appears to be a winner. Now I am going to provide some reasons why Trump should not have this entry-level position:
——————
He often does NOT tell the truth, or is painfully ignorant about past facts. Briefly:

His portrayal of the Iran nuclear deal is terribly false. The USA took NO money out of its treasury to give to Iran. The money belonged to Iran and was confiscated by a group of nations that supported its sanctions. The treaty was not between Iran and the USA but was developed by a group of nations including China, Russia, France, Germany, UK, etc.   He says we got nothing from this deal, which is a terrible lie. Iran lost its enriched Uranium, lost most of its bomb-making equipment, there are provisions for inspection, etc.

His “birther” (citizenship) ideas about Obama were ridiculous and proven false. He never acknowledged this or apologized.

He claims that Hillary Clinton enabled her husband to abuse women. All of this is nonsense. There was no evidence of abuse and Hillary did not encourage these actions.

There is NO evidence that Hillary committed crimes with respect to her emails — and after years of investigation nothing criminal was found.

He says that Mexico “sends” criminals and rapists to the USA. The Mexican government does not send any immigrants to us and most who come are simply good workers trying to support desperate relatives back home. After the immigrant attacks, he later says “He loves the Mexicans”. (Note: I do not support illegal immigration)

The attack of Islamic militants on the American diplomatic compound in Benghazi and Hillary’s role, is falsely portrayed. Over two years, there were nine official investigations, none of which revealed any wrong-doing. The ambassador knew he was going to a dangerous area, but went anyway. Immediately after the attack, a variety of intelligence reports came in and Hillary’s explanations varied because our knowledge was rapidly changing. And in the end, one of the arrested terrorists admitted he was angry about the publication that was offensive to Islam. People die in wars and we really don’t know what the killers were thinking. Kevin McCarthy (a top Republican) admitted that all of the investigation was just to bring down Hillary.

Attacks by Trump (and Republicans in general) on the Clinton Foundation have been false and nothing illegal was ever found. Republicans are desperate to attack anything that Democrats do.

Trump claimed that Muslims in New Jersey celebrated in the streets on 9-11 when the Trade-Center towers were attacked. This was made-up and there is absolutely no evidence to this.
There are many other deceptions. One good source is:
http://www.ibtimes.com/list-donald-trump-lies-10-claims-gop-front-runner-immigration-muslims-kkk-dont-hold-2330265
——————–
Trump’s proposals involve numerous “flip-flops” and many are irrational and impossible. A good example is the Mexican-USA wall. It would be extremely expensive and would not stop people from coming into our country. Terrorists would have the money to come in by sea or by air. There always will be other ways for people to circumvent any barriers. Mexico cannot be forced into paying for the wall — that’s nonsense. We need the support of our neighbors in many ways and coercion of any kind would be harmful.
———————
Trump is crude and lacks the temperament to be President. A really good example is his remark about a Democratic debate intermission. Hillary came back a little late and you can see Trump thinking about this and visualizing it (in an abnormal way) and concluding that it was “disgusting”. What was he seeing in his head?  It’s scary to imagine the way his mind works.  Trump endorsed torture, including water-boarding and worse — despite the fact that R. Reagan and almost all U.S. and world leaders opposed it.
———————
Trump deals with questions and criticism, not by talking about issues or facts, but by attacking the critics, often in childish way. He lost a wonderful opportunity of support by the Pope who said it is better to build bridges than walls. He could have agreed, and said that bridges are most desirable but in some cases like national defense, walls are necessary. What kind of person reacts so negatively and does not take advantage of opportunities to gain important allies.
———————
Many have observed that Trump’s crude, bizarre, and childish behavior reflects a mental problem. He acts like someone who is sleep deprived, and how he describes his lifestyle supports this notion. He is almost 70, dob: June 14, 1946, and the borderline age for Alzheimer’s disease is 65. At his age, many people have the noticeable cognitive impairments due to this disease. (Hillary Clinton, 68, by contrast, is very sharp, accurate, and presidential.)
———————-
My Conclusion.
Trump is unfit for President for these reasons.
He is unfit because without hesitation he lies about past events to support his goals. If this is not lying then he is so poorly informed about the world that he is still unfit. He acts like a person with brain malfunctions, due to Alzheimer’s and/or lack of sleep. His methods emphasize vengeance and dangerous simple solutions to very complex problems. Every foreign-policy decision a President makes involves our relationships with other countries, our national budget, the lives of our soldiers, the support of allies, expensive and serious long-term commitments, etc., etc.  His decisions when dealing with building contractors, zoning laws, bankruptcies, firing people, TV, etc. are trivial compared to the complex presidential decisions.

Now, one could argue that he would have the support of advisors. But he would have to choose good advisors and ultimately must make the final decision. Almost any of the other candidates could do this at least fairly well, but given Trump’s bizarre behavior, who knows? He claims to be incorruptible by very rich donors, but he is already one of them. Trump claims to be supportive of non-rich people, but says that working people are paid too much, the minimum wage should not be increased, his budget plan reduces taxes for rich people, and he started out his adult life with a “small loan” from his father, of One Million Dollars. Does this sound like he will promote the middle class ?  As the primary process is concluded, he will no doubt alter some ideas, but can we trust him?