Election 2016- a Compound Fracture in America

Election 2016- a Compound Fracture in America

Broken US Map

The recent primary results in the states of Massachusetts, Mississippi, Utah and Wisconsin reveal much more than just the voting totals and the delegates apportioned for each of the candidates in both parties. Yet this revelation is seldom being discussed by the talking heads of the major media who are slowly, but assuredly, revealing their own agendas in how they report on the election news.

With all of the accusations of prevarication going back and forth between each party’s candidates, perhaps it is the media itself that is spreading the biggest lie of all- that they have figured out who the winners, and ultimate winner, will be. Anyone who says that they can predict the eventual outcome of this November’s election should equally be taken with a grain of salt that would displace almost all of the frozen liquid in in a Margarita Grande.

For instance:

In Massachusetts, one of the nation’s most liberal states, Hillary Clinton edged out Bernie Sanders, winning forty-six of the Bay State’s Democrat delegates to Sanders’ forty-five- despite the fact that it is largely understood that Senator Sanders, a socialist, is the more liberal of the two Democrat candidates. Donald Trump managed to capture twenty-two of the state’s Republican delegates besting John Kasich (the most liberal Republican running) and Marco Rubio, who each won eight, and Ted Cruz, who won six;

In Mississippi, one of the most conservative states in the United States, Donald Trump bested Ted Cruz, winning twenty-five of the Magnolia State’s forty delegates- despite the fact that by all accounts, Senator Cruz is the more conservative of the two Republican front-runners. Hillary Clinton won thirty-two of the state’s thirty-six Democrat delegates;

In Utah, another conservative stronghold, Bernie Sanders won an enormous victory over Hillary Clinton, winning twenty-seven of the Beehive State’s thirty-three Democrat delegates. Ted Cruz also won decisively, winning all forty of the winner-take-all Republican delegates;

In Wisconsin, a comparatively liberal state, Ted Cruz won big, capturing thirty-six of the Badger state’s forty-two delegates- this by a marked conservative candidate, who won largely based on the support of that state’s governor and former candidate, Scott Walker, as well as local radio talk-show hosts. Sanders managed to walk away with forty-eight Democrat delegates to Clinton’s thirty-eight.

Why all of the inconsistencies?

Because, in reality, there are five political blocs within the two parties trying to win two nominations.

First, there are the Socialist Democrats, supporting Sanders, largely made up of young college students and those who have not fully entered the work force, and thereby have not paid taxes on earned income. They want “free” healthcare, “free” tuition, “free” commodities of all types, and want to soak the rich to pay for all of their “free” stuff. These voters believe that Ernesto “Che” Guevara was a righteously-cool “dude”, because their radical professors managed, conveniently, not to tell them about the thousands who were executed on the orders of this monster. Their professors also forgot to tell them that socialism has never, and will never, work.

Then there are Feminist/Demographic Democrats, supporting Clinton, largely made up of single-issue, pro-choice women, who don’t and won’t acknowledge Hillary’s treatment of women with whom her husband, Bill Clinton, crossed the line of marital fidelity and sexual harassment, as well as ethnic minorities who believe in their heart of hearts that Hillary can take them to the same promised land upon which Barack Obama promised but ultimately failed, to deliver. For these voters, Hillary’s arms distance relationship with the truth is a matter of partisan purview, rather than empirical evidence.

Compared to the two blocs vying for the Democrat nomination, there are three blocs seeking the GOP nomination.

There are the Evangelical/Constitutional Republicans, supporting Ted Cruz, who will always seek to elect the most conservative candidate they can find- even if that candidate is Ted Cruz, not particularly popular with his Senate colleagues who have yet to rally around one of their own. It’s not that these voters particularly like Ted Cruz, but to these constituents, philosophy is more important than popularity and charisma is vastly overrated, so Cruz is their guy.

Then, there are the Disenfranchised Republicans, supporting Donald Trump, who once went along with the oh-so-moderate, oh-so-gentlemanly, go-along-with, get-along-with mainstream “Republicratic” candidates, like Gerald Ford, George Bush the elder, Bob Dole, John McCain and Mitt Romney, all of whom were just too damned nice to launch an effective, spirited campaign against their Democrat rivals, because they just didn’t want to risk offending anyone. This reticence is the primary reason they ultimately lost. These voters have been lied to for decades, and are still being lied to by the Republican leadership in both houses. They will forgive “the Donald’s” many faux pas, because they have had it with supposedly conservative candidates who promise much, wink to one another, and deliver squat.

Lastly, there are the establishment, “kingmaker-du-jour” Republicans, mostly mainstreamers and insiders, who jump from candidate to candidate to candidate, in search of anyone and everyone who can manage to find a way to stop Donald Trump, at all costs. In sequential order, their “guy” has been Jeb Bush, then Marco Rubio, then John Kasich and now, for the time being, Ted Cruz. These Republicans, would destroy their own party, and enable Hillary Clinton to become the forty-fifth president, before they would ever allow either Trump or Cruz to become president, because neither of them would give these elitists the time of day, truth be told. The voters? Hah! Voters be damned… this is their party and they will decide who gets to ride the elephant, regardless.

With five blocs of voters competing for their two party’s nominations, it is little wonder that America is suffering from a compound fracture that is the Election of 2016. Add to this the legacy of the most divisive and most arrogant president in the history of the United States, one Barack Obama, who has divided this country to a greater extent than ever before, and it is no stretch to say that this country is at a breaking point as it has never been in its two hundred forty years of existence.

This must beg the question, “Who in their right mind would even want to be president?”

-Drew Nickell, 6 April 2016

© 2016 by Drew Nickell, all rights reserved.