What follows is not an endorsement for either candidate, but observations made in the continuing saga of the Presidential Elections ever unfolding before the Americans. The campaign began not with either candidate’s declaration to run, but with the election results November 6, 2020. If while reading you decide that I am anti-Trump, I invite you to read the article through.
What can be observed is Donald Trump’s attempt to solidify his supporters while planting seeds of doubt regarding the “fairness” of the processes, including voter fraud in terms of mail-in voting, the judicial process that has been continually developing regarding civil and criminal charges, and now the upcoming debate scheduled for June twenty-seventh.
Mail-in Vote Controversy
Whether called for or wanted, Covid brought changes in the way Americans conducted their business. This issue whether the changes were necessary is the subject for another debate, but the fact is still that social distancing, vaccinations, etc., affected not only our educational process and business models, but the election process that includes mail-in voting.
Mail-in voting is not a 2020 election innovation but an alternative opportunity to vote absentee. The practice was introduced during the Civil War allowing soldiers to cast ballots from their encampments and counted at home. In the late 1800s absentee ballots were distributed to those who would not be home or too ill to vote on the prescribed date. In the 1980s California became the first state to allow eligible voters to cast absentee ballots strictly for convenience.
With the Covid event, social distancing policies designed to limit the spread of the virus resulted in extended absentee voting. In the 2020 election over sixty-five million votes were cast by mail, or over 42% of total votes cast.
Months prior to the 2020 elections, President Trump began lodging a campaign to persuade that mail-in voting was a ploy to rig the election in the Democrat’s favor. He argued ballots would be stolen out of mailboxes, then the practice would stifle Republican voting, and then foreign nations would print and mail in ballots.
Losing the election, mail-in balloting was one of the claims of voter-fraud and helped to generate the fiasco erupting January 6, 2021. Regardless of which side of the aisle you are own, the event was unprecedented.
Criminal/Civil Litigation
It is one thing to protest one’s innocence and employ every legal avenue available to defend oneself in court, but it is quite another thing to launch a verbal attack upon witnesses, prosecutors, judges, as well as the families of those involved in the prosecution process. Nevertheless, Donald Trump has relentlessly used social media and news media to launch tirades impugning the character and qualifications he has considered as his enemies, men and women he says if part of a conspiracy to derail his ascendency back to the Oval Office.
Vivid, and sometimes profane rhetoric personally attacking not simply the charges brought against him, the prosecutorial process, and the prosecutors can serve only two purposes. One purpose is to undermine the judicial process with the hopes of not simply stalling the prosecution process until after the elections, perhaps then in office should he win claim prosecutorial immunity as a sitting President.
Two, it becomes plausible that the jury pool becomes tainted, thus not only trying his cases in the court of public opinion, but in the courtroom itself. Can anyone, regardless of which side of proceedings really expect to find an impartial jury? Trump’s mannerisms and rhetoric evokes strong emotions and certainly create in the minds of many, if not most, a bias either for or against him.
Upcoming Debate
Thursday evening, June 27th, CNN will host the first of two presential debates. The terms of the debate format were discussed and agreed upon by both parties. CNN has always been viewed as Trump’s nemesis because they, along with other news agencies, appear to lean toward supporting Joe Biden over Donald Trump.
Even though the terms were agreed upon by both campaigns, Trump began to bash the hosts as incompetent and biased, and the debate is rigged against him, and it will be a “3-on-1” debate with the two CNN hosts siding and favoring Biden.
If Trump really believes this, why did he agree to the debate, unless its because it will serve his purpose of a negative campaign in which he continues to belittle Joe Bidden in full view of millions watching the debate. He says he wants Biden to remain in the race and given the prospects that Biden may lose badly, and the Democrats provide another candidate, Trump suggested that he may purposely lose the debate just to keep Biden in the race.
Is the ploy to purposely lose the debate just a set up for an excuse that he lost but the debate was already in the fix on Biden’s behalf?
Observations
My observations are not designed to favor one candidate over the other. I do have greater sympathy for Joe Bidden, not because I support him as a candidate, but because his fragile nature has been abused by those who have propped him up. He is no more responsible for his policies than I am. He parrots what he’s told. I believe his handlers should be charged with elder abuse. He’s the go-to-guy to enact presidential edicts and promote Democratic policy.
Attacking Joe Bidden does no service, no more than attacking Donal Trump, who is also the victim of character assassination both by opposition and prejudice news anchors.
One final note: If I could offer a defense for Donald Trump and his campaign, or Joe Bidden and his campaign, for their vicious character assassination to sway the American voter, they are in good company. The practice goes back to the 1800 election between the Federalist candidate, James Madison, and the Democratic-Republican (ironic isn’t it) candidate Thomas Jefferson.
The Federalist portrayed Jefferson as a deist with total disregard for national religious observation who would lead the people into a god-less nation, while the Federalist, backed by the Congregationalist Church with loyalties with the Church of England, we determined to bring America under the Church of England and a Church-state that would enhance the Congregationalist Church at the expense of dissenters and other denominations.
The American Way?
“Muckraking”, they used to call it, and slinging dirt, seems to be the America way, regardless of whether it is the election of presidents, congressmen, selection of Supreme Court Justices, governors, etc.
All either candidate or party has been able to achieve is further polarize the American public while galvanizing the hearts and minds.
As Christians we may be prone the question posed to then President Lincoln regarding which side was God on during the Civil War. Both sides, Lincoln said, prayed to the same God against one another and read the same Bible. He responded it was more important to be on God's side because He is always right.
Prior to Lincoln's election and the outbreak of the Civil War during the Republican Convention, Lincoln addressed the convention with these ominous words taken from the teachings of Jesus, "Any nation divided against itself cannot stand" (Matthew 12:25).
Jesus is always right, too!
Opmerkingen