Comrade Bernie and ‘Quid Pro Joe’: Are They the Best the Democrats Have to Offer?
March 4, 2020
For over a year now Democrats have been declaring their intentions to seek the Democrat Party’s nomination for president. Over the last several years the party has moved drastically to the left. That being the case, the Democrat primary has become a contest to see which candidate can give away the most “free stuff.”
Most of these prospective candidates were not qualified to be dogcatcher, let alone President of the United States, but they all decided that this was their moment to make history. They declared their candidacies, tried to raise money, appeared on news programs, debated, and talked about what a dangerous man Donald Trump was. According to them he was going to become an authoritarian ruler, take over the military, and take away our civil rights. What nonsense.
It appears to me that if these Democrats have a concern about losing their civil rights, they should be looking to their own side of the aisle. To name just a few examples, it is left-wing radical Democrats who are trying to limit free speech. You can go to almost any college campus and see Conservative Republicans having their right to free speech trampled on by unruly left-wing radical Democrats.
Another example of Democrats infringing on our civil rights, took place on national television during the Senate Judiciary Committee’s hearing of Justice Brett Kavenaugh to the Supreme Court. During the hearing, Democrat members of the Senate Judiciary Committee openly tried to dispense with Judge Kavenaugh’s right to due process. The most egregious example of this was exhibited by Senator Maisi Hirono (D) of Hawaii. On numerous occasions she stated “these women must be believed.” In her mind these accusers were telling the truth and there was no need for a hearing. He was guilty and that was the end of it. This is not the way our justice system is supposed to work, and as a US senator she was well aware of that.
The constant attacks on the second amendment are another example by left-wing radicals to undermine our constitutional right to bear arms. It is therefore my opinion that actions taken by people on the left are a much greater threat to our civil liberties than President Donald Trump will ever be.
The latest threat to our constitutional republic came in the form of an attempt by the minority leader of the senate, Chuck Schumer, to intimidate members of our Supreme Court. This was a blatant attempt by Senator Schumer to sway the opinion of the court in a case dealing with the issue of abortion. If this type of intimidation had been attempted by any elected official on the right, the stink coming out of Washington would have been noticeable all the way up into the north country of upstate New York.
These are the types of attacks against our constitution that US citizens should be concerned about. I am currently unaware of any such attacks on our freedoms that have been made by President Trump or anyone from the political right.
Over the last six months or so these candidates have debated, ad nauseam, with four debates still to go. The good news is that the field has dwindled from twenty-five down to the final two. Tulsi Gabbard, unable to garner enough support to qualify for the remaining debates, has just ended her campaign.
When these debates began they seemed more of a shouting match than a substantive debate on the issues. In some cases there were ten or twelve candidates on the stage who, with arms flailing, attempted to out-shout one another in the hope of getting some camera time. They were fighting for the opportunity to speak their views hoping to convince voters that they were the candidates best able to defeat Donald Trump.
We are now nine or ten months into the campaign and the wheat has been separated from the chaff. Many of these so-called candidates had no message other than giving away “free stuff “ and beating Donald Trump. They were mostly unknowns with little support, no personality, and little or no money. There were also two billionaires, who spent hundreds of millions of dollars on their campaigns and came up with nothing to show for their efforts.
We have now reached a point in the campaign where the only two candidates left are former Vice President Joe Biden and Senator Bernie Sanders. Both of these candidates have more baggage than a Carnival Cruise Ship. This baggage includes, but is not limited to, their well-known health problems, advanced age, and positions on issues that will have to be defended regardless of which one of them is the eventual nominee. Make no mistake, President Trump will exploit each and every weakness that is uncovered during the general election.
The average lifespan of an American male is 78.7 years. Both of these geriatric titans will surpass that age during or before starting their first year in office. What this means to me is that whomever these two candidates choose as their running mates will have a better than average chance of occupying the White House before the end of their term as vice president. It is not my habit to vote for the vice presidential candidate. I vote for the person who is running for the office of president and I expect that person to finish out their term. To me, this is reason enough not to vote for either of these two candidates.
Senator Sanders is a self-proclaimed democratic socialist. Just to be clear, there is virtually no difference between a socialist and a democratic socialist. The sole purpose of labeling himself a democratic socialist is to make his socialist views more palatable to the American voter. Don’t allow yourself to be fooled by this obvious ploy. Bernie Sanders is a socialist through and through, and if elected his true colors will come out for the entire nation to see.
