The End Is Near

This is the last planned blog post before the election. I will probably have another post on Monday, depending on last-minute election news.

These are the only two candidates that the other could possibly beat. In talking with my Mom about this election, we noted that this election is something of a crossroads for the country:
• We want someone who knows what they are doing, but we don't want a politician.
• We want to be a diverse country, but we're afraid of what that means if it actually happens.
• We want to be part of a global market, but we are worried about what effects that could have on our country.
• We want to be safer both domestically and internationally, but want to preserve our Constitutional rights.
• We want leaders of integrity, but we have two candidates who do not appear to meet our standards.

Below, I'll talk about the FBI/Comey's letter and Wikileaks news, then explain who I'm voting for. This isn't an endorsement, it's not trying to convince anyone, it's merely an explanation of my vote. I'm sure you'll disagree. That's fine. But if you have read this blog for some time, then you probably value my opinion enough to hear out the how's and why's.

An October Surprise That Actually Matters

As for the newest FBI revelations, everyone has made mistakes. In shortest possible terms, the FBI was investigating Anthony Weiner's computer because he's allegedly a terrible person and found some stuff that raised red flags related to the Clinton email issue. What we don't know is a) If there is anything new b) How much is different c) If it affects Hillary Clinton and not just Huma Abedin, the now-separated wife of Anthony Weiner. On one extreme, maybe there's nothing here. On the other extreme, the worst I see happening from what we know now is Clinton separating from her closest advisor in Huma Abedin.

But everyone has made errors here. Let's review:

FBI Director James Comey was perhaps in the hardest spot. Let's assume the best, and that there are no political motivations. As we understand it, the FBI's investigation of Anthony Weiner found potential Clinton-related emails on a computer. Comey was in a no-win situation. If he told Congress of possible new evidence immediately, it would look like he was trying to influence the election and thus violate the Hatch Act (officials can't directly use their power to try to influence elections). If he waited until after the election, he'd be accused of trying to protect Clinton. So he was in a sticky wicket. But it's reported that the FBI's had this material for weeks. Which means that even if transparency were his goal, then he should have divulged it immediately instead of 11 days before the election.

Democrats and Republicans, in general, are both wrong for being easy-to-identify hypocrites. Democrats who praised both Comey and the FBI in July are now on the attack, with some calling for Comey's resignation. The opposite is true of the GOP, who had called the FBI corrupt since July and is now singing its praises while mischaracterizing Comey's letter.

Donald Trump, who has been calling the system rigged for countless months, said that it might not be as rigged as he thought now that the FBI is looking at this. This implies that the only way to prove a government agency's non-corruptness is by doing what he wants. That's worrisome.

Hillary Clinton. I could talk about how how this whole email mess is wrong but not illegal, or how this most recent news isn't as bad for her legally as first appears. But Paul Ryan is right when he said Clinton brought this on herself. Although she's apologized at every debate for the email system, she also got herself into this mess by using a private server. While there are arguments to be made about how or why it happened, it's nonetheless something that doesn't pass the smell test for many Americans. She made this bed, and she's going to have to lie in it. Ugh... bad choice of words.

Question of Leadership

I hate arguments that the election is rigged. They're usually whining about losing, they tend to overlook context, tend to not understand the hows and whens of what's happening. They ignore that voters make their own decisions. But when clear injections of personal bias get in the way, I am a staunch advocate of harsh consequences.

Let's talk about the last two Democratic National Committee chairwomen. Debbie Wasserman-Schulz was a drag to that party's future, but Wikileaks seemed to show her with a bias toward Clinton and away from Bernie Sanders. However, in context, her leaked comments do not appear as bad as first thought. Her leaked comments calling Sanders a liar and such were about 3/4 through the primary season, when the primary was all but over. Sanders was in the middle of calling the DNC rigged against her. Her comments were in reaction to that — a natural reaction to being called corrupt on a national stage. I did not see any comments that were from before May, and you can look at my past blog entries to see that the race was already concluded except for the formalities. In context, it's not as bad as first blush.

What I have no patience for is Donna Brazile, the current DNC chairwoman who took over from Wasserman-Schulz. She resigned from CNN earlier this month, but it was quiet. That's because Wikileaks revealed that she leaked questions in the Democratic primary debate to the Clinton camp. This is blatant favoritism, blatant interference in a major event, and simply unnecessary. Yes, the party can decide whom they want — there's no rule that they have to be independent. But that's the expectation. That's why we vote in primaries and care about who runs. She was a faithless referee. I believe she should resign from the DNC, and that the DNC should find someone with some integrity.

