Talking into the Wind

Election season in America. There is nothing like it anywhere in the world. Some, even most, do it better. And surely there are also a lot of places that make it worse. But I really doubt that any nation can have such a convoluted, impractical, inconvenient, illogical, costly, undemocratic process of electing the only nationwide elected officeholder.

And we got ourselves a doozy this year. But that is just an observation and not what this blog post is about. However, as you read on, keep that observation in mind.

I am a firm supporter of US Senator Bernie Sanders to be elected President, and so I get to read and talk about his candidacy with many Hillary supporters. Hillary supporters say a socialist cannot win or pass laws. The first point is totally irrelevant, since if Socialism is so despised, then how could he win the nomination? And if the fear of socialism only exists in Republicans, then most of them are not voting for him anyway, and we all know Republicans would never vote for Hillary. More importantly, Bernie Sanders in all his years in office always worked to promote private enterprise, expansion of democracy, and the use of government as the organization to operate certain industries where profit is not in the public benefit. Industries such as schools, health care, and infrastructure projects. Since colonial times, the US has always administered these areas, at least partially, as social institutions.

The second point is unique. Once he understands he cannot pass any legislation, they awkwardly justify it with complete misinformation. The reason is obvious. The point is made under the assumption that Congress will have both houses under Republican control. If that happens, then Congress will block everything Hillary proposes as well. We all know the song; it has been playing continuously for 7+ years. Hillary supporters, in order to obscure that they raise “Her” above Bernie, is to make two (empty) points. First is that Hillary has passed legislation, and Bernie has not. Without going into details, that simply is not true.

The second point assumes the first point is correct and is more of a demand. How he will pass his legislative proposals is a common challenge. One person even asked for a detailed plan. Whether the Republicans hold both houses, there will be different players. For example, Harry Reid will not be the Democratic leader. This would be like asking Peyton Manning exactly how he will win the Super Bowl, what plays he will call and who will be his receiver for the winning touchdown. Not the day before the Super Bowl, but at the beginning of pre-season. But when the question is reversed, the answer gets flipped back to, “Hillary has a history of getting things done, so there is no need to explain it.”

So, in a year when all the assumptions have turned out wrong, we are being told to elect a candidate based on the assumptions that have turned out wrong.