Tweet
Sam has mentioned this in other threads and I thought it was worthy of disassembling. Of course, there are varying degrees involved and nuance that can frustrate a clearcut conclusion, but the question is:
Should principle override success when it comes to selecting a POTUS?
I don't know which crimes Trump may be guilty of committing, but the ones being bandied about don't affect me much in my decision to select him as him being the more strong and beneficial president.
Was he unfaithful to his wife? Not a factor.
Did he pay money to hush a mistress? Not a factor.
Did he not give back official documents when ordered to do so? Eh, not really a factor if he's reelected. Those same documents will become his workpapers again (besides, much of this issue is beginning to look like an FBI setup).
Did he threaten Zelensky to withhold aid unless he conducted an investigation into Biden? No, and is ridiculous on the surface of it, since Zelensky could at any moment say "I investigated and everything is fine."
Did he incite a riot/insurrection on J6? If I believed this to be true, then it would qualify as an uncompromising principle. But I find the evidence to be unconvincing. Sloppy, yes. Did he enjoy seeing people supporting him in such a way? I suspect so, which might have caused delay or emphasis on his part to quell it. That being the case, it does not qualify.
So, I wrap all of that up and compare it to Trump's policies while he was POTUS, and I find in favor of him returning to office.
By comparison, I can also say I don't know what crimes Biden may be guilty of committing.
Was he unfaithful to his wife? Not a factor.
Did he not return official documents when he was not authorized to take them in the first place? Not a factor.
Did he lie about not being aware of his son's business dealings in Ukraine and elsewhere? Not a factor.
Did he profit off of his son's business dealings in Ukraine and elsewhere? The evidence is currently unconvincing.
Did he get Shokin fired to assist in his son's business dealings? The jury is still out.
Currently, there is nothing in the above that convinces me that neither candidate cannot be re-elected. (double negative?)
So, it comes down to policy. And that's a no brainer.
Should principle override success when it comes to selecting a POTUS?
I don't know which crimes Trump may be guilty of committing, but the ones being bandied about don't affect me much in my decision to select him as him being the more strong and beneficial president.
Was he unfaithful to his wife? Not a factor.
Did he pay money to hush a mistress? Not a factor.
Did he not give back official documents when ordered to do so? Eh, not really a factor if he's reelected. Those same documents will become his workpapers again (besides, much of this issue is beginning to look like an FBI setup).
Did he threaten Zelensky to withhold aid unless he conducted an investigation into Biden? No, and is ridiculous on the surface of it, since Zelensky could at any moment say "I investigated and everything is fine."
Did he incite a riot/insurrection on J6? If I believed this to be true, then it would qualify as an uncompromising principle. But I find the evidence to be unconvincing. Sloppy, yes. Did he enjoy seeing people supporting him in such a way? I suspect so, which might have caused delay or emphasis on his part to quell it. That being the case, it does not qualify.
So, I wrap all of that up and compare it to Trump's policies while he was POTUS, and I find in favor of him returning to office.
By comparison, I can also say I don't know what crimes Biden may be guilty of committing.
Was he unfaithful to his wife? Not a factor.
Did he not return official documents when he was not authorized to take them in the first place? Not a factor.
Did he lie about not being aware of his son's business dealings in Ukraine and elsewhere? Not a factor.
Did he profit off of his son's business dealings in Ukraine and elsewhere? The evidence is currently unconvincing.
Did he get Shokin fired to assist in his son's business dealings? The jury is still out.
Currently, there is nothing in the above that convinces me that neither candidate cannot be re-elected. (double negative?)
So, it comes down to policy. And that's a no brainer.
Comment