For the last thirty years Bernie Sanders has been a member of the US House of Representatives or a member of the US Senate. During that time he has had a total of seven of his sponsored bills enacted into law. At least two of those bills were to name post offices and another bill was to designate March 4, 1991 as Vermont Bicentennial Day. So based on the numbers, it is my opinion that during his thirty years as a member of either the House or the Senate, Bernie Sanders has not been a particularly productive public servant.
It is the desire of Comrade Bernie to transform the economic system of the US from a capitalist system that has made this country the most prosperous economic powerhouse the world has ever known to a socialist system that would lower economic growth, decrease job creation, and ultimately lower the standard of living in our country.
Lower economic growth would result in lower job creation and less revenue to all levels of government. Demand for real estate, stocks, and other financial assets would decrease. If the demand for these assets is reduced, the value of these assets will be reduced. If the value of real estate and other personal assets are reduced, personal wealth will decline. This is the promise of socialism.
In a capitalist system, it is the market that determines how the economy makes decisions. In a socialist system it is the government, or more correctly government bureaucrats, who would make those decisions. Senator Sanders has advocated for this type of economic system his entire political life—and probably even before that. In his mind people who work hard and become financially successful should be punished. This punishment should consist of exorbitantly high income taxes, as well as taxes on their accumulated wealth. It’s not a difficult concept. All good, hard-working comrades in the collective should work as hard as possible and give a substantial portion of the proceeds of that labor to the government. At that point it will be the government that will determine how best to spend your money—instead of you.
The most notable of the programs being pushed by Bernie Sanders are Medicare for All, the Green New Deal, free college tuition at public colleges and universities, and safe, affordable housing for all.
If you were to take the time and put forth the effort , you would determine that all the programs that are being proposed by the senator, in order to “transform” America into the socialist utopia of his dreams, would cost between $10T and $12T per year. That number would more than triple the current size of the federal budget. To put this in perspective, if the government were to triple the amount of individual and corporate income taxes collected in tax year 2018, the amount wouldn’t even come close to covering the increase in government spending that would result from these new government entitlements.
For those who follow statistics of this nature, as I do, it is widely known that the group known as the “one-percenters“ pay roughly 40% of all individual income taxes collected by the federal government. It is also known that the top 10% of earners in the US pay just over 70% of all individual income taxes in the US. Beyond this, the top 50% of earners in the US pay 97% of all individual federal income taxes collected. What this means is the bottom 50% of earners pay… well, you can do the math. These statistics are from tax year 2017.
It is Senator Sander’s plan to raise the top individual income tax rate to as high as 70%. When you consider, as I stated above, that the top 10% of earners already pay 70% of all individual income taxes, how more can we expect from them? When you add the state income tax and the Social Security and Medicare taxes to the 70% federal tax rate, these individuals will be lucky to keep 15% of their earnings.
Another tax that the good senator would like to impose, exclusively on the rich, is a wealth tax. This would impose a 1% tax on all assets belonging to a couple that are in excess of $32M. The tax would gradually increase to 8% on the total assets owned by couples that are in excess of $10B. The rates for single taxpayers would be even higher.
When the wealth tax is added to the 70% income tax that could be levied on high-income earners, it is not out of the question that taxpayers could be forced to pay a total tax that would be equal to or above 100% of their gross income. This level of taxation would be nothing less than the legal confiscation of assets by our government and would be totally unacceptable in a free society such as ours.
At last count there were thirteen countries that have implemented a wealth tax. Ten of those countries have since decided to repeal the tax because it became counter-productive. Many of those that the tax was aimed at sold their assets, took the money, and moved elsewhere. Another reason for the repeal was because it became too difficult to enforce. There were problems with the valuation of assets as well as other issues.
There are numerous problems that arise when taxing people’s assets. For example, suppose someone owns a business that is worth $50M. They would owe $180K based on the 1% wealth tax. Suppose they don’t have $180K in cash. In that case, they would either have to sell assets from their company or borrow the $180K.
Another example of a problem that would be caused by this ridiculous wealth tax would be a case involving a farmer in the Midwest who owns a farm with thousands of acres of land worth in the tens of millions of dollars. The consequences in this case would be much more dire. The farmer would have to either borrow hundreds of thousands of dollars or sell a sufficient number of acres to cover the tax. In this particular case he would need to do the same thing every year until his net worth went below the minimum asset level that would be subject to this wealth tax. The sale of this property would reduce the amount of land he would have to farm and thus lower the annual amount of his crop and yearly income.
