Prologue

What follows next are three critical questions, the answers to which are intended to shape your voting in the next national election. Each answer has been derived from various sources of information including newspaper articles, editorial opinions, official state and federal government publications (1), speeches by the two leading presidential candidates (Biden and Trump), (2) and staying abreast of the legislative process as it plays out in the halls of Congress.

While all three questions and their answers are quite significant, they are not equally important. So, they are set forth in a rank-order with the first being the most consequential.

*Which presidential candidate and his party have demonstrated their greater commitment to upholding the US Constitution and the rule of law?

It’s President Biden and the Democrats and by a very wide margin. In fact, the Republican Party, now re-cast as the Maga movement with the 2020 loser as its’ head, are committed to tearing down our present government and creating a new one that is to be authoritarian with an expanded array of powers to be exercised with the goal elevating White Christian nationalism. If you think anything like this couldn’t happen here, disabuse yourself of such naivete’. It has already begun on the state level: red states like Florida and Texas have already started the censuring of the words we use, the books we read, the subjects we study, and how we dress. Influential Christians in Texas are pushing to have one of their clergymen installed in every public school. Even worse, those same state legislators are passing laws that give them the latitude to overturn election results based on nothing more than sketchy evidence of a few individual cases of voter fraud. It would be a serious mistake to blow all this off as just so much political posturing. Rather, these are integral parts of a plan !!!

*Which presidential candidate and his party have a demonstrable record of being able to govern?

Again, it’s President Biden and the Democrats, even to the extent of collecting some bipartisan support along the way. That is how a gun safety law and an infrastructure bill were passed; both accomplished in a bit over two years while primadonald got far less accomplished in four. Even more telling is what has been going on in the House since the maganuts gained control of that chamber in 2022. They ran on a promise of reducing inflation, including gas prices, and investigating the alleged criminality of the new president and his family with impeachment as the end-game.

Now, 18 months in, this new majority has yet to send so much as one meaningful piece of legislation on to the Senate. Instead, what has become all too visible is the existence of a circular firing squad among the House majority where more moderate Republicans have squared off against the radicals, with Speaker McCarthy caught in the middle and incapable to bringing those two factions together. Coincidental to this internecine warfare, three maga-dominated committees have thus far utterly failed to uncover credible evidence that implicates President Biden in any criminality. In spite of this reality, and to placate his rabid base inside and outside Congress, McCarthy has unilaterally (3) launched an impeachment inquiry (4). Throughout all this, the people’s business has been left unaddressed; the process of actually governing has been set aside in favor of hyper-partisan game-playing and the conduct of a fishing expedition (5).

*Which presidential candidate and his party have a plan to move the country forward?

President Biden and a new House majority composed of Democrat representatives: sustain the momentum generated by the president’s infra-structure bill that is already creating new, good-paying construction jobs…focus on people’s pocketbooks by lowering the cost of prescription drugs…support the revitalization of the union movement including collective bargaining that could reduce the size of the growing disparity between what CEOs earn as compared to ordinary workers…continue our support of Ukraine in the interest of our national security and that of the democracies that make up NATO…resume the building of the economic partnerships that President Obama initiated with nations that comprise the Pacific rim.

The immediate foregoing stands in the starkest of contrasts to what another maga-dominated House could deliver. Such an election outcome, including giving 45 a second term, would accelerate the move towards an autocratic form of government that would favor White Christian nationalism (see the first question above). An autocratic President Trump will focus on exacting revenge on anyone he perceives as an enemy while building a team of sycophants whose job will be to accommodate their new boss no matter how outlandish his impulses and policy inclinations. The former would also put an end to the investigations of his alleged criminal involvement in the 1-6 insurrection, and his obstruction of justice in the Mar-a-Lago “documents case”. That would include terminating all judicial rulings and trials that are in process. That would amount to a massive “get out of jail free’ card for 45 and his associates. He has also promised to pardon all of the worst offenders involved in the 1-6 insurrection.

End Notes

With those three queries asked and answered, there must now be a turn to dealing with the “elephant in the room”; i.e. President’s Biden’s age and the compromises in performance that are undeniably part of that “territory”. They have been evident when lapses have appeared within his otherwise acceptable public performances.

The fear held here is that the “age factor” writ large will either keep voters from the polls or even worse, throw their support to the 2020 loser who is also showing signs of not just aging, but serious psychological dysfunction. Is there a credible way to put the Biden age issue into a reassuring context? Consider what follows.

The president has surrounded himself with a competent team that has operated free of chaos and scandal. Not all their policy decisions and the guidance they have offered their boss has been perfect. But, they have not misled us (and the president) into calamitous foreign and domestic blunders. Over time, it is to be expected that members of this team will depart. But, every effort will be made to insure that their replacements will bring to the job the same level of competence and integrity exhibited by their predecessors.

And then there is this: Our Constitution provides for a smooth transition of power should a president become incapacitated or die in office. You may dislike VP Harris on a personal level and/or find her not up to the job of bring Commander-in-Chief. But, there will be no vacuum. She has a firm grasp of the Biden agenda, supports it, and will have access to the same levels of advice and guidance that have benefited Mr. Biden. Moreover, as a former Attorney General of California and a member of the US Senate, she has a solid understanding of the law, the Constitution and how the legislative process works.

Finally, there are times when we are confronted with two bad choices. But, in the present case, even a cursory analysis will bring you to the conclusion that these two choices are not equally bad. Whatever Joe Biden’s shortcomings (including his age), he would sustain in a second term, the forward movement and integrity characteristic of the term now in progress. The 2020 loser (his own age an issue) would, in a second term, deliver an even higher level of chaos, disrespect for the Constitution and rule of law that prompted us to send him packing 2.5 years ago. So, when you get down to what is really at stake, the choice becomes a whole lot easier.

____________________________________

  1. Reference here is to he “speaking indictments” authored by Special Prosecutor Jack Smith, and by Fulton County, GA District Attorney Fani Willis.
  2. Unless something presently unforeseen arises, it will be Biden vs. Trump.
  3. House rules dictate that an impeachment proceeding is to be authorized by a simple majority vote by the full House. Unable to collect the necessary 218 minimum needed to get that done, McCarthy acted on his own.
  4. In the present case, an “inquiry” amounts to a search for evidence that presently hadn’t been uncovered after months of digging and therefore may not exist. This is really what amounts to a “fishing expedition”.
  5. See footnote #4.