For many voters in presidential
elections, attempting to choose between the two major party nominees has long
been compared to choosing between the lesser of two evils. Always before, conservatives
have faced a choice in which both options were flawed, but one infinitely
better, on both policy and character. Now, however, it’s not clear which of the
two evils selected for 2016 is truly the lesser.
Both parties have nominated arrogant New
York liberals who allow ambition to overshadow all else, including what will be
best for the country. Both parties have nominated people who promise change,
but who are the very embodiment of the political establishment and have for
decades bought and sold other politicians, and have been bought and sold
themselves. And both parties have nominated people who have between them
literally dozens of major scandals already in the public record, and who are
both facing either a current lawsuit or the prospect of a federal indictment. Lies
and deceit follow both wherever they go. No wonder that both nominees are also
the two most disliked major party presidential nominees in the history of
polling.
One candidate brings with her decades of
scandal and corruption in the political world; the other brings with him
decades of scandal and corruption in the business world. The only meaningful
difference between the two, then, is that one promises a different sort of
corruption and incompetence from what we’re used to seeing in politics.
The search goes on to find the lesser of
the two.
No comments:
Post a Comment