This scenario would play out for business owners all over the country. In my view it would be unfair to put business owners in the position of either selling assets from their business or mortgaging their business to pay a tyrannical wealth tax such as this.
The problem with the massive entitlement programs that are being proposed by Senator Sanders and other Democrats is this: once they are passed by Congress and signed by the President, they become law. Laws have to be followed. Entitlements become part of the budget and are labeled non-discretionary spending. It is mandated by law that these entitlements be paid. The entitlements listed above will cost, in round numbers, $100T over a ten-year period. It is pretty much a forgone conclusion that these new taxes will not be sufficient to cover the large increase in government spending. That said, how do you pay for these programs? The answer is that most likely the money will have to be borrowed. Since the country is currently $23T in debt and will be $50T in debt within 15 years, even if none of these new programs become law it would be financial suicide for the government to contemplate spending an additional $10T per year. This would bankrupt the country much faster than if we had just continued on with our $1T yearly deficits.
Senator Sanders is most widely known for his government-run healthcare plan called Medicare for All. Just to be clear, when Bernie Sanders says Medicare for All, he means exactly that. Anyone who enters our country illegally would be entitled to free health care. In addition, they would be eligible for housing assistance, food stamps, and any other entitlement that would be available to US citizens.
The senator is in favor of open borders. He would like to decriminalize illegal entry and eliminate immigration detention. He is in favor of disbanding ICE and the CBP. He would also be in favor of returning border enforcement to the Department of Justice. Senator Sanders wants to end the Remain in Mexico Policy and the Public Charge Rule, which are policies put in place by President Trump. These policies have had a significant effect on reducing the number of immigrants coming though our southern border.
To be blunt, Senator Sanders wants no borders and is in favor of letting almost anyone on earth enter our country. In addition, if these people are unable to support themselves, they will become a burden on the US taxpayer. Think about that. Anyone who happens to show up on our southern border, legally or otherwise, would be entitled to all the benefits listed above, plus free education for their children, all at the expense of the US taxpayer.
Mark my words, if Bernie Sanders were to ever become president and these policies, by some miracle, were to become law, the United States would be viewed as a laughing stock and also the dumbest country on the planet. Eventually we would also be the most bankrupt country on the planet.
As I have said many times on this blog, there is simply not enough revenue available to the government to cover the cost of the programs proposed by Senator Sanders; I know this to be true because according to Forbes the total net worth of the wealthiest 400 Americans is estimated to be just under $3T. Why do I even bring this up you ask? Because if the government were to confiscate the entire $3T from these 400 Americans, it would not be sufficient to cover Medicare for All for even one year. The very idea that this country could ever generate enough revenue to pay for programs such as Medicare for All and The Green New Deal is ludicrous. It’s a pipe dream. End of story. End of Medicare for All and The Green New Deal. PERIOD. As I always say here on this blog: “The United States does not have unlimited resources.”
The final bit of baggage that Comrade Bernie will carry with him throughout this campaign is his habit of praising, even idolizing, communist dictators, such as Fidel Castro of Cuba, Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua, and Hugo Chavez of Venezuela. He has repeatedly praised Fidel Castro who educated the citizens of his country and provided them with healthcare. What Comrade Bernie fails to mention is that Fidel and his band of commie followers murdered thousands of Cubans during his violent takeover of the country and imprisoned thousands more.
Comrade Bernie seems to think that the Cuban people are better off since Fidel took over Cuba. Anyone with half a brain knows better than that. Just ask the families of those who were murdered, or the families of those who had their lands and businesses confiscated. It would be my guess that those people would not be fans.
Another negative consequence of the communist takeover was the downturn in the Cuban economy. Prior to the communist takeover, Cuba was the vacation capital of the world, especially in the Western hemisphere. Most people don’t remember this, but Cuba was the place to go back in the 1940s and 1950s. The hotels were all top-notch and provided great entertainment for their guests. Many American entertainers worked there, as well as vacationed there. It was a lot like modern-day Las Vegas. That all changed when Fidel took over. Capitalism left the island, the standard of quality went down, and it’s still that way today.
