In the aftermath of Donald Trump’s shock victory over Hillary Clinton, many people are wondering how it could have been avoided. A common explanation I’ve seen a lot on social media, is that if only the Democrats had chosen Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump certainly would have been defeated. Only Sanders had the principles and honesty to mobilise and enthuse people to counter Trump’s anti-establishment rhetoric. Some even go further claiming that the DNC rigged or even stole the election from Sanders. Continue reading “Would Bernie Sanders Have Won?”
(I’ve considered deleting this post as it’s based on the presumption that Hillary Clinton would win the election, which was sadly wrong. However, I stand by everything I write even when I’m wrong, so I’m going to leave this up as a monument to hubris and a historical reminder of how people viewed the 2016 campaign at the time.)
Whenever people look back on elections, particularly Presidential elections, they always use a simple narrative to explain it. The 1964 and 1972 elections used the narrative that if you nominate an extremist, you’ll lose in a landslide. 2004 was about fear and the War on Terror, whereas 2008 was about hope and change. So what will be the narrative of 2016?
I’ve been meaning to write a blog post on Donald Trump for a while. However, I faced a major problem, in that there are just so many scandals that it’s impossible to keep track of them all. I was simply overwhelmed by the enormous amount of horrendous things Trump has said and done, and that’s without even starting on his policies (although he seems to have very few of these). To give all his scandals the attention they deserve would require a ten part series, and each part alone would be disqualifying. But I don’t have the time to make such a list (I doubt anyone does) and even the professional media has trouble keeping up. Even this post took several days, and I more than likely missed something important. Continue reading “Donald Trump Has Too Many Scandals To Keep Track Of”
It hardly needs to be said that the two main candidates running for president are not very popular. Both Trump and Clinton have historically high unpopularity ratings and many voters are voting against a candidate rather than for one they support. Perhaps it is time to consider a third option.
Jill Stein claims to be a candidate worth voting for based on her policies and principles, not just because people are afraid of Trump. She argues that Clinton is just as bad as Trump and voting for “the lesser of two evils” will not solve America’s problems but only allow them to continue. She is hoping that people will reject “the politics of fear” and break the two party system. Continue reading “Is Jill Stein Worth Voting For?”