Bye week thoughts while sipping on my first
Berkshire Imperial Stout of the season...
The upcoming- and all too accelerated- Presidential primaries... One of the more maddening things I hear is from people who say they will vote for Candidate X because "it's time"- no, not time in terms of the candidate's political philosophies, views, etc... but because of their background. Most of this talk has centered on Hillary Clinton and, to a somewhat lesser extent, Barack Obama. And it is true, in the US we have never had either a woman or a black as a major party nominee, let alone as President. But people would vote for them
solely because they believe "it's time" we had a woman, or a black, as President?! Couldn't a similarly inane case be made that "it's time" we elect an Italian, or a Mormon, as we've never had one of those either? And what do you do if you're a black woman voting in a Democratic primary, who do you support, whose "time" is more timely? Do you vote your race or your gender?! Similar question if you're a Mormon of Italian descent (there must be a few!) voting in a Republican primary; is it "time" for a co-religionist, or a
paisan? The only people more ignorant than those who would vote for a candidate because that candidate is a woman, or black, or Italian, or Mormon are those who would
not vote for a candidate because that candidate is a woman, or black, or Italian, or Mormon. (Related thoughts
here.) Look at what the candidate proposes and stands for, and more- look at what the candidate has actually accomplished. See how their proposals, their past achievements, their rhetoric, and their political philosophies square with and come closest to those things you support.
One item that does tend to sway me- other things being roughly equal- is executive experience. In my lifetime every President has previously served as either a Vice-President (Johnson, Nixon, Bush 41) or as a Governor (Carter, Reagan, Clinton, Bush 43.) I believe that chief executive experience is something that being one of 100 Senators or 435 Representatives cannot match. In the current race, to my best knowledge there are three candidates who meet that criteria; one current Governor, one former Governor, and one former Mayor.
While not etched in stone, I have a pretty good idea of who I'll be supporting. The pickings are, admittedly, a little slim. There is one candidate who seems a likeable, agreeable sort, charismatic and compelling who, unfortunately, has such a dramatically different idea of what government should do (and relatively few things that it
shouldn't do) - and how to fund them- that it would make it almost impossible for me to vote for this candidate in the general election. There is another who has an admirable personal history of service to our country, one whom I could support in a general election, yet one whose campaign has yet to offer much substantively, let alone fire my imagination. There is a third candidate whose overall political philosophy is closest to my own; there's much I agree on, very little I don't...
except for this candidate's views on arguably the most important issue currently facing our nation. The last candidate, and the one I currently plan on supporting, while not perfect, has the best record of accomplishment on issues of importance to me, a proven track record of not merely rhetoric but results as a political chief executive; a candidate who has exhibited under-stated but strong leadership at a time when it was vitally needed; and a candidate whose personal narrative is one I can relate to more readily than that of any other candidate.
Don't forget; remember- and thank- a vet.