It’s not in my nature to be indecisive. A bad decision is better than no decision.
Maybe I am making one here, about the presidential election three weeks from today. My mail-in ballot has been sitting on my desk, all filled in, except for the choice for President.
That I would not vote for Donald J. Trump was a given.
I know him. Slightly. I covered him in Atlantic City. I knew a few of his top executives.
I know him to be a congenital liar. Even his inner circle knew that, and chuckled about it.
In addition to lying, he’s a cheat. One of his great boasts is his reputation as a businessman, but he cheated suppliers in Atlantic City and managed to do the impossible and bankrupt casinos that are ATMs for other owners.
His eponymous steaks, airline, vodka, board game, university, and more, all went belly up. And he calls himself a “stable genius.”
I believe him to have sub average intelligence. He is an arrogant, thin-skinned crybaby and bully. He also ass-kisses America’s enemies. He will sell out Ukraine in a New York minute.
And I will never vote for an election denier. Never.
There is more, but why bother?
Like a majority of Americans, I voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016. Like many, I suspect, I did so without enthusiasm.
As President, Trump was a domestic and international laughingstock, threatening our friends (as in NATO), and siding with Russian dictator Vlad Putin, who tried to help him get elected. I don’t blame Putin for acting in his self interest. Despite the Democrats’ malarkey, I don’t handcuff Trump to Putin’s meddling.
As President, he did a handful of things that I approved of. After deliberately downplaying Covid, he got his ass in gear and launched Operation Warp Speed, which produced a vaccine in near-miraculous time. The Abraham accords moved the Mideast closer to peace than anytime in my lifetime. The Space Force was a great idea. He crippled ISIS. The U.S. became an energy exporter. He is not Politically Correct. Most importantly, he shut the border tighter than a rodent’s rectum.
So I can hear the Trumpsters asking, “So why won’t you vote for him?”
To them I say, go back and read what I had to say about his intellect, honesty, and morals.
Do morals count? To me, yes.
That’s why I didn’t vote for Bill Clinton in 1996.
I went third party.
Which is what I did in 2020.
And what I might do on November 5.
Now I hear my Democrat friends screaming that a vote uncast for Kamala Harris is actually a vote for Trump.
No, it isn’t. It is a vote of disapproval for Kamala’s shroud of disingenuity. Democrat friends have tried interventions to no avail. Unlike Kamala, my positions aren’t on a lazy susan.
She has reversed almost every position — except abortion — she proposed in 2020, just four years ago, when she was a fully mature 55, old enough to know her own mind.
Here is the short list of issues on which she did a 180:
*Ending private health insurance through Medicare for all.
*Forced buyback of “assault weapons.”
*Dismantling ICE.
*Defunding police.
*Decriminalizing illegal immigration.
*Free sex-change operations for convicted American criminals, as well as illegals in custody.
*The electrical vehicle mandate.
*Banning fracking.
Some of you may agree with her previous positions. I don’t and I find it hard to believe her sincerity.
When asked about the incessant U-turns, she failed to give a satisfactory answer (I could write one for her), but said those head-spinning reversals did not conflict with her “core values.”
What?
Well, what are her core values?
Depending on which source you use, she was either the most progressive U.S. senator, or the second most progressive. I am a moderate Pennsylvania Democrat. She is a progressive San Francisco Democrat. I am not on the side of political opinion in San Francisco, where they spent precious energy trying to rename schools named after George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, and tolerated, if not encouraged, open drug use and homeless encampments.
That is not where most Americans are, which is why she is having trouble sealing the deal.
Progressiveness to me is a mad infatuation with gender and racial identity, coupled with an intolerance for opposing ideas that are usually labeled as “hate.”
I can overlook one or two differences, but my disagreements with Kamala are enormous.
I don’t much like this year’s crop of third-party candidates, so I may write in a name, as I have in the past when I did not like either of the major party candidates. Several times, I wrote in my mother’s name as a protest against choices I did not like.
This time it could be Nikki Haley. Or my wife.
But I haven’t yet filled out the top of my ballot.
Kamala can still seal the deal. All she has to do is convince me she has undergone a genuine political transformation, that she is a leopard who has changed her spots from loony left to sincere centrist.
If that happens, I will fill in the circle next to her name.
I couldn’t vote for either major party candidate, but I dI’d vote. If nothing else, voting for someone, whether a write in or 3rd party, shows that your vote is available but the major parties have to earn it by nominating decent candidates. This year, they didn’t earn mine.
