VOTING NOTES FOR 2016

When it comes to Presidential Elections, this has been one of the most contested and fiercely fought campaigns in recent memory - and the real campaigning hasn't even begun yet! Though being a Good Ol' Boy from the South may have nothing to do with it, there are vastly different candidates and for one time I plan on spouting off on who is best and who isn't.  

So, let me take a quick look at each of the candidates and what you're exactly voting for.  

Rubio:  Mayor of New York.  I have no idea why you would vote for this man other than that.  

  Result: No vote.  

Kashich:  Misplaced millions as Governor of Ohio, made cuts to public education, questions about voter fraud have also been raised. 

  Result: No Vote. 

Cruz:  Cruz is a christian and makes no qualms about bringing this to the Oval Office.  This means he's totally against the constitution, equality and ignores the whole "separation of church and state."  He would create a 'Christian ISIS' in the US. 

  Result: No vote. 

H.  Clinton:  Benghazi and email scandal.  Need I say more?  Clinton has more skeletons we haven't seen and yet people rally for her as if she's the second coming.  She is.  You really want a second Clinton in the White House? I won't even go into the whole SuperPac funding. 

   Result: No Vote.  

Trump:  Many years ago I said that we needed a business person in the white house.  We needed someone to tell it like it is. I didn't mean Chump, oops, Trump.  Bigoted, improper and has no real reason to be running this country and has been likened to Adolf Hitler in his campaigning. 
   Result:  No Vote. 

Sanders: Pushing for many changes, but unable to prove how they will be paid for.  Called a Socialist (though I'm not sure that's accurate in this case.) It's obvious at the time of this writing that Sanders may not get the nomination of his party.  If he was the type of candidate I hope, he'd run as an independent the rest of the year. 

Result: Mixed.  We need Sanders, but do we need the government spending he seems to be backing? 

As you can see, it's not a clear cut field.  What to do?  We need to vote, just not sure for whom!

For many years, whenever I was faced with the election, I carried two thoughts into the booth: 
  1) When in doubt, vote for Pat Paulsen - Lord knows he can use the votes - and he never wins anyway, so why not? I voted for the master candidate a number of times; though I can't remember how many exactly. What this taught me, however, is that any vote for anyone other than a justified and viable candidate is just tossing out your vote. You'd be better off not voting at all, and save the gas it took to drive to the voting station. But not voting is even worse, when you consider the field of possibles!
 2) Vote against the incumbent.  There have been any number of petitions, arguments and protests stating how Congress needs Term Limits since the Executive Branch (The President) already has them.  We don't need term limits, we need better voters. Tired of the same candidate? Vote Against the Incumbent! Term Limits established! 

These two thoughts have served me well, though in my entire voting career (starting in my first presidential election in 1976) I have voted for the winning candidate exactly 1 time.  But you see, it's not about voting for the winner.  It's voting PERIOD - and casting a viable, usable vote! As has been often said and by writers, poets and pundits alike, "If you don't vote,  you can't whine about the outcome!"  AND additionally, if you vote for a candidate that has no chance of winning (Sorry, Pat!) that's just as bad. 

Register now, get ready for November!