Joe Biden is the other Democrat who is vying for the chance to take on Donald Trump. Although he wants everyone to believe that he is running as a moderate, his policies are anything but that. For example, he is now in favor of free tuition at all public colleges and universities, providing that the family has an income of less than $125K per year. He also supports the release of all illegals who are being held while awaiting their court hearing. If you recall, the catch and release program, which began under the Obama Administration, was abused: Roughly 90% of those released and told to return for their court hearing never came back. There are two possibilities here. The first one is that the people who came up with this plan didn’t care whether the illegals came back or not. The other possibility is that those people were so naive that they actually believed that these illegals would voluntarily return for their hearing. When you consider the fact that asylum is only granted in 10% of cases of those who apply, it is probably a pretty good bet that most of them are not going to show up for their hearing. Duhhhh.
Another example of Joe Biden’s left-wing positions is his plan to raise taxes on the middle class as well as the rich. It is his plan to spend $1.7T over ten years to help fight climate change. The revenue to fund this government outlay will be raised by way of a carbon tax. This type of tax is a regressive tax, which means that it will hurt poor and lower middle class taxpayers more than wealthy and upper middle class taxpayers. This tax will be imposed per gallon of gas or oil and per kilowatt-hour without regard for one’s income.
Joe Biden is also planning to repeal the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), which in addition to raising taxes on the wealthy and on corporations, will also increase the tax burden on lower and middle class taxpayers.
There is currently a limit of $132,900 on the level of an employee’s payroll that is subject to Social Security and Medicare Tax. Under a Biden presidency that level would become unlimited. Given the fact both the Social Security Trust Fund and the Medicare Trust Fund are going broke there may be a need to generate more revenue for those funds. However, even though more revenue may be needed to prop up these funds, raising the level of payroll subject to the tax to an unlimited amount may be going a bit too far.
In addition to raising individual tax rates the former vice president is also planning to raise corporate income tax rates from the current rate of 21% to 28%. This may reverse the trend of businesses moving back into the US. Many of the manufacturing jobs that have been created since Donald Trump took office have occurred because of the lower corporate tax rate now in place. These jobs could be at risk of leaving again if Joe Biden is able to win the White House.
He is also in favor of raising the tax rate on capital gains and on dividends. Many older Americans have invested in stocks and bonds over their working careers in the hope of supplementing the income from their social security checks. Most of this segment of the population are on a fixed income and would be hurt by this additional tax. Depending on the size of this tax increase there could be a negative effect on the overall amount of investment in the stock market. If the after tax rate of return from stock investments becomes too low, people will be unwilling to assume the risk of owning stocks and will liquidate their investments. If this becomes the case stock prices will fall lowering the overall value of the market.
Although he hasn’t mentioned it, it is my belief that, as Joe Biden moves farther to the left, the possibility of him endorsing a wealth tax will become greater. I don’t have a source to back up that statement. I feel that right now there is a lot of class envy in the country as well as a desire for “free stuff.” It is therefore my view that it is not out of the question that Joe Biden could be forced far enough to the left to be in favor of a wealth tax.
There are other tax increases on business that are also being discussed. One very significant rule change regarding S corporations has to do with stockholder’s payroll. Currently stockholders of S corps are required to pay social security and Medicare taxes only on the amount of payroll they take. They are not liable for those taxes on the profits of the company. They are only liable for income taxes due on those profits. The changes being discussed would remove that rule and make those profits subject to both social security and Medicare taxes. This would eliminate one of the major advantages of being an S corporation.
Joe Biden has been referred to as “middle class Joe” and as “lunch bucket Joe.” Those nicknames allude to the support of middle class, blue-collar workers. In 2016 Donald Trump was able to attract many of those blue-collar union workers away from the Democrats. He did this by promising to repeal NAFTA, which he called the worst trade deal ever made. That trade agreement resulted in the loss of tens of thousands of US manufacturing jobs, some of which will probably never return. It remains to be seen if this vital voting block will return to vote Democrat or whether Donald Trump and his promise to bring manufacturing back to the US will retain their support.
Many of the manufacturing jobs that were lost were located in the upper Midwest rust belt. The loss of these jobs was the direct result of NAFTA. As a senator, Joe Biden voted for that trade deal. As I said above, Donald Trump campaigned on bringing those jobs back to the US, and he has delivered on that promise. That said, it’s an open question whether those voters will continue to support Donald Trump or return to voting Democrat.
The Trans Pacific Partnership was another trade deal that caused thousands more jobs to leave the US. Vice President Joe Biden was very much in favor of this trade agreement as well. As vice president, it was part of his job to sell this deal to the members of the House and the Senate.
