A few weeks ago, I expressed some preliminary musings regarding the field of presidential candidates. Since then, I have been monitoring political news, increasing my focus on the political blogs I monitor (Electoral Vote, Electoral Projection, and FiveThirtyEight), and watching the posts as they come across Facebook. I’m starting to settle down (or just settle) for a particular candidate, and so I thought I would share you my thinking so far. I’ll note this is on the eve of the sample ballots being sent out in California.
Before I do, a comment on decorum. I’ve been writing of late about the importance of diversity. My opinions here have been been shaped by two excellent podcasts — one from Startup, and one from ReplyAll. I extend this importance to political diversity. Having the diversity of political opinions and views is vital to our country; it is the compromises achieved from those positions that tempers the extremes and often finds an approach that can be tolerated by all. Central to this diversity is the notion that reasoned people can, based on their experiences and circumstances, arrive at different views. Just as I do not want an echo chamber, I want the respect for the different views. If you cannot do that — if you can’t respect either the candidates or their supporters — then just don’t bother to comment. This reflects an evolution of my position since the days of Bush 43 where I did resort to such name calling. I now regret that.
Next a stipulation. I’m a Democrat in the mold of Hubert Humphrey (whatever happened to him 🙂 ). This tends to shape my overall position. As such, the current crop of Republican candidates are not under consideration. Donald Trump is, in my opinion, too unpredictable and unmeasured to be President. I would not have confidence in his having appropriate interactions with international leaders, or in his ability to work with Congress. I also do not like his stated positions. He is also, to put it bluntly, a bully (as demonstrated by his interactions with Ted Cruz and his making fun of Kasich). [ETA: He is also sexist and works to inflame differences.] Not presidential. As for Ted Cruz and John Kasich, they are eliminated from consideration, before any other consideration, because of their social positions (i.e., their views regarding equality and the role of Christianity in government). [ETA: Furthermore, I think a Republican President with a Republican Congress and a Republican-leaning Supreme Court will hurt this country. Even if the Presidential candidate is a moderate like Kasich, they won’t be able to veto overly conservative legislation from Congress because they need to support the party position, and the R-leaning Supreme Court will demonstrate, because it did in the past, that politics trumps justice. Nope. Cannot support a R candidate in the present political environment.]
That brings us down to the battle between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. I truly like the characterization of Hillary Clinton as the best candidate for the system we have now, and Bernie Sanders as the best candidate for the system we should have.  I also agree with the characterization that whether or not Bernie Sanders becomes the nominee, he has already won. Vox said this best: “Even in defeat in New York and most likely in the overall quest for the 2016 Democratic nomination, Bernie Sanders has already won in another, perhaps more important way: His brand of politics is the future of the Democratic Party.” Just as Trump is moving the Republican Party to the right, whether they win or lose; Sanders is moving the Democratic Party to the left. He has energized the young people with this view, and as we older Boomers move to the back of the picture and decrease in number, the Sanders view will become stronger. To the younger, strident, Sanders supporters: I urge you to remember this. Patience — something often not found in the young — will enable you to triumph in the long run.
Translation: This means that I’m leaning towards Hillary Clinton at this point. Read More …
