Some of my friends on social media are aghast that I support Donald Trump against Hillary Clinton. Some of them think I am being a contrarian for the fun of it, some think I have changed for the worse, and others, in a well-intentioned manner, are trying to drill, at least in their minds, some sense into me.
I wrote an earlier post explaining why I support Donald Trump. I encourage you to read that post before going ahead.
This post is an elaboration of that earlier post. Also, now that the nominations of both parties have been finalized, it is time to contrast the candidacy of DJT vs HRC.
I will talk about five issues on which I believe DJT and HRC have opposing positions, and why I favor the position of DJT. In the end, I will make some general remarks, and also outline where I disagree with DJT.
Before continuing, I will clarify that I am a libertarian at heart. For that reason alone, I find most of the positions of the Republican party, which believes in limits to the power of the federal government and a more decentralized form of governance at the state and local level, to be more true to the libertarian creed. So, even if we don’t consider the candidates, I have a predisposition toward the Republican party.
Let us talk about some of the central issues of this election:
Immigration: I believe that in a democracy, people who follow laws should be rewarded, and those who break laws should be punished. I know many fellow immigrants who have followed the legal process and waited for decades to get their right to work and stay in the United States. I know many heartbreaking stories where spouses and parents have remained apart and patiently followed the process, to finally be together. For reasons of fairness to these law-abiding people, I am not sympathetic to lax enforcement of existing laws, or the policy of allowing amnesty to those who have fraudulenty or illegally entered this country. If we disagree with the immigration laws, we should change them. But to allow flagrant violation of those laws, and to forgive those violations, is injustice and cruelty to the law-abiding people. Not just that, rampant illegal immigration drives down wages and burdens taxpayers for no fault of their own. And of course, terrorists can enter the country in the guise of being refugees, as is happening in western Europe. For all these reasons, I support Donald Trump’s strong position of LEGAL and SAFE immigration versus the unjust and dangerous policies of HRC.
Trade: In today’s globalized world, lower wages in a developing country like India or China have the potential to destabilize markets and wages in a developed country. The business owners like this globalization, and it does enrich the developing countries to some extent, but it hurts the local and domestic population. It does lead to cheaper goods, but it leads to lower wages and decimation of local manufacturing and industry. The global trade deals which HRC supports, and which both DJT and Bernie Sanders oppose, need to be negotiated properly so that the American workers and families can hope for a financially secure and prosperous future. DJT has gone against even the Republican establishment in insisting that trade must be fair, and not just free.
Defense and Security: I find it absolutely astounding that otherwise peace-loving people cannot see that of the two candidates, DJT is by far the candidate of peace. The media has relentlessly portrayed him as “dangerous” and “scary” while he has always called for less intervention, more collaboration, more negotiation, a re-thinking of military coalitions from the time of cold war, a criticism of even his own party’s President in going into Iraq, and a repudiation of nation-building and regime changes in other countries. With similar information, many politicians at that time opposed going into Iraq, while HRC voted in its favor. HRC was responsible for catastrophic decisions related to Libya, Syria and Iran. HRC was probably just going along, as I don’t think she had much judgment of her own. But it is time to focus on America’s domestic issues instead of war-mongering around the world. For that reason, I support DJT. And of course, only the Republicans are able to call Islamic terrorism for what it is, while Democrats still have their head in the sand.
Healthcare: Obamacare has been a disaster. Many previously uninsured have gotten insurance, but a majority of law-abiding paying insurance customers now face much higher premiums and lower choice. I regard Obamacare as a massive and unjust market intervention which has gone horribly wrong, and cost the country billions of dollars. It will probably die its own death due to a massive financial burden on the government. The focus must be on more competition, and lowering the actual cost of healthcare which is currently the highest in US compared to most other countries. Obamacare is a “health tax” (you pay a tax penalty if you don’t want to get health insurance), and as a libertarian, it is against my ethos.
The Bill of Rights: Republicans don’t want a dilution in the first and second amendments. While liberals and feminists would like nothing better than to enshrine hate-speech laws and gun-licensing in US. I regard the bill of rights as the greatest constitutional document in human history. It limits the power of government to tyrannize its population. And it has withstood challenges for hundreds of years. United States is an open society because of the first amendment, and I vehemently oppose anyone who tries to curtail this right. Left-liberal governments in UK and Germany have limited expression of politically incorrect opinions, and I regard that as a tragedy for Europe. The second amendment rights, aka gun rights, is a complex subject. Without going into details, I support the right of private citizens to own and carry guns. Republicans, and DJT, support the second amendment far more than Democrats and HRC. And lastly, the due process right is sought to be repealed by third-wave feminists and their ilk.