I ALWAYS vote, but not always for the top two. In addition to president, there are state and local candidates.
Unpopular opinion here, but truth as I see it. If you’re voting for someone in a purple state who can never get enough ballots to win the electoral college, I’d say that’s a wasted vote, even a half vote for the worse choice. If you say “every vote counts” but vote for people who can’t win, I call bullshit on that. I probably vote against candidates more often than I vote for them. Our two party system isn’t an exercise in futility, it’s an exercise in basic math. The side that splits votes loses.
I’m with you Joseph, particularly in a state as closely contested as Pennsylvania. To vote for anyone other than the top two candidates is, in my view at least, a wasted vote. Now, if we got rid of the electoral college, then it’s another story entirely. Sometimes, I just hold my nose and vote for the least stinky candidate of the two, but better than throwing my vote away. Living here in Texas, I know Kamala will lose our electoral college votes, so I have that luxury; Stu and others in Pennsylvania do not.
The only wasted vote is an uncast vote. To believe otherwise suggests that voting for the loser was a “wasted” vote.
We disagree. I wouldn’t venture to tell anyone how to vote but a vote for RFK Jr, Cornel West, Jill Stein or Mickey Mouse is worse than leaving the space blank. I voted for Mickey against Nikil Saval, who ran unopposed in a local primary, I voted for MM in November imo. POTUS 2024 in PA is a didn’t story imo.
I have no problem with civil disagreement. You have a pefect right to be wrong. ☺️
That is an inconvenient truth, Joseph. In a two-party system, a vote for a third party is simply folly, whether you like it or not. You can call it some kind of “personal protest,” but it is very clear and logical that your non-vote WILL favor one of the two major party candidates whether you like it or not. that is simple math.
Who would be best for the country? The answer is obvious. You don’t reward failure. Only one candidate had a successful administration and brought peace and prosperity to the country.
If Daniel had stopped after the second sentence, he would have been correct. But of course, Daniel does not understand reality, so off he goes. NONE of the data supports what Daniel says about the economy (prosperity). None of the ongoing wars was caused by any action or inaction by the United States. Don’t be like Daniel. Base your decisions on facts, not rhetoric and lies.
Only a dummy like you would vote for the obvious failure.
Bravo, Daniel.
Stu, once again, thank you for a well written piece and one of reason. You echo my sentiments as you very likely do for many others here in Philly and the rest of the Commonwealth. You’re a self-described disloyal Democrat and I am an independent who left the democrats after more 50 years. What a conundrum we face (again). On one hand we have a sociopathic narcissist, liar and cheat and his election to office will bring us a s–t show in the White House. And on the other hand, this prosecutor from San Francisco and her vice president selectee are almost certain to veer hard left to their core values and only God knows just how harmful that will be to the country on so many levels. I’m going to gamble. I’m going to hold my nose very tightly, vote for Madam Waffle and the er., coach and hope that their four years of likely left-looney shenanigans will have two collateral effects. First, it’s going to force decent Republicans to regain courage and sanity, pull their party back from MAGA and nominate an authentic leader in 2028, like Nikki Haley or Liz Cheney. Second, it may compel the tons of marginal Democrats, especially urban folks, out there to begin considering alternative 3rd parties, such as the Forward and the Reform parties, which at least and at this point, can offer voters an authentic alternative with reasonable platforms and agendas. God help us all next month and thereafter.
“are almost certain to veer hard left to their core values”.
No, they are more likely to veer to the center, as that is simply what the vast majority of Americans are looking for, and they damned well know it. This is simply YOUR prejudice talking. It is becoming more and more clear that what Ms. Harris is going to do is to move to the center and stand up for the middle class. Know why? Because that means VOTES.
P.S. Let me know when god jumps in and helps with ANYTHING. Been waiting several centuries and not a peep out of him.
You make assumptions and draw conclusions from them. “YOUR prejudice”. Kindly tell me what they are. They are not being too centrists now as the most current poll numbers reveal that far too many independents can’t trust them to govern as centrists. And if you bothered to read and understand what Stu wrote, we have good reason to believe that candidate Harris and her running mate will bend left to meet the expectations of the party members who placed them there as candidates.
