Voting for a man you hate?

In this article called I’m wielding my electoral power of 40 Texas Republicans to vote for a man I hate written by Rachel Manteuffel in The Washington Post she talks about how she will be voting for a man that she does not like. This might not make sense to many people but it will in a bit. Rachel goes on to say in her article that, “Moral authorities such as Mitt Romney… have declared it the duty of Republicans to stop Trump”.

Rachel is claiming that by casting your vote for someone else other than trump than that will be better, even if it is someone that you do not like or approve of. She continues to say, “I don’t want the rest of the world to watch us get so close to electing a boorish xenophobe sexist who doesn’t seem to care what he’s actually saying… as long as the crowd roars in delight.” I would have to completely agree with the author Rachel Manteuffel.

We are coming so close to having the Republican Party back up a candidate who has brought out the truly bad side of everyone, supporter or not. This article makes sense because in an article I had read before it was speaking about how Marco Rubio’s campaign was urging support for Kasich in Ohio. This means that between Republicans they are trying to flush out someone who knows that would bring shame to its party. We cannot be letting this happen, we can’t let our fears and phobias get in the way to see clearly. Yes we might not all agree on who to vote for but what we should agree on is that we can’t possibly let someone who has divided us more than ever be President. The day that we are divided as a nation is the day that we are most vulnerable. Our country is called United States of America, ‘United’, for a reason because we know what is beneficially and we know what is destructive to our Great Nation. 

Reagan lost in the Republic?

"What Today’s Republicans Don’t Get About Reagan "is written by Jacob Weisberg who has also been the author of the Ronald Reagan volume in the American Presidents series. Jacob Weisberg makes it clear in his article that Reagan’s beliefs were not those of the Republicans running for President now, but that his beliefs were more conservative.

The authors’ main focus is to the people who believe that the Republican Presidential candidates are like Ronald Reagan, with the things that he stood for and fought for. Jacob Weisberg makes sure the reader knows what the differences are in the Republican nominees and Former President Ronald Reagan by saying, “… the characteristics that made him a successful politician seem lost on them.” Those of us who have heard or read about what kind of President Ronald Reagan was would agree with Weisberg.

While the people who are currently running for President talk more about Ronald Reagan they are nothing like him. The whole party has completely switched and changed since that era. What used to be a Party that would ‘settle for 70%’ is now a party that “won’t settle for less than 99%”. We have been indulged with entertainment have been focusing on these entertaining presidential candidates who ‘exploit prejudice around immigration and terrorism’.

Personally I happen to agree with what Mr. Weisberg wrote when he said the party might not just lose this chance to have a president but might also lose itself in the process. Regardless of how you see it this is not the Republican Political party that Reagan was a part of. The republican political party has lost itself.

Politics of Hope

Is President Obama "Returning to his roots"? Can our country still stand strong while it's divided? Do we really have 'poisonous political climate'?

This article written in the Los Angeles Times explains to us exactly how dangerous having a 'poisonous political climate' really is. President Obama goes as far as to reference Abraham Lincoln when he spoke about a divided house and how it could not stand. Our current President, Barack Obama, believes that we shouldn't compromise a big democracy like ours because 'we can't govern ourselves'. Our politics have become a joke to some filled with 'blanket promises' and insults that only create more tension between citizens. Constant spectacle and little battle of ideas is what we are currently seeing. 

I believe this article is worth reading because as citizens we should be informed about what is going on with our government. We should look at our problems, past and present, and perhaps focus on a different solution to our problems. It is up to us, the citizens, to not be blinded by the things we see and hear but to research ourselves and always stay informed. We shouldn't let these promises and insults dictate who we vote for but we should always have in mind that at the end this is "politics of hope".

Hello