Years from now, when the presidential election of 2016 is only an entry in history books, we may wonder how we got here. How we went from a serious discourse about issues, good faith differences, men and women of principles although imperfect, to, well, the cluster#$@# we have now.
I was cringing and silently screaming during the first debate on Monday, through mentions of skirting paying taxes, to hotels and Rosie O'Donnell and beauty pageants and false boasts. It's straight out of an episode of Veep, though even Veep seemed more the serious drama by comparison.
I have been conflicted, and I see the abdication of so many men and women of principle as a great disappointment. Maybe it is a lesser of two evils, or maybe it's #NeverHillary. But with any endorsement, where do you draw the line between policy and character?
So many, many months ago Donald Trump suggested, "I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters." He floated a scenario where the GOP runner-up's father was complicit in a presidential assassination. Said runner-up then promptly endorsed him. He's made crude and flamboyant comments about both women and the disabled. He has displayed virtually no humility when bragging about his great wealth, great success, great intellect, etc. He mocks those who he deems vulnerable.
There's the chatter about 300 million people and we ended up with THESE TWO. I could say much about Hillary--she lies, obfuscates, misleads, excuses, explains, condescends, and displays no respect to the ideas that make America great. No individual can do this. The nature of man, of Americans, and the respect we have for the principles embedded in our constitution do that.
So I endorse: neither. I cannot support nor will vote for neither. I cannot place a premium over policy above character, and neither check both boxes. Until 2020, a republic then, if we can keep it.
No comments:
Post a Comment