The question voters answer, whether they think about it or not, when inserting their ballot into that machine that ok looks like a shredder is “Which of these two real candidates will strengthen America and the free world more in the next four years?” The “handful” of good things Trump did in his term that strengthened America and the free world also included suppressing inflation, a realistic [not an inside-Israel Arab state] Palestinian Arab-Israeli peace plan that helped bring about the Abraham Accords, not tolerating riots and crime, and making Americans less divided and more respectful and proud of being Americans.. Vote for Trump, Stu.
Trump made American “less divided”???????????? Pardon me if I laugh out loud in your face. You gotta be kidding me.
Hi, Freeze,
You think open floodgates of illegal immigration, defund the police, calls for “reparations,” decriminalizing looting of stores for < a grand, critical race theory, "equity" vs "equality," pro-Hamas protestors "having a point," burning American flags and defacing statues, etc, are making Americans less divided?
Well said, Jerome.
Trump sleeps in bed with Putin.
Kamala will shake them out.
Vote for Kamala
I like your conclusuon. I happen to believe that one can shift positions as they gain knowledge or the world changes. Fracking is dirty though I believe they continually try to clean it up. The net effect of drilling for gas is a net reduction in CO2 emissions and grid stability for complex technical reasons. So maybe her switches inckusing yhis one are OK.
That explains one change. What about the other six, or whatever.
I’ve heard of mid-life changes, but this is ridiculous.
I have my reservations about Harris, but I think her answer in the 60 minutes interview was reasonable, “In the last four years, I have been vice president of the United States, and I have been traveling our country, and I have been listening to folks and seeking what is possible in terms of common ground. I believe in building consensus..to find common sense solutions, and that has been my approach.”
The main problem I have with progressives is that their solutions are not practical and the “cure” tends to be worse, or at least as bad as the disease.
That does not mean that I am in favor of racism, pollution, poverty, police brutality, or lack of healthcare, lack of educational opportunity or plain old generic injustice. (Quite a few years ago, I had a long talk in my living room with a progressive canvasser who was utterly mystified by me, “you sound progressive,” she said, “but you are against all our policies.” And, I didn’t contribute to her group. It was pre-critical race theory, so maybe things were more cordial than they might have been today.)
The despicable part of woke, is that if you don’t agree with their solutions, you are ipso facto racist, sexist, homophobic, whatever. I know you have been personally attacked by woke, so I understand your skittishness. But Jill Stein, she’s not.
I haven’t heard Harris go on about “white privilege” or “the patriarchy” or say “all cops are racist” and she never actually said the words “defund the police.” Reassess our budget priorities?
What’s wrong with reassessment? In any event I am all in favor of things like more “community policing” and special training for dealing with mentally ill people in crisis (instead of shooting them). That probably means more money for policing, not less. But in some cases it might make more sense to spend on that instead of a new troop carrier for a swat team (what’s wrong with the old one?)
So what I hear when she says, she’s kept her core values, that works for me. It means she has finally grown up and realized the things progressives never do–don’t toss out the baby with the bathwater; that the economy, and life for that matter, is not a zero sum game, that there are competing legitimate interests that can and should be taken into account and accommodated; that policy is the art of the possible, and that “compromise” is not a dirty word.
You can also take a look at what progressives have said about her:
“Time after time, when progressives urged [Harris] to embrace criminal justice reforms as district attorney and then the state’s attorney general, Ms. Harris opposed them or stayed silent,” wrote Bazelon, the former director of Loyola Law School Project for the Innocent. ” She was considered pro-cop, because she defended cops accused of misconduct.
This is more than just jailing “too many” black people. She was also dinged by the left for defending California’s death penalty. True, she said she was personally opposed it, but she explained that she was duty-bound to defend the statute by virtue of her office.
[“Duty bound”—there’s a phrase Trump would never use. “I am ‘duty-bound’ to accept the results of an election.” Ha, ha, ha.]
In other words, whatever bad policies she embraced, she tossed aside because they were bad/unworkable or just stupid policies.
More to the point, she demonstrated that she will put her duty to the public before her personal preferences. That alone is enough for me, compared to the alternative.
Me, I have no ideological objections to “Medicare for All”—just about every European country, and Israel have it—but it would clearly be too disruptive, expensive and politically impossible. Especially since we have the ACA.
The brilliance of the ACA–which, by the way, was originally proposed by the Heritage Foundation, current author of “Project 2025”, pushed by Newt Gingrich, and previously adopted as “Romneycare” in Massachusetts—is that it sidestepped the practical problems of national health insurance, first proposed by Harry Truman, the well-known commie, ha, ha. Was Truman too “woke” for you, Stu?
