Now before anyone thinks I have completely lost my mind; this piece is an exercise in understanding. During a discussion about the upcoming election, I made a statement to the effect that I couldn’t understand why otherwise rational, educated people would vote for Mr. Trump.
Not all of his followers are white supremacists, evangelical fundamentalists, or jingoistic nationalists. Some are quite articulate in their support for the President.
One thing I have always tried to do, although not without some failure, is to understand all sides of an issue. Be it the abortion debate, the place of religion in secular activities, equal rights, Antifa, or whatever issue I have a differing opinion on.
This got me thinking. What if the candidate facing Mr. Trump was someone I could not, in good conscience, vote for? I have often said choosing who to vote for by picking the lesser of two evils is not the wisest course of action, reason should prevail. I should therefore be able to articulate valid reasons to vote for Mr. Trump.
Thus this piece.
Here’s why I would vote for Mr. Trump.
- If you ignore all his caustic speeches and often inarticulate manner of expressing his ideas, there is no dis-ingenuity about the man. Many of our more articulate politicians sound better, are more inspiring speakers, but are wolves in sheep’s clothing out just to keep power.
- The absolute lack of any effort at reaching across the aisle in the spirit of cooperation is endemic in Congress. Their unwillingness to even discuss fresh ideas with the President needs curbing. Reelecting Mr. Trump may force them into one of two choices, cooperate or do nothing but obstruct for 4 more years. It’s a tossup which is more harmful.
- His disjointed, unbalanced, inconsistent, and contrary to the once staid course of American diplomacy foreign policy aside, he has not led us into another endless war. While his withdrawal from Syria is a grave error, there are fewer American service members dying in useless incursions throughout the world.
- His insistence on naming a Supreme Court Justice as soon as possible, and the Senate agreeing to take up the vote, is the right thing to do. Inferring nefarious motivations is an exercise in futility.
History shows us few zealots end up on the court. And a well-qualified candidate likely to be considered for the court, regardless of their particular history of legal theory, can be relied on to render well-considered decisions with the guidance of the constitution, legal precedent, and the law.
That there are hypocrites in the Senate who only see this as a way to stack the court when it suits their purposes does not alter the validity of a sitting President’s authority and responsibility to fill a vacancy with a qualified, well-considered, and vetted candidate. If it was wrong not to hold a hearing on Merrick Garland, it is wrong not to hold a hearing today.
Is this enough for me to vote for Mr. Trump? Probably not. But I thought it important to be fair in my assessment of all sides of an issue. And to understand how someone might choose to vote for Mr. Trump.