Hello Folks!
Back today to briefly discuss the Democratic Party as a whole. Now, as I have stated previously, I'm an independent with a firm belief in the Constitution. I will vote for whichever candidate, in whichever party, who's policies closely respect the Constitution. With that stated again, I'll go into detail about how the Democratic Party looks at the current moment and maybe we will visit the Republican Party in more depth in a few days.
Let's start with a look at: The Democratic voting process. In the Democrat party you're not supposed to own your own vote, you vote for who they tell you to vote for, or else. Queen Hillary was the democratic hopeful back in 2008 before Obama came in like a wrecking ball. Defeating his adversary in a crushing way. Hillary to this day, hates the man and her party for it, but now it's her turn to shine. Debbie Wassermann-Schultz, the head of the DNC, has all but handed the nomination to Hillary on a silver platter by intentionally scheduling less debates, and scheduling them at inconvenient times. This is how the Democratic Party has always operated. It's nothing new. Voters decide the delegates, which is by popular majority, but wait.... the process is further complicated with super delegates! Most people think, "what in the world is a super delegate and why does that matter to me?" Well, super delegates are the Democratic Party elite and this is the democratic way to throw in a sneaky curve ball at the voters, whom are usually unaware of, or simply uneducated of the full process. While the delegates are tied to popular vote, the super delegates aren't tied to have to vote for any particular candidate and they hold 20% of the democratic vote. Yes, you heard me, 20% OF THE ENTIRE VOTE! Therefore, THEY are the ones who ultimately decide who they and their party feels is "best" for the job. Funny, it should be the voters deciding, but they're not. For instance, if Bernie manages to pull a win over Hillary, he has to win by well over 20% margin; otherwise, the super delegates can easily have him removed. Most Sander’s supports will foolishly tell you that the super delegates always end up conforming to the popular vote in the end; but, there’s no guarantee of that as that’s not in the democratic rule book and the Democratic Party is against Bernie's socialistic slant.
· Note: The Republican Party did have the same system up until the 80's but they've since changed their system to a lot less super delegates and those delegates are still tied to the popular vote. Talk about actually progressing! Go red! (CNN link provided at the end of this blog for further reference)
Furthermore, there's so much chatter going about social media that if "Hillary wins the nomination then we're writing Bernie in!" Hold on a second there partners, there's a BIG issue here. What most don't know, is that each state has write in ballot rules to be followed in order for them to even be counted. This happens every presidential election and 99% of those ballots get tossed. In fact, there are 6 states who do not allow write ins whatsoever (I'll include a link at the bottom of this blog for further reading).
Then, the electoral college takes over.
Let’s now examine: experience. Both candidates in the Democratic Party are basing a lot of their platform on them being the most experienced/qualified for the job of America's next President. I ask you this, what have these experienced politicians in the past 40 years given this country besides perpetual wars, poverty, big government dependency, homelessness, corruption and a two party system that caters to the whim of corporations who dole out the cash? Privatizing this country to the point that basic human rights have been replaced by profits for a select few. If you’re going to select a candidate, would it not make more sense to vote for someone who is currently unexperienced in the political arena? I mean, you can hardly run on a platform that clearly shows you as not doing a damn thing to actually help our country, can you? At the very least, after the last 7 years of a Democratic president, is it not obvious to everyone that we’re drowning in PC bullshit with a floundering economy? How can either of these candidates realistically promise us any better?
Next, I give you: The candidates. I'm 32 years old. In theory a millennial and even I think Hillary is a pandering, gender shaming cunt. If people would actually examine her record she is John McCain on the issues and a plutocrat like Mitt Romney. She's an Establishment Republican but the only thing her coalition of middle age women care about is her vag. On top of, failures after failures and lies upon lies and her main campaign motto is, “more of Obama’s polices!” Good grief. As if we haven’t suffered enough with Obama’s policies? And then, BENGHAZI, need I really go on?
Bernie is a pandering, "free shit," fairy dust sprinkling moron. Comparable to no one due to his completely undeniable socialistic, communistic beliefs. If people would actually examine his record, they wouldn't find much. In his 26 years in politics he has nothing to show for his time, besides cool pictures from protests he attended; meanwhile, he was drawing welfare and did not have his first real job until he was 40 years old. Post office renaming aside, I've read that he's the "amendment King." Know what that means? It tells me that he's not capable or smart enough to propose his own legislation but takes pride in tearing apart what others present.
It's no secret that the democrats push big government rule and as much government welfare dependency as possible. Why? Because the more the people are reliant on them and ditch working hard for the American Dream, the more people will vote democrat to keep the freebies coming. That brings me to Bernie. Let's discuss "democratic socialism" a little bit. I'm sure most of you have heard the argument that we're already living in a socialistic type country, right? That the military, social security, Medicare, roads and highways, emergency services, public services, etc. are socialistic programs. Wrong. Just because something is named "social security" doesn't make it a socialist policy. A social program is defined as: a program designed to protect citizens from economic risk. The only example of socialism in our country is welfare. The rest are capitalistic programs paid for by taxpayers, as it should be. It actually makes me laugh that free education is even in the mix. Look, public education K-12 is already funded by tax payers and government programs, and ran by the government, can we honestly say it's even worth it these days? Come on, common core ring a bell? My kids are highly intelligent and with the new teaching programs implemented they are becoming unchallenged and disengaged.
Lastly, the supporters: Hardcore supporters of both democratic candidates are becoming equally annoying in their unyielding devotion that consists primarily of irritating hashtags, inaccurate memes, and name calling, simply because one would choose to keep their own vote and vote for whoever they like. And don't you dare vote with your values! Don't you dare!
Welcome to the Democrat side of things, where you must conform or else. Because, well, clearly they’re a cult. I have no other ideas on what else to call them. With the fear mongering that a Republican president would be the “end of the country as we know it,” they have no shame in attacking each other and anyone who doesn't believe the way that they do, to ensure a democratic win no matter what.
Kristen White
“The world is a place of constant change. If we are open and ready to consider everything while remaining unbiased, we will be ready to accept these changes and utilize them to improve our lives.” ― Daniel Willey
