A 2016 Election Best-Case Scenario?Posted by Dr Snyder on August 11th, 2016
This has to be the dreariest election season I’ve ever experienced. Republicans have flirted with political suicide in their choice of Donald Trump. Democrats have decided that a woman with no real accomplishments other than being a former First Lady and who ought to be indicted for criminal activities should be their standard-bearer.
Could it be any worse?
After an interview with Chris Wallace on Fox, in which Hillary declared that FBI director Comey concluded she never lied about her private server and e-mails, the whole world was laughing. That led to her attempting to provide an excuse of sorts: they were talking “past” each other; she just “short-circuited.” Yes, there is definitely a short circuit occurring in her brain:
Just imagine how this excuse can be used in other circumstances:
As for Trump, well, I can’t keep up with his latest gaffes. By the time I’ve finished writing this blog, he may have committed another one, so why try to say a certain misstep is the “latest” when it already may be surpassed by another.
Never have polls indicated such an absolute disgust with both major candidates. Neither is considered trustworthy or truthful.
May I tell you what would be the best-case scenario for this election, in my opinion?
First, I would like to see the Republicans hold the House and the Senate. With Trump at the top of the ticket, many are saying that is in jeopardy. Yet voters need to grasp this essential fact: the presidency is not everything; Congress is the branch delegated by the Constitution to write and pass laws. Disgust with Trump should not stop anti-Trump Republicans/conservatives from voting for good congressmen and senators.
Second, I would like to see a record number voting for the presidential nominees, but in a different sense: I would like that number to be the lowest in presidential election history as a percentage of the eligible voters. That would make it clear that the majority of voters have expressed their disdain for the choices given them. Such a record-low turnout might send a strong message to both of the parties: we’re not happy with rules that effectively rig elections.
It’s obvious now that the Democrats, with their super-delegates and the Clinton Machine in full swing, chose Hillary over Sanders well before the primaries even began. He never had a chance.
On the other side, Trump was able to take advantage of the rules established by the Republican party to outlast his opponents. How about some changes, such as a nominee having a history of being a Republican? Or how about only allowing Republicans to choose their nominee in the primaries? I know, that’s too much common sense to be seriously considered.
Electing a president should be a serious matter, not a choice between two equally unqualified, and possibly criminal, nominees.
The best-case scenario is simply this: that a Republican Congress can keep either Hillary or Trump under control. Wish I could offer something better, but we have to think long-term now. The next four years will be a nightmare regardless of who “wins” this election.