Back to More Content Magazine
The folks on the left and right have principles that guide their electoral choices. These FUCs are the ones whose views are primarily shaped by the appearance of a candidate, campaign advertisements, mainstream television news and newspaper headlines. Like the fair weather fans of sports teams, they often support people solely because they think that they will be the winner. They lack guiding principal for their political choices, are uninformed and are easily swayed by factors unrelated to the candidates' ability to perform the job such as the candidate's hair style or sex life. They are an enemy of good government yet they are the ones who get most of the candidate's attention and ultimately decide our presidential elections.
If you think that you may be one of these people, please make a genuine effort to research and understand the candidates and issues before the election. If you are not willing or able to do your homework, please don't vote. Voting based on ignorant, superficial impressions of the candidates and issues is not helpful, it is harmful.
*Quote Investigator attributes this quote to Dr. Gordon A. Eadie.
We Couldn't Have Said It Any Better
Jessica Valenti of the Guardian did a great job of expressing our views on Trump and his supporters:
"...For the targets of Trump’s ire, the bigotry is obvious: polls show women, Latino and African American voters are overwhelmingly adverse to voting for Trump, and that is not likely to change before the November election.
That’s why Trump’s recent “outreach” to black voters – speeches about the African American community before mostly white audiences; upcoming visits to black churches – is not really about rehabilitating his image with people of color. It’s about pandering to white voters who want to believe they’re not racist for supporting Trump.
He’s hoping that moderate white Republicans – those who may be disturbed by Trump’s white supremacist supporters and his invective against, well, everyone – will see this as their opportunity to vote for Trump without feeling guilty for supporting a racist. As NPR’s Domenico Montanaro said last week: “the fact is whites with college degrees don’t want to feel like they are voting for somebody who’s seen as a bigot or a racist.”
The tactic may work to assuage that guilt, but it doesn’t change reality: a vote for Trump is a vote for racism, misogyny and hate. It matters that white supremacists (who apparently prefer the softer term “white nationalists”) support Trump, and that he is slow to disavow their endorsement. It matters that he consistently and repeatedly surrounds himself with women-haters and bigots. It matters that his policies and beliefs would irreparably harm marginalized communities.
Associating yourself with a terrible person – whether through work or through votes – reflects on who you are, whether you like it or not....There is no papering over the sexism and racism that has infected this campaign. If you believe in equality, there is no voting for Trump."
Third Party Candidates for President
The system is rigged for the two party system and a vote for a third party candidate is a de fact vote for Trump. A Trump victory will quickly result in significantly more misery for vulnerable people and the appointment of judges and cabinet members whose decisions will adversely impact us for decades. The balance of the Supreme Court alone requires that we hold our noses and choose the lesser evil. A decision to act on principal alone and vote for the 'best' (or even a "good") candidate ignores the predictable real world consequences of a Trump victory. Trump will not start a revolution by being so bad that the people will rise up in rebellion, the USA is not ready for that. Instead, he will harm vulnerable people and make the world even more volatile and dangerous while many will complain and some will directly benefit. For a preview of the Trump presidency look at current events in Turkey and the Philippines.
Speaking of Hypocrisy
The fact that Trump's wife posed for commercial erotic nude photos has been unreported and rarely mentioned in discussions of the candidate. (Perhaps because of Trump's propensity for suing journalists) Meanwhile, Hilary is still routinely criticized and opposed because of her husband's erotic activities twenty years ago. The Pundit fully supports the right of anyone to express themselves erotically and to display their uncovered body to consenting adults, so we don't have a problem with her actions or Trump's apparent acceptance of her past. We do find it intersting that the party of traditional values and their anti-sex religious contingent has been so silent about a candidate whose attitudes and behavior are so contrary to their positions. I would like to think it is a sign of progress, but I doubt it. (By the way, the NY Post reports that the photos were reportedly taken in New York City and published in January 2016, yet Trump claims that she never worked in the USA until 1976. (Not that we have an issue with those who are guilty of minor violations of immigration law either)
Sign of Progress?
Before last year, gay rights and gay marriage were frequent targets of conservatives/Republicans criticism amid talk of anti-gay marriage constitutional amendments etc. and the passing of bogus "religious freedom" bills that attempt to legalize discrimination. They haven't officially changed their views, but they sure are quiet about gays this year. Our guess is that the candidate's advisors looked at the public opinion polls and determined that immigrants and Muslims are a better choice for scapegoating than gays. Hell, I have even seen conservatives use the sexist and homophobic views of some Muslims as an argument against taking in refugees and other Muslim immigrants. Will the gay marriage issue be revived by Republicans/comservatives in the future to gain support from social conservatives (as is done routinely with the abortion question), or is the issue finally resolved and irrelevant to a solid majority of residents of the USA? Stay tuned.
Clinton is a Ground Breaking Candidate?
I think nominating a short, bald, Jewish guy with a Brooklyn accent who is an out-of-the-closet socialist as presidential candidate of a major party would have been far more remarkable than nominating a wealthy old white woman who is a Yale law school grad and a former President's spouse.
Back to Oranj Productions Home
Page
Contact Info
All content Copyright 1993-2016 Oranj Productions.
All Rights Reserved. Commercial use, public distribution or presentation allowed with written permission only.