Wednesday, February 1, 2017
Sunday, January 22, 2017
I could have though, relaxed at home, basking in the white male privilege that I enjoy by default. Its not that I haven't worked for the place and status I am at, its just that I am measured by a different yardstick than women and others.
I am a single father who has care and control of his child well over half the time. I work full time, I'm a union activist and a partisan political activist as well. I manage, but its not easy to balance everything. I don't do it alone, I have friends and family that assist. Single parenthood is a struggle. Yet, because of my white-male-ness doing what millions of women do every day, I get accolades and 'atta-boy's' from folks who think the world of how I "get'er done". While the recognition is welcomed and appreciated, its another day in the office for many other women in the same boat as me that do so with far less help and support than me.
I salute you.
But back to the Women's march. I could have mouthed off like others and said: "where were you on election day?" Truth, protesters at these marches likely voted. Not only did Hillary win the popular vote, she got more votes in this election than Obama did in his 2012 re-election. Which makes this a perfect metaphor for what many women face. An over qualified woman not being exactly perfect in all ways losing in an unfair system to a dude who's unqualified in every way but just managed to fill out the application form.
What did I say about being measured by a different yard stick?
Yes, Donald Trump is now the President. Yes he won the electoral vote and yes, Constitutionally, that allows him to take the oath of office and govern accordingly. But the moral victory isn't his, its hers. Now this isn't a ringing endorsement of Hillary Clinton, I was never an fan of hers; she was a flawed candidate too. But even her flaws are better qualified than the best things of Donald Trump (whatever positives he may have).
Sure, women have it better in North America than most other places in the world, but that didn't come from the generosity and charity of powerful men. That came from protests, arrests and collective actions by folks that were rightly upset and the unfairness of the then status quo. Now, given that the base of support of Trump and like-minded Canadian conservatives appeal to a more traditional (dare I used that word) view of the old world, protests like yesterday's Women's March will happen regularly. And I, with my son, will attend as much as we can.
Trump may have won a legal mandate, but not a moral one. So let it be known that his opposition, and those who would support him or import his hate filled ideology as their own, you're on the wrong side of history. So long as I draw breath on this realm, I will stand also opposed to such backward philosophy and welcome its predestined defeat.
"The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice" - Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.
Tuesday, November 15, 2016
Running as the inevitable nominee, then inevitable President because it was your turn didn't work for Hillary in '08. Until some dirty tricks within the DNC, it might not have worked in '16 either. Team HRC would have been smart to let the nomination race conclude organically (without institutional interference). The folks who Bernie Sanders brought in from the outside, returned to the outside after he was ousted from the contest. Who's to say, but if he lost to her in a fair and transparent way, those folks could have been the extra 4-5pts that would see her with a 370+ electoral vote win instead of losing to Donald Trump.
Economic voters are still economic voters. Obama campaigned on the economy in '08 and won. Again in '12 as the economy was finally growing again.
Well pocket book issues still matter, and Trump, for all of his flaws, had an economic message. It doesn't mean it will work; pledging massive tax cuts that typically benefits the 1% are still a politically sexy thing to offer. And when you're dealing with a voter base that traditionally doesn't trust government, offering to out some more coins in their pockets gets their attention.
Trump is a womanizing dirtbag. So was Bill Clinton. The two are not comparable, and Bill wasn't on the ballot, but there was a little political genius in attacking him. The very folks that supported and kept Bill Clinton in office didn't care about his personal flaws, and both Hillary and Bill counted on that. But now, she was counting on those same folks to judge as unfit, Donald Trump, after proving that voters don't give a crap about that. Trump figured this out and used Bill as his own defense. It worked.
The open support of white supremacists (or, if you prefer the more sanitized "Alt-right" crowd) failed to dissuade folks from voting Trump because his campaign latched on to a popular (but wrong) myth that immigrants were taking American jobs. More accurately, Republican attacks on education were making Americans fall further behind and less competitive in the global economy while the country simultaneously needing to hire for a growing high tech sector. That argument wasn't being made though; it seemed as though by simply only condemning the KKK links to the Trump campaign the Democrats ignored a false theory on immigrants/jobs. End result, "immigrants taking our jobs" argument was left to stand as 'fact', and worse, went a great distance to partly rehabilitate the Klan as a legitimate political influence in American politics.
