10/13/16

Donald Trump and the One-Party System

Donald Trump’s Presidential campaign ran aground again in the shoal waters of accusations of sexually groping women without permission. Following the release of a video where he bragged about having done exactly that (later recounted and ascribed to locker room boasting (perhaps so high society didn’t think he was a dinky, shyterish lover of money in-itself rather than a bold man of the world sleeping about recklessly as a youth cranked up with the designer dope of the day), Trump’s republican Party support continued to abandon ship like rats running from a fire below deck.

Many Americans for some time have believed the inside the beltway crowd is a Harvard leaning clan running puppets as yes men for Wall Street and/or the British and recrudescent imperialism. Bill Clinton as a Waco Christian burner that required Oval Office fellatio from student interns to grease his loquacious speech making is sort of the same old kind of stuff already impeached. Some wonder why Trump isn’t given a chance to be impeached for-himself-by-congress so Mike Pence can move up as an exemplary conservative.

In Alaska the two U.S. Senators that claim to be Republican have jumped ship from State Party Leadership so they too can avoid supporting Trump. The one-party system that would make men slaves of Hillary Clinton and force homosexual marriage upon the world as best as possible probably as a step in scientific population reduction and generous corruption of individual rights within a planetary neo-imperial economy concentrating wealth seems supported as an actually existing fact by the recrudescent Clinton campaign and the worst Presidential campaign run in the U.S.A. since maybe the 19th century by the potentially nation-saving billionaire Trump. 

Do American voters really believe a moral, intelligent candidate with good policy ideas could actually be nominated by a major party? One wonders what moral standard U.S. politicians should be comparatively held to? Don't the policies matter at least as much to citizens as a candidate's morality?

If one was poor and trash talked by the Democrat party and wanted political economic change would such a voter care more about getting a candidate elected that would advance his or her economic interests rather than one that was not caught lying, cheating or in some non-sanctioned sexual activity? Sure it would be great if politicians in the U.S.A. never cheated on taxes, didn't lie, were never getting millions from Wall Street for making an ass kissing speech for a half hour, and didn't use dope or have sex before marriage etc. Yet if voters somewhat delusionally look in that direction instead of their national economic and secure interests they may suffer attrition to those, though they elect a leader that can claim never to have been in as morally compromising of a situation  as the other.

I must wonder how a nation that approved-even via Supreme Court force-or rather tolerated homosexual marriage can be concerned about morality as an issue. They also tolerate abortion, support for the construction of protracted civil war abroad- murder in a sense, allow the federal Reserve to provide trillions of dollars for nothing to the wealthiest banks via zero interest loans-theft in a way since it gives to the rich and pisses on the poor, destroy the world ecosphere, live as examples of spoilt over-consuming, irresponsible sycophants of wickedness too much etc.

There is no mistaking the fact that many Americans consider this the last U.S. election with a chance to conserve the nation’s borders and people. Even so the Reagan administration probably was the last real American administration. Like that following the Antonines of ancient Rome the subsequents seem incapable, corrupt, inclined to concentrate wealth, promote moral decay and or so forth. The people as well vote for superficial characteristics of candidates (though race and gender are not superficial they are not indicators of good or bad policy as might lizard behavior be thought to be consistent with physical characteristics.

Democrat voters and Republicans seeking to provide effectively a third and fourth term for the impeached Bill Clinton as confident that his wi8fe can lean on him for advice and support for every critical decision she must make about how to mollify American voters as they become poorer and lose national advantages while concentrating wealth better; not easy decisions to make.




No comments:

The President's Irrational Ukraine Policy

Nuclear weapons are an existential threat. Presidents are not welcome to egress toward the direction of nuclear war. It's just bad polic...