The ICE, and guns stuff—again, just stupid ideas, and over-reactions. The intentional cruelty of Trump’s family-separation policy, and his consistent rhetorical dehumanization of migrants, was too much for me, too.
Core value—stop unnecessary and wanton cruelty; bad policy: decriminalize illegal border crossing to stop it. Core value—against mass shootings and school shootings. Bad/unworkable policy: mandatory buy-back. (I’d be fine with voluntary buy-back).
I mean, Stu, are you in favor of mass shootings? Is it “woke” to be against them? What’s good policy and bad policy with respect to them is what we discuss. Those policies are not “core values.”
I just don’t see the disconnect in the policy changes from “core values” that you do. I see a realization that there is more than one way to skin a cat (does PETA let us still say that?) and that workability and viability of a policy is a prime consideration
The comment of hers you cite comes close to what I need to hear, but not close enough.
I may write a position paper for her, as I did months ago with campaign advice, most of which she took. (Not that she saw my piece, just a happy coincidence)
Character matters when considering who to vote for in this election. When an insurrection is organized by Republican operatives along with the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers and other misinformed election deniers a repeat of these actions are predictable. When most of our institutions (Military, Judicial, Educational) are labeled as biased by a candidate and needs to be eliminated, it scares the hell out of me. Faith for Democratic Institutions is based on trust. I also know it is good at times to question our institutions because of the extreme movements to the left recently. When the majority of cabinet members appointed by that candidate report he is untrustworthy, I believe them. When you label everyone who disagrees with you a nickname that behavior is childish. This election is to important not to have a say in the outcome. The Democratic candidate is a far left candidate who is now somewhat moving toward the center of political thought. I don’t know if she changed her viewpoints or is lying to us. The candidate that wins needs to unite our country after the election. There should not be punishment for having different points of view. It is said this is a generational election. I hope it is an election about accepting change and moving the US forward by respecting the rule of law, rewarding hard work and eliminating equity laws. I voted for change and hope it is accomplished over the next four years.
NO ONE is uniting this country until we are attacked by an outsider.
And even THEN, you have halfwits claiming it was a false flag. Remember 9-11?
All great negative points about Trump, no one (except Daniel) is arguing those points. The questions raised are about Harris. Why she will or cannot articulate a response to the simple questions regarding her changing her position on so many policies is a stumbling block for many of us undecideds.
I could buy into her changing positions if I believed her, but her failure to address these flip flops leads me to believe she will veer to the left, which will further divide our country.
I liked her better when she strongly embraced her positions. I would not have voted for her, but then again, did we actually vote her in or was she chosen by the president or more accurately unelected democratic leaders.
As for standing up for the middle class, raising taxes on the rich, Obama and Biden already did that, right?
Well she will surely unite this divided country, wait Biden already did that.
Back to the negative features of Trump, how bad of an impression does a candidate have to have made on the American public to still be neck to neck with a candidate as bad as Trump?
Stu, I get your dilemna, I am with you 100%. Still hoping one of those tv ads or daily texts to my cellphone sways me to one of the candidates.
When thinking of Trump remember he’ll be Biden in a couple years, father time is undefeated so take a close look at Vance. As for Harris, nobody wanted her when she ran the first time, Joe promised the VP seat to a female,( or was told to) she kind of fell into this, her platform comes from those faceless folks who run the party, no thanks. 2 biggest crime families in the US, the GOP and the DNC
Oooo, harsh. But not so far fetched
I think your vote for “El Republicano” went unnoticed.
If you mean Nikki, that is not a certain vote.
AG Candidate Dave Sunday
You are correct. I do not vote party, I vote for individuals.
Stu, I think you are mistaking your sentiments for your responsibility. This is SELF-government, and when you are marking your ballot, you, and all of us, ARE the government. You are making a decision for the country, not for yourself. Sorry, but on election day, the buck stops with you. Can’t fob it off “other voters” or “the system.”
It is one thing if you are voting in a state like Florida or California. In places like that, a “protest vote” that says “come on, give me a better choice” is a reasonable response. But when you are in a closely contested state, that does not fly.
In this situation, you have to act like you are the sole decision-maker for the American people and government with regard to a purely binary choice. Anything less, in my view, is an abdication of your civic responsibility.
