Here are a few random musings on the presidential elections. Diversity It seems it only matters if you’re diverse when you’re a Democrat. There’s been a lot said and written about Barack Obama as the first black president, and rightly so. There’s also been quite a lot said and written about the prospect of Hillary Clinton being the first woman to become president. And by a lot said I mean that the media has covered those stories. We’re reminded of those facts fairly frequently. And we should be. But did anybody think it was weird when following the Iowa caucuses, it wasn’t news that three of the top four Republican candidates were either Hispanic or black? There was literally no coverage of that fact. Isn’t that at least interesting enough to report? Nah. No news there. Nothing to report. Just move on. Can you imagine if the Democrats in Iowa had elected a couple of guys who each had a shot to become the first Hispanic president. Or a guy who might be the second black president? Think there would have been any coverage of that? Any stories pointing out how diverse the Democrat Party is? Yeah, there would have been. See, that’s what so troubling about today’s media. They don’t even try to mask their bias. Christie When I saw that debate exchange between Chris Christie and Marco Rubio, I really wished I had been in that moment, You know, when Christie called out Rubio for having no experience and parroting the same answer over and over? The takeaway for Christie was supposed to be that Rubio is a neophyte like Barack Obama and that neither of them are qualified to be president. Rubio’s answer was to repeat over and over that Barack Obama is no neophyte, that he knows exactly what he’s doing. Well, here’s what I would have said if I was Marco Rubio: “Chris Christie? YOU’RE questioning MY experience? Weren’t you the guy who figuratively and literally hugged President Barack Obama on the eve of the 2012 election following Superstorm Sandy? That highly publicized move was widely credited by political analysts with torpedoing Mitt Romney’s campaign. Tell me, exactly what was it in your vast political and prosecutorial experience that led you to the conclusion that it was a good idea to help Barack Obama get re-elected?” That might have gained Rubio a few more votes and delegates. I get the sense Christie knew he was toast after New Hampshire anyway and figured he’d take a shot at Rubio on behalf of Jeb Bush on his way out of the race. Don’t you just love politics? Trump Sure, Trump got 35 percent of the vote in New Hampshire. That was a resounding victory. But that also means 65 percent of voters chose someone else. As the field narrows, will voters flock to Trump when their favorite candidate bows out? Will Fiorina and Christie voters now choose Trump? That’s the million-dollar question. (By the way, I refuse to rule out the possibility of Trump claiming to be treated unfarily and running as an independent if he’s not the Republican nominee. But I digress.) To provide insight into that million-dollar question I want to share what I perceived to be a stunning exchange between a voter and a reporter I heard while listening to National Public Radio. The NPR correspondent started out by talking to other reporters from different mainstream media outlets. She was asking about voter anger. Each reporter she talked to said voter anger was palpable, that more than in any other election cycle, voters were mad at the Washington establishment. That was no surprise. But here comes the stunning part. Later in the story, the reporter was talking to a New Hampshire voter identified as a 60-year-old white guy. She asked him who he was supporting. He identified himself as a Democrat and said he really liked what Bernie Sanders had to say about wage inequality and the need for single-payer health care. He liked the fact that Sanders was a bit of a political outsider. Then – and this is the stunning part – he said that even though he liked Sanders, he didn’t believe that Sanders would be the eventual nominee and he couldn’t vote for Hillary Clinton. “If Hillary gets it,” he said. “I’ll just blow up Washington and vote for Trump.” I was thinking, did I just hear what I think I heard? The reporter cut away from the interview and reiterated this voter’s viewpoint. I realize this is just one voter, but I think it says a lot about this year’s electorate. Here’s a guy who identifies as a Democrat. He likes the ideas Democrats generally espouse. He really likes Bernie Sanders, who is politically to the left of the majority of Democratic voters. But if he can’t vote for Sanders, he’s gonna vote for Trump. How can this be? Is there so much voter anger that this guy is willing to cash in his entire ideological makeup just to make a point? Is a certain kind of “I’ll show them” mentality ruling the voting booth this election cycle? I don’t know. But if it is, I have a pretty good idea who’s going to reap the benefits.
