The Struggle For Democracy
The Struggle For Democracy
Divisive Politics Engenders Disaster
Whether we are weary of divisive politics or enthusiastically participate in elections, those who seek and attain power ultimately affect our lives.
The battle for the U.S. presidency has lost all traces of sanity and democracy. The extreme opinions regarding which potential leader supports freedom and justice — and who is a charlatan or criminal — reflect the schizophrenic polarization of the country.
This crisis in choosing leadership is no accident. The unscrupulous, disruptive methods of attaining and maintaining high office reveal the continuing degeneration of ethical standards, constitutional rights, and a willingness to abuse the electoral process.
Political strategies designed to skew perception and incite emotion, rather than display the actual qualifications and predisposition of candidates, are a blight on the country. Most Americans are not fooled by these charades, though consequently, confidence has been lost in U.S. institutions; particularly the presidency.
The Democratic National Committee’s changing of rules including the date of the Iowa caucus and the New Hampshire primary are solely designed to rig voting and influence the image of President Biden. This chicanery is matched by the Trump campaign’s attempt to dominate the Republican Party’s nomination apparatus.
The deterioration and division caused by the two-party system are not hidden. The United States is being torn apart by partisan agendas that have little to do with the daily lives of its citizens.
Beneath the manipulations, slogans, and propaganda — different facts are revealed.
An Economist/YouGov poll provided a stunning revelation about the favorability of presidential contenders and who would likely become president if the electoral process was not encumbered by a divisive process. Among all Americans, regardless of party affiliation, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has the highest ratings above every candidate — surpassing both Donald Trump and Joe Biden.
A subsequent Harvard-Harris poll of registered US voters on the Favorability of Political Figures confirmed similar profound results.
A few news articles reported these meaningful findings, although both surveys have been virtually ignored. Mr. Kennedy’s name was not included in a later Gallup poll of popular newsmakers, confirming a disinterest in acknowledging the preferred candidate of the majority of Americans.
Coverage of the surveys simply twisted words, exposing a desperate attempt by mainstream news to blur the truth. In a bizarre story, Newsweek magazine announced that Robert Kennedy Jr. Would Be Winning 2024 if it Was a Popularity Contest. In an effort to deflect the importance of the data, the article diminishes the relevance of its headline and attempts to reduce the viability of the Kennedy campaign.
The sum of what a candidate presents to the public, including personality and platform, determines the ultimate elements of their popularity. The Economist and Harvard polls present a reality that won’t be disguised or repressed. The numbers clearly indicate a preference for Mr. Kennedy’s leadership; reinforcing the fact that the current electoral process is engineered to betray the will of the people.
A Broken System
Additional statistics and trends confirm the threat to democracy.
Only 68% of the population voted in the 2020 presidential election. In previous contests over recent decades, where many results were close, the President of the United States has been elected by just over half of those who voted; about one-third of the US population.
In some cases, candidates have won the popular vote and lost in the electoral college, a process that has been long criticized for not reflecting the will of the people.
The most glaring weakness in elections is the lack of majority rule. In most other democracies, leaders must be elected by over 50% of voters. Some states have already initiated the transition to Rank Choice Voting where if an initial election doesn’t yield a winner with over half of voters, a subsequent poll is held, allowing the two leading candidates to vie for leadership.
Ignoring the need to maintain a truly representative government, two-party politics in the US has manifested a degradation of the electoral process. This becomes increasingly apparent as the 2024 primary season approaches.
Narrowing the parameters for presidential contenders serves something other than righteousness. Among those who vote and those who don’t, at least half of the country is well aware there is a crisis; many people are alienated from an unfair system that doesn’t consider their needs. Partisan politics has discouraged entire sectors of the population from participating in government; a recent Pew Research poll indicates frustration with the two-party system and shows that nearly half of younger adults say, they wish there were more parties to choose from.
Corruption Dominates
Elections do not engender fair and responsible government; the process is increasingly structured to allow powerful interests to gain undue control. In particular, the corporate and financial impact on elections often results in legislation contrary to the preferences and needs of the people.
This breach of democracy overshadows the impact of any illegalities or fraud at the polls.
Monetary backing of parties and candidates has taken hold of government in an unprecedented fashion. Over 14 billion dollars was spent on the 2020 election and nearly 17 billion in 2022 on the mid-term elections. Rather than financing campaigns for noble causes, this funding is targeted to support those who will sign on to policies and laws favorable to donors.
The most revelatory donations display the depth of the disorder; some individuals and corporations hedge their bets, giving to both Republican and Democrat candidates in the same race.
This existential threat to the United States is now integral to a process where huge budgets are the primary influence on outcomes, permitting campaign financing to be the overwhelming force, permeating all aspects of government.
The outrageous fact that material interests dominate elections is accepted with despondency by voters; and winks, smirks, and shrugs by business leaders and politicians. Unsurprisingly, this corruption engenders both anger and apathy towards the government — and distrust of public figures.
Yet few leaders dare to mention or complain about the pernicious effect of corporate campaign financing.
The Real Divide
Election reform ensuring a majority of voters choose their president is the most threatening challenge to Washington’s elite and their reliance on a combative environment.
Those who highlight the damaging bipolar system are berated and sidelined. Anyone who defies internal or external party politics — and supports a fairer electoral process — is deemed an interloper and unworthy of the presidency.
Mr. Kennedy has agreed openly with Republicans on a number of issues. Rather than recognizing this as an effort to find common ground, his fellow Democrats claim this proves his duplicity and betrayal of the party. His desire for Democrats to return to former priorities and historical role in representing the interests of the middle classes is ignored.
The powerful leaders of both parties know that their presidential candidate will pretend to be many things, but any transgression from corporate favoritism is unacceptable.