Gender had little to do with this. Several states have voted for strong conservative women as Republican Senators, Governors, state level representatives and such. Having said that, clearly there will be some who'd never vote for a woman for President. Those people exist. But remember this: the folks who some on the left would dismiss as anti-woman voters forget that conservative Republican Sarah Palin was on the Presidential ticket in '08 and received almost the same 60 million votes as Trump did in '16.
It wasn't gender. It was Hillary Clinton that some had issues with.
Thus concludes an absolute disaster of American politics for another cycle. Donald Trump will be the 45th President as he won the election and now has the right to serve as such. I have little doubt that he will be a disaster for America. And that will be the Democrats opportunity if they're smart. Give voters something to vote for, not another contest of who's less bad than the other.
I haven't even addressed the many other policy flaws that Hillary has, and there are many. Her support of Bush's war in Iraq, her support of the Patriot Act, her uncomfortably close links to big banks, big oil to name a couple; and put her strangely close to some Republicans that she'd pretend to oppose.
You can't campaign as something different while offering little difference in policy. Obama did, and he captured the imagination of a generation. That wave in '08 swept away Republicans at all levels. Democrats kept the house, expanded their hold in the Senate. Obama offered folks something different and delivered. Hillary didn't..but Trump did. That's why she lost.
That's my take.
Monday, October 31, 2016
I hope Hillary Clinton wins on November 8. I hope she clobbers Donald Trump in the popular vote, and the electoral votes. I hope Democrats win a filibuster proof majority in the Senate, and retake the majority in the house. I hope Democrats win state houses up for grabs, gubernatorial contests so that gerrymandering can be rolled back.
I hope Hillary wins, not because I'm particularly won over by her, but that it proves that America isn't insane.
To be clear, Hillary is a flawed candidate. She's proven more adept at the game and not the results. That's why she lost to Obama in '08 but why she'll win against Trump.
I would have preferred Bernie Sanders as the Democratic candidate, but that's just not the way it goes.
Mostly, if Hillary Clinton wins, she will force the Republican party to burn itself to the ground in order to start again.
Republicans weren't always like this. They're the party of Lincoln and Eisenhower. When organized and moderate, they produced great things too.
This is the natural cycle of the Tea Party infection that was drawn into the spotlight after Obama won in '08.
Democrats expunged the far right racists from their party in the 1960's when LBJ signed the voting rights act. It's high time that Republicans do the same. A defeat with Trump at the top of the Presidential ticket would be the right opportunity to start that process.
Losing to Hillary Clinton would light that fuse. That's what America needs.
Thursday, October 20, 2016
As Obama was taking the oath of office in January '09, GOP leaders were plotting their way back to power. Their plan was to simply say "no" to everything that Obama was in favor of. If that meant gridlock in Congress, then so be it; they'd prefer government shut down than to compromise with the President. In fact, they've done that twice since Obama's first election win, and are making noise as if to deploy the same strategy against Hillary Clinton should she (likely) win in November.
Hillary Clinton may win by a landslide, but her win will be pointless without flipping control of Congress away from the GOP as well. Until the backwards thinking Tea Party movement is beaten out of the Republican party, they cannot be trusted to govern effectively or governm for the whole nation instead of their narrow minded agenda.
Hillary Clinton is not a perfect candidate, Democrats are not without their flaws as well. But unless the gridlock is broken in DC, little will change.
Saturday, October 15, 2016
It was a lesson that was supposed to be learned from '12 for Republicans to better reach out to Latinos, blacks, etc. Romney won 61% of the white vote and it wasn't enough to win outright. America has changed so much since 1988 when Bush Sr. won 400+ electoral votes and 61% of the white vote.
The point is that the Republican Party was to reach out and build bridges if they wanted a chance again at winning the Whitehouse. Instead, they got Trump.
Trump. Build a wall along the Mexican border, Trump.
Until Republicans eschew the tea party movement and move moderate, they'll never win again.
Wednesday, September 28, 2016
Also, both federal and provincial governments have green lighted the potential use of temporary foreign workers for this proposal.
This is notwithstanding some very serious issues regarding a requirement for meaningful consultations with the affected first nations' in the region.
Petronas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:
'via Blog this'