Although not as widely-publicized,
Bernie Sanders and his supporters had already accused Schultz and the
DNC of showing preferential treatment toward Hillary Clinton. Among
other allegations, claiming the party limited the number of
sanctioned debates between Clinton and Sanders; knowing that Clinton
does not come across as a likable candidate of the people if she
speaks for more than 15 consecutive seconds. Both Sanders and Senate
Minority Leader Harry Reid, had previously asked that Schultz be
replaced due to her “obvious bias” against Sanders. These
requests however, were quickly dismissed. Interestingly enough,
Clinton and her team never had any issues with Schultz.
The entire race for the 2016
Presidential election has been historic, to say the least. Both
Democrats and Republicans have shown they are sick of politics, and
are ready to shake things up with the upcoming election. Bernie Sanders, who describes himself
as a “Democratic Socialist” garnered a huge following, especially
among younger and lower income voters, who historically, are less likely to participate in elections.
Meanwhile, an almost overwhelming
collection of 17 Republican candidates fought for the last 12 months
to win the nomination to represent their party. After a staggering
13 scheduled debates (the last of which was canceled due to lack of
candidate participation), outspoken billionaire businessman, and
unlikely Presidential candidate, Donald Trump won the Republican
nomination. Although there was an excessive amount of mud-slinging,
and many overly-passionate opinions vocalized during the campaign
leading up to the primary election, the majority of the party came
together to stand behind Trump. As with the Sanders campaign, Trump
earned the support of many voters from the crowd that typically has
lower turnout at the polls. Even though some well known Republican
legislators were quick to say they would never endorse or support
Trump, the delegates at the Republican National Convention still
followed the lead of their constituents and gave Trump the
nomination.
Unfortunately for Sanders, members of
the Democratic National Committee, believed the majority of voters
were not intelligent enough to look at both candidates and choose the
“right” one. So they decided to pull strings and manipulate
public opinion from behind the scenes in order to put another Clinton
in the White House. Looking back at it now, it is almost ironic that
the socialist candidate, who was looking to distribute wealth and
level the playing field, was defeated by big money from behind the
scenes. Then, having lost the Democratic nomination, even though
many would argue it should have been his, he endorsed Clinton.
Based on how long Sanders waited before
endorsing Clinton, I don't believe it would be out of line to
speculate that there might have been some back room negotiation
between the two, determining exactly what his endorsement would cost
her and the DNC. It is a sad state of political affairs when our
democratic electoral system fails us, only because one candidate has
more money and political power than the other. A system designed to
elect our leaders based on popular vote, has been bastardized to the
point of being nothing more than the illusion of choice. Then, to
make sure everyone has a warm fuzzy feeling at the end of the day,
that “choice” is sugar-coated by the media, according to their
directions from the Democratic establishment.
Even after his endorsement of Clinton,
many of Sanders' supporters are refusing to get behind Clinton.
Feeling that Clinton and the DNC stole the nomination from Sanders,
they are choosing instead to vote for Trump, or for the Libertarian
candidate Gary Johnson. Some have become so frustrated and
disillusioned with our political system, they are choosing instead to
just simply not vote at all.
If I could give one word of advice to
Sanders' supporters, it would be this; If you are sick of seeing
Presidential elections dominated by the Clintons, the Bushs, and the
other political elites, vote for someone you believe stands the best
chance of disrupting this pattern for future elections. A
disgruntled vote for Clinton, still says you are okay with continuing
things at the status quo. It says you are okay with the
establishment deciding which candidate is best for you, and then
systematically withholding or presenting information to you in order
to manipulate you into voting for said-candidate.
This year, due to the large number of
disgruntled voters out there on both sides of the fence, I believe we
will see a historically-high number of votes for the third-party
Libertarian candidate, Gary Johnson. People who would normally be
“straight ticket” voters feel their views are not represented by
the candidates presented to them in our two-party system. If there
were ever an opportunity to elect a third party Presidential
candidate, this is it. So don't limit yourself by simply voting for
the lesser of two evils.
No comments:
Post a Comment