But apart from these boring policy positions, I see DJT as a more authentic person than HRC. He is not a career politician and he speaks from the heart. Sometimes he says stuff which seems like political suicide, and the media never forgives him for it. But it is undeniable that this aspect of his personality has endeared him to millions of people who have voted for him in the primaries. His persona may be brash, but I think his character is clean, at least when compared to the political class in this country.
HRC is a thoroughly corrupt (Clinton foundation, DNC, demonizing Bill Clinton’s rape victims), inept (emails, Benghazi, Iran, etc.) and in fact cruel individual who every honest, law-abiding and kind-hearted individual must oppose.
I disagree with DJT on a few issues. Historically, the republicans have been seen as anti-science with not enough focus on issues like the environment and global warming. I believe it is possible for Republicans to both friendlier to the domestic industry as well as be more informed about these challenges. Secondly, I believe Edward Snowden is a national hero, and Republicans (including DJT) regard him as a villain. If we need surveillance, citizens must vote on it and it must be legally authorized. Organizations like NSA cannot be allowed to circumvent laws and mock the existing laws. And thirdly, I don’t think Islamic terrorism can be solved militarily. It will require careful diplomacy, healing the wounds of the past, and correcting injustices that in many cases the United States itself perpetrated.
Both the parties are not able to articulate the past sins of United States foreign policy, but at least DJT is brave enough to go against his own party in criticizing Iraq war.
I would also like to say that I respect the supporters of Bernie Sanders. He too was an anti-establishment candidate. At least he offered a new vision. I applaud those who supported him. Hillary Clinton is a status-quo candidate, and supporting her shows an utter failure of imagination.
DJT is not a perfect candidate or a flawless human being, but he is certainly BY FAR preferable to a corrupt, inept and cruel candidate that is Hillary Clinton.
But these words won’t matter to those who have made up their minds. What will matter is something that many don’t realize. Hillary Clinton is in bad shape, health-wise. Her brain is under medication and is not quite stable. She has understandably tried to avoid any press conference and ad-lib pronouncements. It is not her “fault”, but it makes her a very, very dangerous choice. Before November, we will see some alarming symptoms of her ill-health which will turn the course of this election.
I wrote an earlier post explaining why I support Donald Trump. I encourage you to read that post before going ahead.
This post is an elaboration of that earlier post. Also, now that the nominations of both parties have been finalized, it is time to contrast the candidacy of DJT vs HRC.
I will talk about five issues on which I believe DJT and HRC have opposing positions, and why I favor the position of DJT. In the end, I will make some general remarks, and also outline where I disagree with DJT.
Before continuing, I will clarify that I am a libertarian at heart. For that reason alone, I find most of the positions of the Republican party, which believes in limits to the power of the federal government and a more decentralized form of governance at the state and local level, to be more true to the libertarian creed. So, even if we don’t consider the candidates, I have a predisposition toward the Republican party.
Let us talk about some of the central issues of this election:
Immigration: I believe that in a democracy, people who follow laws should be rewarded, and those who break laws should be punished. I know many fellow immigrants who have followed the legal process and waited for decades to get their right to work and stay in the United States. I know many heartbreaking stories where spouses and parents have remained apart and patiently followed the process, to finally be together. For reasons of fairness to these law-abiding people, I am not sympathetic to lax enforcement of existing laws, or the policy of allowing amnesty to those who have fraudulenty or illegally entered this country. If we disagree with the immigration laws, we should change them. But to allow flagrant violation of those laws, and to forgive those violations, is injustice and cruelty to the law-abiding people. Not just that, rampant illegal immigration drives down wages and burdens taxpayers for no fault of their own. And of course, terrorists can enter the country in the guise of being refugees, as is happening in western Europe. For all these reasons, I support Donald Trump’s strong position of LEGAL and SAFE immigration versus the unjust and dangerous policies of HRC.
Trade: In today’s globalized world, lower wages in a developing country like India or China have the potential to destabilize markets and wages in a developed country. The business owners like this globalization, and it does enrich the developing countries to some extent, but it hurts the local and domestic population. It does lead to cheaper goods, but it leads to lower wages and decimation of local manufacturing and industry. The global trade deals which HRC supports, and which both DJT and Bernie Sanders oppose, need to be negotiated properly so that the American workers and families can hope for a financially secure and prosperous future. DJT has gone against even the Republican establishment in insisting that trade must be fair, and not just free.