My Reasoning for My Vote

I started this election campaign without a dog in the fight. I have voted for Republicans and Democrats for President in the past. I was not impressed by any candidate before the election season and was hoping to be convinced. I came in open minded.

On the one hand, there was Hillary Clinton. I was not impressed by her run against Barack Obama in 2008. I've heard and told jokes over the years about her ambition for the White House for years (the more I think about this, I'm not sure it's not sexism in disguise –- no one accused any of the GOP candidates of having too much ambition). However, I thought she did a fine job as senator and performed admirably as secretary of state.

Donald Trump has seemingly always been a public figure. He was in Home Alone 2, he's been a beauty pageant owner, he's been in WWE, he's been in feuds with Rosie O'Donnell, he's been the face of the birther movement, he's been a star of the tabloids, he's made a name out of making a name for himself. His name is on many large buildings across the nation's largest cities. He is narcissistic excess writ large.

I watched every debate, with one exception, in both the primary and presidential levels. I saw Clinton battle with Bernie Sanders largely over policy. She was the better debater. People weren't as passionate for her as they were for Sanders, but she won the debates. I was impressed by that. Then, in October 2015, she went before the (eighth) Benghazi committee to testify for 11 hours about her email server. I watched much of it, because I was home with a sick kid. I was impressed by her calm demeanor, her answers to tough questions from GOP lawmakers, and her stamina. That was, perhaps, the best and first argument for her: She was at her best in the big moments.

At the same time, Trump was using insults to win the primary. He denied that John McCain was a war hero because he got captured. He accused Ted Cruz's dad of helping with the assassination of JFK. He described Mexicans crossing the border as rapists and bringing drugs (Some, he assumed, were good people.). He called to ban Muslims from entering the U.S. (He's softened that position to "extreme vetting," with no explanation of what that means.). He seemed to not understand who David Duke was or even deny the support of white supremacists for a time. He advocated war crimes. He advocated torture. He made reference to the size of his penis in a debate. He was sued for the fraudulent Trump University, which was not a university and was really just a scheme. He used his foundation to funnel money to a Florida AG who was looking into Trump University and has since been fined for it. He implied that Carly Fiorina was too ugly to be president. He implied that Heidi Cruz was ugly.  He retweeted white supremacists and Benito Mussolini quotes. He attacked Megyn Kelly for having "blood coming out of her wherever" after she asked him about his sexist quotes about women.

That is all just from the PRIMARY battle. He wallowed like a pig in mud at any and every salacious rumor that existed, even when no evidence existed to support it. Perhaps this was a distraction from his policy positions, which didn't have much substance and fell apart at the slightest questioning. Take this video about the Mexican wall. Or this one about tax policy. Or this one about health care policy. He has courted evangelicals while seeming to misunderstand even the basics of Christianity, like asking for forgiveness. This is not even mentioning his failures as a businessman, with Trump Airlines, Trump Vodka, Trump magazine, Trump World magazine, Trump Taj Mahal, GoTrump.com, Trump Steaks, Trump Wine, Trump Mortgage, the aforementioned Trump University, etc.

Since the primaries, he has continued his tour of anger and vitriol, attacking Miss America winners by imagining a sex tape, attacked Clinton for perceived illness and stamina issues, has been caught on tape seeming to describe sexual assault, used his foundation to pay off his lawsuit settlements, called for the return of an unconstitutional police technique, acknowledged during a presidential debate that he didn't pay taxes for years, used a now-illegal tax loophole to avoid millions in taxes, seemed unaware of Russia's invasion of Crimea two years ago, disagreed with his running mate about Syria while showing little knowledge of the situation, called an Indiana judge out for his "Mexican heritage", etc.

Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton has had to deal with her emails for more than a year. She's had to deal with the fact that many Americans do not like her. She's had to deal with the baggage that comes from both Obama's and her husband's legacies. She's not as natural of a campaigner as those two on stage, either — a challenge for any candidate. In the big moments of the campaign — debates and conventions, Clinton has excelled. You can easily see this in the FiveThirtyEight information or any poll tracker: Clinton's poll numbers jumped after the big set pieces. She beat Trump in all three debates. She had a convention built not just on fear of her opponent, but also of what she'd build in comparison (something the RNC did not). While I do not agree with her on all the issues and find her slow to change/late to certain views, I believe she's a capable leader who is a bad campaigner. She made her own bed in regard to the emails and to a far, far lesser extent the Clinton Foundation, but compare those to the seemingly incomplete list of links to Trump problems above.