This trade deal fell out of favor with the Republican members of Congress when candidate Trump began to push his “bring jobs back to America agenda.” Taking this narrative one step further, when Donald Trump became president one of the first things he did was to pull the US out of the TPP.
There is a growing anxiety about the possibility of a Biden presidency. People on both sides of the aisle are concerned that Biden’s cognitive ability is declining. For most of his thirty-six years in the Senate and his eight years as vice president, Joe Biden has had the well-deserved reputation as a gaffe machine. After being out of the public eye for the last three years, he has returned with a vengeance.
Over the last year or so since declaring his candidacy, his gaffes or misstatements have become more egregious and more frequent. He has also become combative towards voters who have asked him questions that he was uncomfortable answering. These are not the traits of someone who is at the top of his game mentally.
Examples of his gaffes and angry outbursts are numerous. He has made comments such as “Poor kids are just as smart as white kids.” I’m sure that some African-Americans were justifiably offended by that statement. He has also referred to Barack Obama as “the first mainstream, articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that’s storybook man.” In my opinion this one was even more offensive to African-Americans, but the media and many Democrats discounted the comment for the sake of politics. This strategy obviously worked—or the comment was completely forgotten by black voters in the south during the recent primaries—since Joe Biden was the overwhelming favorite among black voters in just about every primary race.
There have been many other gaffes that were just as worrisome but not as insulting as those mentioned above. He has made statements that he was in Ohio when he was in Iowa. He has also said that he was in Vermont when he was actually in New Hampshire. Another gaffe occurred on national live television during an interview with Chris Wallace of Fox News. At the end of the interview Joe Biden said, “Good-bye Chuck.” He evidently mixed up Chris Wallace with Chuck Todd who works for NBC.
While giving a speech, he recently said “I’m Joe Biden and I’m running for the Senate.” Another major gaffe took place during a Democrat Primary debate in Charleston, SC. He made the statement that 150 million people had been victims of gun violence in American since 2007. That would be roughly half of the entire US population. These verbal gaffes are just more examples of what are becoming a daily occurrence.
During the 2008 presidential campaign Joe Biden made a comment about the stock market crash of 1929. He said, “When the stock market crashed, FDR got on television and didn’t just talk about the, you know, the princes of greed.” The problem here is that FDR was not president in 1929—and also that television had not yet been invented.
Other verbal miscues by the former vice president include comments like he “accepts truth over facts.” He also made the statement that he met with survivors of the Parkland School shooting while he was vice president. This tragedy occurred on February 14, 2018, more than a year after he left office.
During another campaign appearance Sleepy Joe tried to recite the preamble to the Declaration of Independence. After reciting the first sentence or so he began stumbling and bumbling and then finally gave up and said, “You know, the thing.” In another speech he told the crowd that he was arrested by the police in South Africa when he attempted to visit Nelson Mandela while the latter was in prison. The facts are that he was not arrested at all. He was instructed by South African police to go through a door reserved for white people. Joe Biden, as a way of protesting apartheid, wanted to go through the door that was marked for black people. The issue was ultimately resolved without the vice president being arrested.
Ordinarily most people, including myself, would chalk up these gaffes and verbal miscues to the problem of old age. In this case, however, Joe Biden is running for the office of President of the United States. The job is a demanding, stressful, high-pressure position. It is not a job for someone who is beyond his or her prime physically and especially mentally. If Joe Biden is committing gaffes such as those mentioned here, how much worse will it be in two or three years?
Finally, there are several allegations of corruption in the news that involve Joe Biden himself, his son Hunter, and his brother James. I don’t pretend to know enough about these issues to say one way or the other whether there is a basis for any of them. What I will say is that before we elect anyone to the presidency, any and all suspicions of corruption should be thoroughly investigated. The investigation should show that the former vice president had absolutely no involvement in any corrupt activity before he ever becomes president.
As you can probably surmise from everything I’ve written above, it is my opinion that electing either of these two candidates would not be in the best interest of the country. I am strongly opposed to Senator Sanders and his socialist views. His socialist policies, if implemented, would run our economy into the ground and would eventually put the national security of this country at risk.
I have a very low opinion of socialism for several reasons. Reason number one is that to my knowledge there has never been a successful socialist country. That would include, by the way, Sweden and Denmark, which are both capitalist countries. This revelation comes straight out of the mouth of the Swedish Prime Minister who said, “Sweden is a capitalist country.” Another reason, and this really puts the icing on the cake, is that of all the Eastern Bloc countries (of the former Soviet Union) who now have the freedom to choose which economic system they want, not one of those countries has chosen to return to a socialist economy. Every one of them has chosen to enjoy the freedom and prosperity that a capitalist system can provide.
