There has been a lot of negative content written on the Clinton Trump race for the White House-and here's some more. In the USA the political battle rages; controlled immigration, class distinction and discrimination are all on the table-or are they? To watch two would-be diva's lock horns is expected and can even be somewhat entertaining when it's in a television pop singing competition or a reality show but this is neither. This is a contest to become leader of the free world. Winning over the fans, sorry, I mean voters with the gratuitous and automatic gainsay of what the other person says cannot be taken seriously as political quarrel. It would almost be laughable if the stakes weren't so high. The rhetoric swings between chasing moral high ground and performing U-turns on policies that don't sit well with popular opinion. However, when popular opinion is what governs party leader's policies in order to maintain their standing, then leaders don't lead-they follow. Could that be why policies and culture has stagnated? Big business has not stagnated however, with huge profits going to the upper classes that then have most direct influence on media and on policies. Speech in America is supposed to be free-but it's not; its very expensive and the rich control speech by their ability to give bigger donations to political parties in exchange for governmental support to their particular agenda's and so the two extremes of social economic classes get pushed further and further apart.
The posturing and grandstanding of two party leaders this time has been unprecedented in my lifetime. This seems to be because when political parties have increasing control or influence over mass media with continual broadcasting of political rallies and TV spots then the whole 'debate' becomes like a bad season of the Kardashian's. (Like there was ever a good one!) By this I mean petty squabbling conducted and hubristic behavior that belongs more in squalid daytime TV soap opera rather than in political conference. But the battle is won or lost in the media so they don't want the masses channel changing. As a result of that heightened media power you have what must be the two, most singularly bizarre Presidential Candidates in history. Trump likes to appear to be the man who says what he thinks even if he himself doesn't completely believe what he says. As for Mrs Clinton, how many of the stories of lies and duplicity are true? We may never know. What we do know is that she has a very bitter streak and very little tolerance for anyone who doesn't see her natural entitlement to become Commander in Chief.
Not only have serious international policy issues had very little attention neither one of them has any political gravitas whatsoever. If their persistent character assassinations of each other are anything to go by they appear to have very little dignity, solemnity or moral code at all which is surely prerequisite to lead the most powerful country on Earth?
I'm not a socialist by any means but I still have to agree with them and admit that modern politics doesn't seem to represent all or even the majority of the people in the USA. Where is the representation for the bottom 20% who are slipping of the edge, marginalized and with no idea how to make their voice heard? What is the blueprint for turning things around? What are the coordinates for America to navigate itself out of the wars its involved in and to avoid becoming embroiled in more of them? I just see two people using what they have to get elected. For Trump, creating fear and cynicism are his chief tools; elect me or allow the terrorists to take over. Clinton has been less able to promote her ideas if she has any worth listening to mainly because she has been preoccupied with ducking and diving the stream of accusations of lies and deceit that are routinely and manifestly fired at her. This has been a veritable mass graveyard of skeletons, some but not all previously in the closet, that has risen up and is now running amok on the political drama stage that is her life. Trump and Clinton have much more in common than appears and indeed, I really can't see much difference between Donald and Bill. Hillary's feminist stance is well, less than window dressing really. Over the past months, the Clinton campaign and its celebrity supporters have worked hard to convince the American public that "Hillary" is synonymous with feminism. What hogwash that it is. She knows and tolerates misogyny very well and first hand; she hung on to its coattails to get where she is today.
As far as Trump's position on feminism, women's attitudes toward the Republican candidate are mixed. Women overwhelmingly dislike him by more than a 2-1 margin according to the Washington Post pollster Scott Clement. But among Republicans and GOP-leaning independents, national horse race polls don't show much of a gender gap in Trump's support. People who like segregation like Trump and Trump likes that so much he wants to build walls-like has with his hair around his forehead.
It really seems like a choice between the better, or least worse of two deeply flawed candidates. What a choice to have to make. I genuinely don't mean to come across so cynical, angry and contemptuous-but I am-so I doSuggest a correction