Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

Voter, does one really believe the spring-necked politicians in their enthusiasm and assertions about who the three front running candidates for the presidency appear to be? Two are capable of reminiscing about the aroma of percolated coffee made on a wood stove, and the other is younger but is still found wanting. So, let us figure out the reason for such commotion and then evaluate the negatives. 

The most obvious aspect for support is their existing status, as in past and present. However, the sledgehammer is the size of the lifetime propaganda budget (in politics they refer to it as a campaign fund), this allows for immediate press releases at any time immaterial between fact and fiction and on any topic. This trait was shown in a recent lawsuit. This implies those that are capable but underfunded require more time in aligning donors, so the competition of exposure is about money and not capabilities. 

If one likes to fish, look at campaign finance law, it is a bucket of worms designed to be manipulated, among individual donors, non-profits, pacs, and super pacs. For instance, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) is made up of six members, three from each party a virtual stalemate on decisions. So, one way to rectify the situation is the creation of a third party or more, and each party gives a member or members to the FEC. This could also help distribute funds in a fairer manner, due to a greater number of candidates and thus minimize the purchase of legislative seats as is seen in all elections.

According to the Pew Research Center, just before the election in 2020, the party voting categories were identified as follows; about 34 percent of voters claimed to be independent, 33 percent as Democrats and 29 percent as Republicans. A common trait is being blind to the obvious, and so what do you notice? First thing the Republican Party struts around as if they stand for the majority, and in fact is in possession of the lowest percent of voters. Therefore, require assistance from others, so how can one claim fraud without being in possession of the requisite number of votes necessary. 

Secondly the independents represent the majority as well as having the ability to direct the outcome. It is said, they lean at 49 percent Democrat and 44 percent Republican. For example, in the 2016 election 5 percent of Democrats and leaners voted for Trump and 4 percent of Republican and leaners voted for Hillary. The largest group of voters at 52 percent and growing are greater than 50 years of age, and 41 percent of the college educated voters lean towards the Democrats versus 30 percent for Republicans. So, independent voters, it is time to wield the influence of a party in the search of another candidate such as Ross Perot.

Ross Perot was a candidate in the 1992 and 1996 elections. In 1992 he ran against President George H. R. Bush and Bill Clinton. In the 1992 race he momentarily dropped out of the race in July, evidently to protect a family member from defamation of character which apparently the Bush campaign was planning to release (sounds familiar). However, he returned in October and garnered 19 percent of the votes, and Bill Clinton won with 43 percent. In the 1996 election he was able to garner only 8.4 percent of the votes. 

However, as I have mentioned before politics is about control, he was banned from taking part in the debates, therefore his response to issues went unheeded. According to Journalist Paul Burka, “Perot is the candidate of the disaffected the disenchanted, the fed up; the people whose contempt for politics has passed beyond cynicism to despair.”

The Republican Governor from Florida is said to be a contender, however his approval rating in his home state is a negative 19 percent. With an average disapproval rating of 55 percent, if one looks at ethnic percents it gets worse. It is known he endorsed a candidate in the Kentucky Governor’s primary race, and a candidate in the mayoral race of Jacksonville, largest city in Florida, both candidates were defeated. His nature appears to be dictatorial; his message is unclear, and proposed solutions are hard to figure out how they could pass in the legislature. 

Now, the touted ex-president as a candidate (ignoring present situation) is also improbable. A moment of reflection historically the presidents have served two consecutive terms, and that is the limit. So, eligibility of one term. Also, historically in the mid-term election the House majority changes, and since WW II, with an average of twenty-six seats. Therefore, this candidate will have a two-year window in the passing of his personal agenda of retribution. However, if one looks closer, in his 2018 midterm election he lost 41 seats, 58 percent above average. This election has often been claimed to stand for the public’s opinion on the government’s direction and or policies. 

On the other side of this issue is the midterm of 2022, said as such because of the claims about the 2020 election results. The Biden House lost only nine seats or 65 percent below average. Was this a message? The Trump supporters were claiming this election would verify the 2020 assertions, and as shown it did not, the turnover was historically expected. If he did in fact become a candidate, as noted above the independents could load the house with Democrats. Then in four years another election, which once again historically once a president has exhausted his eligibility the opposing party usually wins. This would show a trade-off of four years for 8. Finally does the voting public want another one term president, 12 years of waffling along, a ship without a rudder.

The situation for President Biden, centers on another 4 years of health. Currently the president appears fragile, absent minded, and diffident in desires versus reality. It is known the president has fallen in public more than once, next thought how often out of public view has he fallen? When listening to his responses his mental acuity appears to be slowing. With 52 percent of voters above 50 years of age, they are also addressing the issues in the aging process. This would show a higher level of scrutiny and comparison of his abilities to those of the voter. Finally, the stark issues facing this country that need to be addressed, and real concerns about the president’s abilities for another four years is questionable.

So, voters it appears that the selection process is up to the independents. As noted above we are referred to a leaner’s it is time for perhaps a more direct approach in solving the issues of this country and that is another party. Ross Perot was a capable candidate for the presidency, just a little ahead of his time for the country was still stuck on either or. Times have changed, this venue would supply the ability to find and address impediments in the governmental process. How? It would cut the possibility of a trifecta, force both parties to focus on the needs of the government and not the control factor known as partisan politics. It would also find recalcitrant politicians who typically hide behind partisan issues who are concerned about themselves (fifteen votes in choosing Speaker of the House) versus the needs of the country.

Ron Marbeiter

Niles