If this were a race between Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney, it would be a different consideration. I would be considering their policies more. However, that's not what we have. I am not one for hyperbole, so let me be clear when I say this: Donald Trump is an existential threat to America. Mitt Romney and John McCain and Barack Obama and John Kerry were not at all. Donald Trump has advocated loosening libel laws so he can sue journalists more easily. I've already mentioned that he advocates for war crimes and torture. He has implied that gun owners could "do something" if Clinton is elected. He has invited Russia to hack Clinton's emails. He has advocated for a religious test against Muslims before entering the country. He is the epitome of everything that foreign critics say is wrong about America (obsessed with money, caustic and uncaring about people). At the end of the day for me, Hillary Clinton is a politician, but ultimately just a politician. I don't think she's a threat to the country's future. Donald Trump is a person with little regard for the Constitution, basic decency, simple respect or even the truth. I am firmly in the Never Trump boat, but also I've been impressed by Hillary Clinton in the biggest moments. Please vote your own conscience on Tuesday.

Election Update

Presidential
Big changes this week. Clinton was trending down in the last week before the FBI email story. Now, she's going to have to sweat out a victory. I still think her "firewall" is safe: No poll shows Trump leading in Wisconsin, Colorado, Virginia, Pennsylvania or Michigan. Michigan's a LOT closer than it used to be, though — but still no poll shows a Trump lead. Of her firewall states, there's been only two polls with a Trump lead in the last two weeks: both in 4-electoral vote New Hampshire. However, other polls of that state show a Clinton lead. Outside her firewall, I think she's still got the inside track on North Carolina. Winning that would allow her to lose either Wisconsin and New Hampshire OR Michigan, but not both. Reading the tea leaves of early voting, I think she's got a slight edge in Nevada, but I don't feel confident about it. If she won that, it would also give her a bit of breathing space in case New Hampshire flips red. I think the FBI scandal has cost Clinton Arizona. Only two recent polls show her with a lead, with the others going for Trump. Florida is really, really close. I've gone back and forth twice today about which side to put it on, but I think I'll leave it blue for now. Winning Florida is vital for both: Clinton needs it to potentially counter losses elsewhere or to run up the score, while Trump almost has to win it. Arizona moves red. States to watch: All of them -- it's the home stretch! Electoral college: Clinton 322, Trump 216, 270 to win. 

Senate
Illinois is out of reach. Wisconsin's had some two polls showing a tight race, including one lead for the GOP incumbent. But every other poll shows a solid lead for the Democrat Feingold. Florida is the same case, with polls showing a tighter race than before, but I still think Rubio has the lead to keep his seat. Indiana is also much, much closer than it was and now it's not a lock for flipping like it had been. I'd still give it to Bayh, but it's now just as much a battleground as most of the states below. The most recent polls of Nevada have a slight tilt toward the Democrat, though they are quite back-and-forth. Six new polls of Missouri — finally! — and three show a small Blunt lead, two show a tie, and the other shows a small Kander lead. I still think Blunt takes it. Katie McGinty's starting to pull away from Pat Toomey in Pennsylvania. I think New Hampshire is the closest race in the country, and I have no clue which way it will go. But I'm sticking with my prediction that Hassan will win. Finally, North Carolina, which I think is way closer than most give it credit for. However, the polls are also showing a lean toward the GOP incumbent Burr, and I'm sticking with my prediction he holds on. If you'd asked me a week ago how the Senate ended, I said confidently that it'd end up a 51-49 Democrat edge. Now, I am not unconfidently saying it's going to end up a 50-50 split with the presidential winner deciding the majority.

Summary Judgments

Nike had a nice "Goodbye Someday" commercial after the Cubs won the World Series. But I thought this Sportscenter ad was better.  •  •  •  With the Cubs winning, the next longest drought in Big 4 Sport history is... the NFL's Cardinals, who have moved towns a few times, but is now in Arizona. (In baseball, it's the now sad-sack Indians.)  •  •  •  I don't even like country music, but this was a lot of fun, with Beyonce and the Dixie Chicks.  •  •  •  My kids don't like it when I sing. I like to sing. "No Sing!" Evie says, grabbing my lips. "No Sing!" Roland says.