Despite the country’s majority of voters having a preference for Mr. Kennedy’s leadership, so far he has declined to run as an independent, recognizing this could inflame the adversarial atmosphere. His ultimate goal is healing the divide, he said, “My aim is to convince every Democrat that you’re not a Democrat and every Republican that you’re not a Republican.”
This quote and concept are not found in any news coverage because it violates an essential code that allows continuing partisan corruption. Instead, Mr. Kennedy is insulted and berated because of his threat to the kleptocracy that dominates the country.
Divisive politics serves only one purpose: while Democrats and Republicans insult each other and brawl, the wealthiest and most powerful Americans profit from the battle.
The antagonism that drives public controversy in the United States is an over-riding dominant force. The us vs. them mentality continues to fuel dangerous animosity; Americans have not experienced this degree of a polarized climate since the Civil War. If this trend is not reversed, the damage will be irreparable.
The dysfunction highlights a desperate need for a president who recognizes the systemic flaws in politics and the corporate capture of government. The electorate can recognize the dignity and potential of a candidate who speaks to these central concerns. And the one-third of Americans who don’t vote might come to the polls if they heard from an aspiring leader whose perspective crossed party lines.
Mr. Kennedy’s strong popularity is very worrying to those who have struggled to maintain illicit and treacherous power. This explains the relentless efforts to diminish his prominence.
Nonetheless, it is apparent that if Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is on the ballot next November, he will win the presidential election by a greater majority than any candidate in recent history.
If Robert Kennedy, Jr was more like his father and less like Donald Trump I might agree but Junior still thinks the Kennedy name makes him legit without and true ideas or clear plans. Trump has longed to elevate his family name to that of the Kennedy name but long ago the country has tired of family Dynasties.
So I will respectfully disagree and the fact his entire family as thrown him under the bus and he has no agenda other than his last and first name makes him a pathetic candidate.
Hello, I got the sense that many people do not understand what and where in the Bible applies to the U.S. Founding. This is purely an academic discussion in which I will attribute the founding to the Bible. It is much more in depth than this post but I will try to get some critical connections. Most topics are themes that run through the Bible rather than a simple referenced verse. However, there are a few that can be summed up pretty quickly.
The Separation of Powers came from Isaiah 33:22. For the Lord is our judge (The Judicial Branch), the Lord is our Lawgiver (The Legislative Branch), The Lord is our King (The Executive Branch); he will save us.
Pursuit of Freedom and Liberty: The pursuit of Freedom and Liberty is a theme that runs throughout the entire Bible. Nonetheless, it is summed up in Galatians 5:1. Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free. and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Thus, freeing each man from the yoke of the law and to conduct himself in accordance with the Ten Commandments. That means we are to be principled people. "Now the Lord is the spirit, and where the spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom", 2 Corinthians 3:17. The forefathers knew the Bible promoted freedom for man in many ways and viewed slavery as counter to the notion of liberty they promoted. "Anyone who kidnaps another and either sells him or still has him when he is caught must be put to death", Exo 21:16. Jefferson freed his slaves but because the social culture did not allow them to live free they were indentured to Jefferson. The forefathers knew a Civil War would be fought over slavery and made compromises, the infamous 3/5 vote clause, to establish the new nation.
Here is a curious quote from James Madison, “We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of Government, but upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves according to the 10 commandments” Taken from from America's God and Country, William Federer.
Equality: One of the most famous lines in our founding documents centers on Equality. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal…" One source for this statement in the Bible is "God is no respecter of persons" Acts 10:34. And another source is Deuteronomy 10:17 -"…who (GOD) shows no partiality nor takes a bribe". In short, God favors no one simply because of a station in life or advantage. James 2:1-4 illustrates that favoritism is forbidden: "Suppose a man comes into your meeting wearing a gold ring and fine clothes, and a poor man in shabby clothes also comes in. If you show special attention to the man wearing fine clothes and say, Here’s a good seat for you. But you say to the poor man Stand there or Sit on the floor by my feet. Have you not discriminated among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts?" The Constitution takes this notion of equality in Article I, Section 9, Paragraph 8 and Amendment Fourteen then forbids any state from denying any person within their jurisdiction 'equal protection from the law'.
God Given Rights: Human rights have a founding in the Bible and come from God. Man is created in the image of God, Gen 1:26-27 and 9:6. Being created in such an image comes with dignity and rights to give levity and protect the image. These rights come from beginning with the Ten Commandments. Man also has the right to freedom, Exo 21:16 and Deut 24:7. There are other rights wrapped up in the Ten Commandments but that is a lengthy discussion. Here are some quick ones:
The right to secure existence. You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his manservant, or his maidservant, or his ox, or his ass, or anything that is your neighbor's. Exodus 20:17
The right to property. Thou Shall Not Steal. Exodus 20:15
The right to life. Thou shall not kill in vain. Exodus 20:13
The right to fair treatment. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. Exodus 20:16
In brief, the Ten Commandments are written in a negative connotation. Scholars have rewritten the Ten Commandments is a positive connotation and in terms of a right. Rights have duties and responsibilities and usually protect society from the individual. However, more recently rights have flip flopped and protect the individual from society. For example, The Right to Life has a duty not to kill in vain and a responsibility to uphold the sanctity of life. This way everyone is alive and society is protected and thriving. Today, there seems to be a duty to kill in vain when an individual decides to do so. The responsibility is the individual's to select the method: assisted suicide, euthanasia, or abortion. Society cannot not say anything about the individual's decision.
The US founding was directly taken 100% from the Bible and there is a very extensive background on this that hardly no one knows or appreciates. Therefore, we struggle in our democracy with ancillary discussions and side shows that would become mute if people knew and appreciated our heritage.