Setting Aside the Unproven Crimes: Reconsidering the Candidates

userpic=obama-hillary-california,politicsFor those of you that haven’t voted yet, I would like you to re-consider (or just consider) your pick for top of the ticket. Innuendo has been flying hot and heavy about potential crimes committed by one candidate or the other, and all of these accusations has made it difficult to make an informed decision. I’m here to help. In this country, one is innocent until proven guilty, and none of these charges — against either Trump or Clinton — have yet been proven in court. So, let’s presume both are innocent. Although there might have been classified information on Hillary’s server, it didn’t reach the level where it was intentional and broke the law. All those accusations against Donald — just hot air until proven. For the sake of argument — and this post — let’s consider both innocent.

I’d like you to take a look at the candidates fresh, taking the following into account:

  • Experience. If you were looking at a random candidate, for the sake of argument, white male, with the experience of both candidates, who is best qualified to run for public office? Candidate 1, Howard Carlin, has been secretary of state, a senator, has worked in the executive branch, and has been working for the public good his entire life. Candidate 2, Darren Towers, has been a private businessman, never elected to a public office, and never worked in a public corporation where he had to answer to a board of directors.
  • Diplomatic Style. How do they react under pressure? Do they study an issue and present a reasoned response? Can they be goaded into a response by an adversary? Do they carry grudges, and do they use the power of their office to retaliate?
  • Knowledge of how Government Works. Do they have a demonstrated knowledge of civic affairs and government processes? Do they understand where revenue bills start? Do they know checks and balances? Do they understand the limitations of each branch of government? Do they have the ability to compromise with those with whom they disagree?
  • Positions. Do they have stated positions for the most pressing issues facing this country? Are these positions both reasonable and realistic? Can they be implemented without major financial impact on the Federal Budget and Deficit? If the candidate doesn’t get the issue how they want it to be, can they live with a compromise?

I know, when I look at the two candidates Howard Rodham Carlin (HRC) and Darren James Towers (DJT), I know who I will choose. I hope you’ll make the same decision when you consider the issue. Certainly, in the first three areas, there is a distinct difference between the candidates — and much as some may hate government, we need it to work and work effectively for our society to function.

Next, if you haven’t seen it, here are the links to my ballot analysis: