No. of Recommendations: 7
BHM:
Two words....
"Security" and "Prosperity"
More please.
Getting caught up here. I'm with you on the end goals, but I suspect we see the prospects of the candidates very differently.
For starters, which candidate was the one who said (to his supporters, no less) "I don't care about you. I just want your vote"? How does that translate into "security" for said supporters, let alone the opposition?
Which candidate has said he wants to be dictator for a day and will get revenge on his rivals?
Then there's nuclear war. I grew up in the 70's, with a constant underlying unease about the potential for nuclear war as weapons proliferated and we were not on great terms with Russia and China. That unease largely went away over the years until it reappeared when loose cannon egomaniac Trump was elected in 2016. He uses inflammatory rhetoric, trashes alliances, praises dictators and creates chaos and division. Not the stuff that "security" is made of. It was a happy day for me when his first term ended without us getting into a nuclear war. If he is re-elected, I would be much more worried with him having his finger on The Button. He wants only fame, and would love to do something to keep his name alive after he is gone, even if it takes doing something awful. He doesn't care. Not "security".
Then there's his disregard for and politicization of science and medicine, as well as the judiciary. When Covid struck, and he should have been playing a lead role in giving us reliable information and yes, keeping us "safe", he instead spewed a bunch of misinformation and turned his circus-like press conferences into infomercials for his business buddies like the My Pillow guy. This kind of stuff undermines the very foundations of what could help us feel a sense of more "security".
Then there's the fact that he's a convicted felon, as are many of his closest associates. He faces other serious charges that he's trying to avoid, not by saying that he didn't do them but rather by claiming full immunity to prosecution. The good folks who have been around him tend to get left behind in his wake and trashed. "Security"?
I'm guessing that a large part of why you think Trump would provide more "security" is because you think he would provide a more secure border. As I'm sure you know, he nixed a bipartisan border deal because he didn't want Biden to get credit for it. That's "security"? (See "I don't care about you. I just want your vote.")
I'll also guess that another large part of why you think Trump would provide more security is because he is less likely to enact more strict gun ownership laws. Does that really provide more or less "security"? That subject has been studied and debated a lot, I won't repeat it here, but there certainly is a lot of evidence that the answer is "less".
I'm sure Paul Pelosi would have something to say about how much security Trump provides, and Heather Heyer if she could. And the capitol police.
I'm sure I'm leaving out a lot of other evidence of Trump's corruption and lack of caring for the populace, but that's enough for now. Oh, what the heck, I'll throw in a "losers and suckers" reference as well. That should get the point across.
As far as "prosperity" goes, Covid has complicated the picture for both administrations. I can understand how someone could feel Trump is more economically savvy (if you buy into his claims of how wealthy he is and ignore the fact that he started with a lot of wealth and has had six companies go into bankruptcy and has been convicted of tax fraud, misused his charitable foundation and defrauded students at his University--come to think of it, those have a lot to do with "security" as well).
I do hope you're not one of the many who think that we're in a recession, that the stock has been down for the last couple years, and that unemployment is at a 50-year high.
