By Dick Miller
WE.CONNECT.DOTS: What a time for Donald Trump and Sen. Bernie Sanders to be running for President. Both propose to deliver us from evil of the one-percenters, albeit by contrasting approaches.
If either or both open the door, do we have the will to battle for what belongs to us?
A summer of discontent around the national conventions of both parties could alter the outcome of the 2016 General Election. What if the establishment finds an ugly way to deny Trump the Republican nomination at Cleveland? The following week at Philadelphia, Hillary could fail to unite Democrats to win in November.
Just a year ago, the smart money was on Jeb Bush. The dynasty was going to continue, this time with the brightest family member of all. Democrats had occupied the White House for eight years. Precedence (history) dictated Republicans were going to have their turn.
Hillary had enough smoke to be her party’s nominee, but not enough to beat Bush, so went predictions.
She was going to have primary opposition but no one – including Independent Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders – had the muscle to stop her march . . . at least to the convention.
That was a year ago.
Few – not even Trump – knew discontent would erupt amongst Republican voters first. Not that discord did not exist, but the revolution would begin among disgruntled Democrats, so we thought.
At best, Republicans had suffered setbacks, but their leadership kept them under control by promising to share membership in the one percenters. The only requirement was their continued loyalty to Republican candidates and causes.
Surprisingly, many Republicans had become disillusioned. Some correctly concluded mega corporations (their partners in the oligarchy ruling this country) were not going to allow mass deportation of a cheap source of labor.
At the outset, Donald Trump was one of three GOP candidates – considered to be “outsiders” –supported collectively by at least half of Republican voters. Trump appealed more to base emotions. Early primaries kept Trump and Dr. Carson in the lead and even Carley Fiorina with respectable results. A dozen other Republican candidates split that half of the primary vote that reflected establishment.
Democrats have also been surprising this campaign. At the beginning, Democrats continued to shun “liberalism” in all sizes, shapes or forms. Hillary claimed she is a “progressive,” as far left as the Democrat front runner went.
Sanders talks up “socialism” — free higher education, breaking up the big banks and taxing the wealthy. He carefully defines advancement of the causes. Electing him President will not deliver these benefits immediately. Rather Sanders’ election is the beginning of a political revolution that can lead to Democratic reform.
What kind of government creates an economic system where collapse guarantees one percenters walk away with pockets stuffed with cash while the rest of us lose savings and earning power?
A democracy is a system of government by the entire population typically through elected representatives. A republic is where supreme power is vested in the populace through their elected representatives, including a president. We are told both definitions apply to the United States.
Results, however, are indicative of a new definition.
In an oligarchy, all power is vested in a small group of powerful people, such as land owners, the wealthy, the connected
The sacrifices you made help keep the United States afloat. It is now time your contribution is recognized.
Bottom Line: Low interest rates and high drug prices are the stuff of revolutions, for Sanders and Trump, for certain. This could be the first presidential election in modern history where the voter counts. In 2016 voters are actually picking their candidates.
