L&T Publisher Earl Watt
I visited with a poll worker who told me that some voters are clueless.
According to this worker, some voters have no idea who is on the ballot and yet they still make a selection based on either a familiar-looking name or some other obscure reason for casting a vote.
I know I’m not the norm. I’ve been politically active since the fourth grade when I stumbled across C-SPAN and watched a replay of the 1968 Republican National Convention when Richard Nixon accepted the nomination.
I’ve been addicted to following politics ever since.
But the chasm between that and an uninformed voter is meaningless when it comes to an election. Both votes are the same.
And they should be. No person’s vote should carry more weight than another.
But voters need to be informed about the issues and the candidates before casting a vote.
Are we still doing the same thing we did when we voted for Student Council? Are we voting for friends or the most popular kid in school? Or are we actually looking at who is qualified and voting for the person best suited to do the job?
The very first televised debate between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon in 1960 proved that we really haven’t changed much. When people saw the younger and handsome Kennedy against the older and less attractive Nixon, the influence on the voters was apparent.
Do we care more about how someone looks rather than how someone performs?
While age was definitely a factor in Joe Biden choosing not to run for re-election, clearly the Democrats knew voters would not accept Biden after his disastrous debate in June.
The question, then, is who to replace him with and how.
Many are looking to Vice President Kamala Harris as the heir apparent, but there are several issues with that.
For one, a rubber stamp will not look good to the American people, nor can they continue the claim of fighting for democracy when they just nullified the entire Democratic Primary across the entire nation.
The question will be whether or not Harris or some other person takes up the mantle for the Democratic Party on the basis of qualifications or on some other superficial attribute.
We are keenly aware of the challenges of Harris. For one, Tulsi Gabbard delivered a knockout blow against Harris in the first Democratic Debate in 2020 by pointing out the overaggressive prosecutorial style of Harris especially going after marijuana convictions in California and then laughing at a question on whether or not she ever used the drug.
Harris withdrew from the primary before the first state of Iowa ever took a vote.
And yet Biden chose Harris as his running mate not because of her accomplishments but because of her physical attributes — her sex and the color of her skin (Biden’s words, not mine).
It is no guarantee it will be Harris, although it is looking more and more likely as the power structure of the Democratic Party is lining up behind her.
So what business has she successfully operated? What charity has she successfully guided?
What landmark legislation did she propose when she was a U.S. Senator?
If the answer to all of these questions is negative, then what qualifies her to be president? Because she was Vice President?
As Vice President Harris, what has she accomplished? What peace agreement did she broker? What trade agreement did she deliver? How did she solve the border crisis as the border czar?
Again, if the answer to all of these is a negative, then again we have an unproven, ineffective, non-policy driven candidate.
In addition to the drawbacks, she has been known for her word salads, where she simply speaks in circles rather than say anything with substance.
That may work in California. But this is the big leagues. Bush league party cronyism wins on the Left Coast but it doesn’t play well in the Rust Belt, and neither Trump nor Harris will find their way to Pennsylvania Avenue without Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin, or at least three out of the four.
Trump has his personality defects as well. Many just don’t like the way he talks.
But he isn’t running for pastor or Sunday school teacher. He is running for president.
Neither candidate is perfect, for sure.
Trump has a great understanding of showmanship while Harris has been able to get by on power party politics.
Which will be more effective in Washington? Who will be able to ignite the economy, restore American dominance in global trade, secure the border and establish peace and prosperity on a planetary scale?
The hyperbole will be aimed at telling us democracy is at stake.
Whether voting for Harris or Trump, democracy will survive. Voting, after all, is democracy.
The challenge is whether or not the votes cast will be informed votes.
There is such a thing as kissing babies and shaking hands, but more importantly is getting the bureaucracy in Washington back in control of the people. As long as they are in charge and not our elected officials, democracy is already lost.
