Spring and the election

Shannon Bohrer

(5/2016) The election season is in full bloom and the spring flowers and vegetables have been planted and the fruit trees have buds. Spring in an election year is just a little different than non-election years; in that one receives telephone calls and mail from people you don’t know - asking for your support. The news reporting seems focused on the candidates and the experts tell us early and often who is winning, who will win and why. But they are usually wrong. This year, the weather has been warmer than normal. The question we may wish to ask this year is; is the warmer weather related to global warming, or is it related to the political rhetoric?

Speaking of fruits and vegetables, the crop of candidates can be difficult to understand. While initially we started with over 85 candidates for president, the field has narrowed to just a few, some of which were not expected to blossom. Normally, in any contest you would expect the most qualified to rise to the top. This may not be a normal contest, unless you are abnormal, which might be prevalent this year. That is one of the great things about this country, you have the freedom to express your opinion and it is not illegal to have a different opinion. I could say more, but I won’t.

The leader in the republican field; Donald Trump, has taken home the prize of best in show before the nomination process. In fact, because this candidate is leading in the republican field, there have been backroom conversations of how to stop him. When have you ever heard of a political candidate being so successful and at the same time the party wants another candidate? If you plant bean seeds, you expect to grow beans. And to many that is just what happened. The party has planted and operated on fear, opposition to the other party, a dysfunctional government and not working with the current president for so long that many of their constituents believe it all. Don’t trust the government, don’t trust the press, but trust me. And Donald Trump is not just parroting the party lines; he amplifies it, telling everyone that he is the only savior that can save us. Remember – he is the smartest person in the race and he is only non-political candidate.

So what we are growing this season should not have been so unexpected, since the issues have been repeatedly planted for years. If you plant distrust of government, distrust of the press and distrust everything normal, eventually it might grow. It is possible to use too much fertilizer and stunt the plant, but sometimes the fertilizer works so well that it can grow too much. In the current case the party leaders have been trying to trim the growth, but have not been successful. Possible it is related to the planting of not trusting the system. After all, when politicians tell you not to trust the government, are they not telling you not to believe them?

Just how bad this growing season is, or will be, has been the topic of numerous subject matter experts that have all been wrong. However, on the plus side, the Trump consumers are happy. They really believe that their candidate can deliver everything he has promised. I don’t think it possible, but then I am not an expert. Since Trump is the president and only member of the "Inflationary Persona Society" he will tell you that he can fix anything. Maybe, if he could fix anything, the party would not be upset with his positions! Of course the subject matter experts believe that if he is nominated as the party candidate, he will lose the election. Given the current record of the subject matter experts, should not give one confidence in their predictions.

Just how determined the Republican Party is to replace Donald Trump can be measured by the different strategies and plans that have been put forth. We have the "support the other candidate plan", we have the "brokered convention plan" and we have the "third party candidate plan."

The "support the other candidate plan" is interesting and really poor. It has been said that the Republican Party needs a candidate they can work with, at least have some control over. The other candidate they have chosen is Ted Cruz. One senator said that if Ted Cruz was murdered in the senate and the trial was held in the senate, there could not be a conviction. Ted Cruz has repeatedly said he will not compromise, he is proud that he does not play well with others? And this is the candidate they prefer over Trump? Of course supporting the other candidate might be code for not letting Trump obtain the number of delegates required for the nomination process, if that makes sense.

The "brokered convention plan" is almost as good, but not quite as poor as the "support the other candidate plan." Unless there is a disturbance in the force, the leading candidate will have the required delegates for the nomination. But, let’s say there is a disturbance and the leading candidate is short of delegates. He would still be the leading candidate with the most delegates that most the people have voted for. To nominate someone else would be telling everyone that votes for him, their votes don’t count. That cannot be good.

Of course the "third party candidate plan" could also be described as the "guaranteed to split the vote plan." According to the "experts" the third party candidate would be someone that most of the party members could support. The problem with the expert(s) is that the most of the party members have already chosen. I don’t think they would leave their candidate, the person they voted for. And that’s the problem. If the majority of persons vote for one candidate and then that party select someone else as their candidate, the party is really not listening to or working for the majority of their members.

Related to the issue of not listing to the voters is the fact that the Republican Party has said they will not confirm the President’s nominee for the Supreme Court. Instead the Senate is saying the people should decide, meaning after the election the next president should make the appointment. And yet, the people already did decide when President Obama was elected for his second term. Of course if a brokered convention elevates someone that did not receive the most votes, then the party is saying – we know better…we should decide, not the voters? The only thing consistent with these position(s) is the inconsistency.

The Republican Party has planted their garden and is now trying to stop the growth. Maybe the party should pay attention to what they plant. As was once said; "We could learn a lot from crayons. Some are sharp, some are pretty and some are dull. Some have weird names and all are different colors, but they all have to live in the same box." What is the lesson?