Defense and Security: I find it absolutely astounding that otherwise peace-loving people cannot see that of the two candidates, DJT is by far the candidate of peace. The media has relentlessly portrayed him as “dangerous” and “scary” while he has always called for less intervention, more collaboration, more negotiation, a re-thinking of military coalitions from the time of cold war, a criticism of even his own party’s President in going into Iraq, and a repudiation of nation-building and regime changes in other countries. With similar information, many politicians at that time opposed going into Iraq, while HRC voted in its favor. HRC was responsible for catastrophic decisions related to Libya, Syria and Iran. HRC was probably just going along, as I don’t think she had much judgment of her own. But it is time to focus on America’s domestic issues instead of war-mongering around the world. For that reason, I support DJT. And of course, only the Republicans are able to call Islamic terrorism for what it is, while Democrats still have their head in the sand.
Healthcare: Obamacare has been a disaster. Many previously uninsured have gotten insurance, but a majority of law-abiding paying insurance customers now face much higher premiums and lower choice. I regard Obamacare as a massive and unjust market intervention which has gone horribly wrong, and cost the country billions of dollars. It will probably die its own death due to a massive financial burden on the government. The focus must be on more competition, and lowering the actual cost of healthcare which is currently the highest in US compared to most other countries. Obamacare is a “health tax” (you pay a tax penalty if you don’t want to get health insurance), and as a libertarian, it is against my ethos.
The Bill of Rights: Republicans don’t want a dilution in the first and second amendments. While liberals and feminists would like nothing better than to enshrine hate-speech laws and gun-licensing in US. I regard the bill of rights as the greatest constitutional document in human history. It limits the power of government to tyrannize its population. And it has withstood challenges for hundreds of years. United States is an open society because of the first amendment, and I vehemently oppose anyone who tries to curtail this right. Left-liberal governments in UK and Germany have limited expression of politically incorrect opinions, and I regard that as a tragedy for Europe. The second amendment rights, aka gun rights, is a complex subject. Without going into details, I support the right of private citizens to own and carry guns. Republicans, and DJT, support the second amendment far more than Democrats and HRC. And lastly, the due process right is sought to be repealed by third-wave feminists and their ilk.
But apart from these boring policy positions, I see DJT as a more authentic person than HRC. He is not a career politician and he speaks from the heart. Sometimes he says stuff which seems like political suicide, and the media never forgives him for it. But it is undeniable that this aspect of his personality has endeared him to millions of people who have voted for him in the primaries. His persona may be brash, but I think his character is clean, at least when compared to the political class in this country.
HRC is a thoroughly corrupt (Clinton foundation, DNC, demonizing Bill Clinton’s rape victims), inept (emails, Benghazi, Iran, etc.) and in fact cruel individual who every honest, law-abiding and kind-hearted individual must oppose.
I disagree with DJT on a few issues. Historically, the republicans have been seen as anti-science with not enough focus on issues like the environment and global warming. I believe it is possible for Republicans to both friendlier to the domestic industry as well as be more informed about these challenges. Secondly, I believe Edward Snowden is a national hero, and Republicans (including DJT) regard him as a villain. If we need surveillance, citizens must vote on it and it must be legally authorized. Organizations like NSA cannot be allowed to circumvent laws and mock the existing laws. And thirdly, I don’t think Islamic terrorism can be solved militarily. It will require careful diplomacy, healing the wounds of the past, and correcting injustices that in many cases the United States itself perpetrated.
Both the parties are not able to articulate the past sins of United States foreign policy, but at least DJT is brave enough to go against his own party in criticizing Iraq war.
I would also like to say that I respect the supporters of Bernie Sanders. He too was an anti-establishment candidate. At least he offered a new vision. I applaud those who supported him. Hillary Clinton is a status-quo candidate, and supporting her shows an utter failure of imagination.
But these words won’t matter to those who have made up their minds. What will matter is something that many don’t realize. Hillary Clinton is in bad shape, health-wise. Her brain is under medication and is not quite stable. She has understandably tried to avoid any press conference and ad-lib pronouncements. It is not her “fault”, but it makes her a very, very dangerous choice. Before November, we will see some alarming symptoms of her ill-health which will turn the course of this election.