Failing that, I urge to look at this from a practical standpoint. Harris isn’t alone in running away from the woke crap. The “squad” got decimated in the dem primaries. Why would she return to unpopular policies, and who would support them? The Senate will definitely flip GOP, and it could very well retain the House. There is no possibility of police defunding, getting rid of ICE, banning fracking, decriminalizing illegal immigration on any other idiot woke cause.
She has come out against these things, and politicians tend to dance with the ones that brung ’em. She’s promised a GOP cabinet post–as opposed to one for RFK, Jr.–and has committed to bipartisanship, while to Trump, dems are in cahoots with “the enemy within.” Also, she will want a second term, which will impose some political and public opinion discipline, while Trump will have nothing to lose by letting his freak flag fly and governing solely for his superfans, rich friends, and to get some flattery from Putin and “love letters” from dictators.
If you want to replay Ralph Nader to the imperfect Al Gore in Florida, except this time in Pennsylvania, you have every right to do so–so long as you are willing to take responsibility for the possible result.
My responsibility is to vote for candidates who are best for job IMO. So I voted Cherelle Parker for mayor in the primary, even though I do not like her.
Kamala has not yet made me believe she has had a change of heart. I believe she is still woke and not all the Squad was removed. Ilan Omar escaped.
A friend asked how I would feel if Trump won PA by 1 vote. HIGHLY unlikely. IF that happened, my vote for Kamala would have made it a tie. NOT a win, and we’d have a revote, I believe.
I do not tell anyone else how to vote, just what I am doing.
Actually not. In Pa., as in most states, a tie election is decided by lot. No re-vote–a coin flip. So there’s actually two scenarios–Harris loses by one vote, and she is deprived of a 50-50 shot at still winning, or, there has is an actual tie, and Trump wins the coin flip. Yeah, unlikely, but if it is going to happen anywhere, Pennsylvania is the most likely, given the statistical tie in the polls.
More generally, the “my vote won’t make a difference” fallacy is, in my opinion, a cop-out, because we are talking about collective action.
The shop-lifter says “the $10 item I boosted isn’t going to put anybody out of business or raise prices”; the draft-dodger: “one soldier more or less isn’t going to affect the war effort”; the illegal immigrant: “one-guy working hard busing tables doesn’t hurt America”; the tax-fraud: “there is no amount of money I could pay that would have the slightest effect on the deficit.”
They are all being as factually correct as you are. True, these actions are illegal, and you are well within your rights, but the law is not the only arbiter of right and wrong. Voting is a right, but, in my view, it is also responsibility.
Sorry, but in a close election, it is, in my view, that one must choose the lesser evil, which is quite clear here. Trump cabinet members, folks in his administration, generals, and hundreds of rock-ribbed, life-long Republican officials warning against another Trump presidency. Are you ignoring the calls from “inside the house”? Something like this is absolutely unprecedented in American history. For you, no biggie?
“Hey uncle Stu, what did you do to prevent Trump from being president?” “Well, nothing. I and other people like me withheld our votes from the only person who had a chance to prevent it.”
So, when you are casting your vote, I ask you to remember what JFK said,
“Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.”
One vote ain’t much, but it is what you can do. That’s called doing your civic duty.
Thanks for the 411 on lot. I could not find that online.
I will answer your JFK with another: Sometimes party asks too much.
Yes, I know strictly speaking you are not telling me to vote party, to vote country.
Your worst-case scenario is Trump wins. Should that happen, my ray of hope is the Dems failure against such a horrible person, they will be forced to move back to the center, get away from identity politics, woke and obsession with pronouns.
She is two-faced and a lying sack of shiznitz, and those are her GOOD traits. It goes downhill from there.
The irony of that statement and not meaning it about Trump.
Vote for Nikki Haley Stu, best alternative choice…it sets the clock for the future.
That is a possibility.
A “shroud of disingenuity” is equal to Trump’s whole history as a non-vote?
Let me ask.. Do you think if elected, a President Harris would try to do what’s best for the country, as it stands in 2025, as opposed to what she may have wanted in different times and places? If yes, then your disagreements may not be as “enormous” as you made them out to be.
Oh yeah.. And not voting for Harris in Pennsylvania really is a vote for Trump. You’ve already made your point. The race in this swing state is too tight to play games.
This piece appears to have hit a nerve – evidenced by the furiously-scribed (and many thoughtful and a few not so responses). I think it also took a great deal of courage and integrity to publish. It’s always such a relief to me to read your honest and informed opinions – especially this one. It gives me hope for my kid’s future.
Thank you. That means a lot. Not so much courage in a land where free speech is a right.