Joe Biden is a chameleon. The former vice president is trying to run as a moderate but he is continuing to move farther and farther to the left every week. This may stop if and when he wins the nomination, but for now he is a liberal Democrat in sheep’s clothing. He has moved to the left on the issues of immigration, healthcare, free tuition at all public colleges and universities, and on second amendment rights. He has also hitched his caboose to a light version of the Green New Deal. These are not the positions of a moderate.
Since announcing his candidacy Joe Biden has become a flip flopper. Joe Biden voted for NAFTA when the Senate originally ratified it. He is now trying to back away from that vote because a lot of jobs, union jobs, left the country as a result of that trade deal. He needs the support of that voting block if he expects to win in the Midwest.
Another example of flip flopping is Joe Biden’s support for the 1993 crime bill which resulted in 100,000 more police on the streets and 125,000 new jail cells in the US. The 1993 crime bill was a federal law, but most people in prison are there because they violated state statutes. This bill encouraged states to give tougher sentences and also to make convicts serve at least 86% of their sentence. Money was given to states to build 125,000 new jail cells and it seems that these new jail cells were filled, disproportionately, with people of color. One final provision of this crime bill was the “three strikes clause.” This law made it possible to incarcerate criminals for life if they had three felony convictions. I think this particular clause was most responsible for adding to the overall prison population.
Joe Biden was instrumental in getting the 1993 crime bill passed. As a matter of fact, he actually played an extensive role in writing the final bill. It has now become popular for Democrats to apologize for their past decisions. Elizabeth Warren apologized for falsely saying she was an American Indian for financial gain. Michael Bloomberg apologized for utilizing “stop and frisk” on the streets of New York City. New York police used this procedure mainly when dealing with black and brown people. The only reason they did this was because they were running for president. If not for that, they never would have apologized. Joe Biden is not apologizing for his role in getting this bill passed; he is downplaying his involvement and is now trying to distance himself from the law he helped write. Just like Senator Warren and Mike Bloomberg, he is doing this purely for political reasons.
The Democrat Primary season started with between twenty-five and thirty candidates. We are now down to the final two. One is a socialist whose views and beliefs on the economy would be totally foreign and completely unacceptable to the majority of Americans. This is why the Democrat National Committee (DNC) has been working behind the scenes to help Joe Biden win the nomination and undermine the candidacy of Bernie Sanders.
Joe Biden is the consummate Washington insider who has flip-flopped on some issues and is moving hard to the left on many others. He has also become well-known for his frequent gaffes and misstatements. There are many people on both sides of the aisle that believe that “Uncle Joe” is losing his cognitive ability. In addition, he has, at times, struggled to answer questions from the press. There have also been instances where he has lost his self-control while taking questions from voters. On more than one occasion he has actually lost his temper and responded by calling them names. These are not the traits the people of America are looking for in a president.
After months of campaigning and debating, Quid Pro Joe and Comrade Bernie are the last two candidates standing. Both of these men have numerous flaws. Both of them will reach the life expectancy of the average American male either before taking office or during their first year in office. This means that whoever is chosen to be their running mates will have a very good chance of becoming president. Both of these candidates also have serious health problems, which makes that possibility even more likely. Why would anyone vote for an aging candidate with serious health issues?
In addition, their left-wing socialist policies are in direct conflict with the principles that America was founded on. These principles include working hard, self-reliance, being innovative, and taking care of one’s family: These are just some of the reasons why our country has prospered. America works best when Americans work. Socialism and the policies that it preaches do not work and will therefore never be right for America.
Both of these candidates, to one degree or another, agree with the economic principles of socialism. Socialism does not motivate people to thrive or to excel. It makes mediocrity acceptable. It doesn’t motivate people to build a better mousetrap or to find a better way of performing a task. History has shown us that these tired, worn-out ideas have never worked, and in my opinion, never will.
When I began writing this post I wondered why anyone would vote for either of these two candidates. As I mentioned above the job of president is stressful and demanding. It requires the physical ability to work long hours if the need arises and the mental toughness to make difficult decisions on a moment’s notice. Both of these men have serious health issues and are well past their prime. So, I am asking this question: Are these two candidates the best that the Democrat Party has to offer? If that answer is yes, God help us if one of them becomes president.