Saturday, October 29th, 2016
Time to say the parties are over
By Daily Standard Staff
This presidential election has ripped aside the comforting curtain to expose how badly the nation's power structure has failed its citizens.
About 40 percent of each party's members flat-out rejected the party leaders' chosen ones, opting instead for candidates who basically weren't even party members.
Bernie Sanders, despite not even being a Democrat, upended the party's coronation of Hillary Clinton, generating the only real enthusiasm in that race. Wikileaks has exposed the lengths to which party leaders went to deny Sanders an honest shot at the nomination.
Donald Trump's Republican pedigree is dubious to say the least (donating to Clinton's earlier political campaigns really should raise eyebrows). He had the good fortune of competing in a race with so many opponents that party leaders couldn't coalesce around one alternative to deny him the prize.
Neither suriving candidate has talked about the real issues we face. Neither has a realistic vision about rejuvenating our economy, solving the deficit, taking care of the unfunded mandates, fixing health care or improving our standing overseas. All we hear is that the other candidate will destroy our nation.
The result is voters are left to choose between two well-deservedly despised candidates. Both have shown complete disdain for millions of the people they hope to "lead."
Hillary Clinton has shown a high-nosed disgust for the "basket of deplorables," who disagree with her elitist, socialist-leaning agenda. However, she hasn't shown as much disdain for the money she can rake in by disparaging Catholics and others who disagree with her.
WikiLeaks has revealed the level of hatred Clinton and her campaign leaders hold for the actual working class - particularly those of traditional faith - in the middle of the country.
Recently released videos have also shown party leaders likely paid to have protesters show up at Trump events and cause violence.
She and Bill have turned the Clinton Foundation into a huge slush fund. She said herself the couple was flat broke when Bill's second term ended.
Somehow, despite all their time spent on charitable work, the couple has managed to amass tens of millions of dollars in personal income. We're sure it's entirely coincidental people suddenly decided to hand over huge amounts of money at the same time they were trying to catch Hillary Clinton's ear as secretary of state or potential president.
We're also certain Wall Street officials are quaking in their boots at her threats to take them down. Somehow we don't think that's what she said behind closed doors after charging them nearly a quarter of a million dollars per speech.
She's also trying to run on her resume. She may want to reconsider that tactic. A quick glimpse at the places that received her attention as secretary of state display her incompetence. Syria and Libya are basically nations in name only at this point, each with huge areas ruled by jihadists. Libya is a particular disaster brought about by Clinton's actions. She helped literally to bring down Muammar Gaddafi in 2011, leading to the death of four Americans in Benghazi and a power vacuum filled by jihadists who are now funded by Libya's oil revenues.
When she took office, she promised to reset relations with Russia. Those relations have taken a dramatic turn - for the worse. Our military and theirs are basically one mistake away from a shooting war in Syria with each threatening to set up a no-fly zone and shoot down the other's planes.
Trump has a multitude of his own flaws. Regardless of whether he actually sexually assaulted any women, his repulsive words are toxic enough to question his judgment and demeanor.
Trump is running on his business experience, but his string of bankruptcies and unpaid contractors really don't give us much confidence on this point.
Saying he was a businessman and operating by rules different from those in politics really don't cut it as an explanation.
We keep hearing about his genius solutions to problems but still haven't heard many details.
His other faults have received copious amounts of news coverage and we don't need to repeat them here.
We agree the D.C. establishment needs a wake-up smack, but a president also needs to be able to sweet talk some foreign and domestic leaders to be able to succeed. We understand - and agree with - his followers' belief that Washington is corrupt and has accumulated too much power. However, with no party support he stands no chance of achieving his goals. Does anyone really expect Paul Ryan to shepherd Trump's policies through the House?
We led with Clinton's faults because the media has been entirely derelict in its duty to expose the glaring deficiencies in her 40-year political life while reveling in any dirt they could dig up on Trump. The networks and The Associated Press have tossed in their lots with Clinton. A search of AP wires turned up only one story about Wikileaks this week - and no analytical pieces.
They have, rightfully, challenged Trump's assertions and positions. However, we've had to search deeply to find similar vetting of Clinton. Journalists seem to have determined on their own that Trump is the greater threat and must be stopped.
Their sudden protestations about the propriety of running the improperly obtained Wikileaks material also rings hollow after media outlets ran with stories about the Pentagon Papers, Watergate and earlier Wikileaks information dumps that cast former President George W. Bush in a bad light.
We agree a Trump presidency would likely be a disaster. Being able to blast the establishment's faults is only worthwhile to those capable of fixing them. He'd receive no support in the House, and we question whether the Senate would even approve his Supreme Court nominees.
Our real problem is that a Clinton presidency is also destined to fail. If Republicans, as is likely, maintain control of the House, we'd be set for four years of paralysis and innumerable investigations of the political stink that inevitably trails a Clinton administration.
The Clintons have yet to be convicted of breaching any serious laws or ethics rule. But, we attribute that more to the lax limits to which the ruling class holds itself than to any overriding sense of right and wrong on the Clintons' part - a valid reason to bring in a third party to put some real teeth into ethics rules and laws.
If the GOP manages to hold control of the Senate, we'd see a dwindling Supreme Court as all nominees would likely be bottled up.
The next four years give every appearance of horrid gridlock with the upstart movements battling the parties' old guards.
The party leaders need to feel a serious threat to their power before real reform can take place. They currently listen only to their money and power sources, completely ignoring the people's call for real leadership and real reform.
As long as 95 percent of voters who bother to take part pick one of their nominees and those disgusted with their options stay home, we're stuck.
We encourage voters to show up at the polls and make another choice. Grit your teeth, one of those two will win and fail.
Don't accept either of reprehensible choices and don't let the parties force you into staying home. Choose a third-party or independent candidate with whom you can actually agree and respect.
The only way to get the party leaders' attention is to threaten their combined hold on Washington. Forcing other voices into the debate is our only hope to capture Washington's attention to real issues we want solved.
At least, the current leaders would see large numbers of people are actually willing to vote and are really fed up with their nonsense.
It's time they're reminded the real power does rest with the people.