Last week, IPLawGuy posted an interesting thought:
More and more this election reminds me of 2008. One party begrudgingly
nominates a candidate who has been in the public eye since the 70's,
been prominent since the 80's and has a long record of bipartisan
cooperation and accomplishment. The other party nominates someone who
is almost a blank slate when it comes to policy and political
achievement. The only thing this candidate has done is make
aspirational speeches. But this candidate has a positive theme.
Really, what's difference between "Make America Great Again" and "Hope
and Change"?
Just about every successful candidate had a positive
theme that summarized their campaign. "Hope," "Bridge to the 21st
Century," "It's the Economy Stupid," "Kinder, Gentler/No New Taxes,"
"Morning in America," "Are you Better Off Now than you were 4 Years
Ago," "I'll Never Lie to you," etc.
I hate to say that sound
bite politics matters, but it does. What's Hillary Clinton's THEME? The
WHY that we should vote for her, as opposed to AGAINST Trump? That
she's a woman? The people to whom that MATTERS would vote for just
about any Democrat. That's not who she needs to attract. She needs to
find something to get the undecideds in her column. And so far, I see
nothing.
And as previously stated, my plan is to vote for Libertarian Gary Johnson.
Is the Gary Johnson/William Weld ticket for the Libertarian Party a worthwhile alternative? Certainly, they seem like the most reasonable folks at that convention:
There are some things about the Libertarian platform that many people (including me) find worthwhile. In the field I know about, criminal law, I really do think that the federal government has done too much, and grown too much self-perpetuating bureaucracy. But... getting rid of social security? Taking away nearly all limits on gun ownership and possession? That's going to be a much tougher sell.
I suspect that many votes for the Libertarians will be a protest, not an embrace.
What do you think?
Although some of the ideas presented in the party's platform are not problematic for me, the "close the barn door after the horse is gone" method of environmental protection is a non-starter. Individual property rights will not prevent irreversible environmental damage.
ReplyDeleteThe Libertarian Party Platform is science fiction. So is the GOP's, and if Bernie Sanders had won the Democratic nomination, the Democrats' platform would have been equally ridiculous. The official Democratic Platform and Jimmy Carter's actual positions in 1976 and 1980 bore little resemblance to each other. And despite a lot of talk, Reagan, Bush and Bush did little to advance the "official" GOP position on a lot of issues.
ReplyDeletePlatforms are themes, not blueprints.
If Johnson actually won (he won't) he certainly would NOT have Libertarian Congress to work with. He'd have to cut deals. Which he and Weld both have a record of doing as Governors.
I agree with both of you. Desiree, it seems like no one is talking about environmental issues, other than an occasional mention of climate change.
ReplyDelete