| I'll bite! You get a screed! I'll address every question you raised... > If that's the case, why do you want to vote for four more years of that? Tumultuous does not imply worse. A high variance process can have zero mean. > Why are you afraid of the left? The Constitution was designed to handle an attack by disperse interests. It was not designed to handle a coordinated assault on the executive and the simultaneous watering down of the judiciary (e.g. court packing). Ten years ago I could say stupid things in public without being afraid for my livelihood. Now, I worry when I will cancelled for speaking aloud what I believe will help my fellow citizens. This is wrong and wholly attributable to the left. I can say progressive things around right-leaning friends. I dare not more than suggest non-orthodoxy around my left-leaning ones. > What outcomes are you afraid of in particular? That the notion of equality under the law is lost for the notion of absolute equality (i.e. interpreting the Declaration's "created equal" for instantaneous equality as defined by the mob du jour). That an increasing number of my personally earned dollars will be confiscated to support ends with which I disagree. For example, the Fed has no business addressing inequality as suggested by the Biden platform. Those poor bastards have enough trouble with monetary policy as we've agreed upon it for the past several decades. > The Trump administration has deployed federal forces to states that have not requested asked for any help. Do you believe this is necessary? Yes. > And if so, why? By what right does a state government decide to allow the destruction of Federal property? The Federal government serves the interests of the other 49 states when it shows up in 1 to address civil disorder. Did the other 49 states all say that they wanted the Federal government to turn a blind eye? We're all in this nation together. > Do you worry what precedents this sets for the left should Democrats take the Senate and White House? Absolutely. All unconstitutional concentrations of power in the legislative, executive, or the judiciary undermine the the dispersion of power aimed for by the Founders. Prior to Trump, Obama had a field day with executive actions. Both should be hung out to dry for what they did. Both allowed the legislators to avoid hard choices and instead ruled by dictat. When the executive steps in, it allows the legislative to skirt their jobs. We elect those asshats to make choices, not point fingers and make speeches. > What do you think about DeJoy's decision to functionally slow the speed of the Post Office? The legislative branch can do what it wants to the USPS. Let the legislative branch sort it out. In particular, if the House is unhappy let the House put forward legislation in the manner that Congress should pass all laws as set forth under the Constitution. Let the elected members of the Senate suffer the brunt of their constituents if those constituents do not like how the Senate votes on the House's proposal. It's a great system so rely on it. > How do you find Trump's handling of the coronavirus in comparison to leaders in Europe and Asia? See the peer comment. Generally, fine as evidenced by https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104709/coronavirus-deat.... There is a lot of fearmongering and virtue-signaling baked into the Covid response commentary. I believe kneecapping the economy in the short term is the wrong choice in the long term. > How do you think four more years of Trump will improve your life? The past four years has improved my quality of life vs what I suspect would have been the alternative. The economy was humming (humming!) prior to Covid appearing. Imagine the current economic situation had unemployment been even what Obama left when he exited office. Most of my improvements have been because, as a generally free economic agent, I have invested in myself instead of asking for a third party to hand me things. The Trump tax cuts have been beneficial to many, and the capping of SALT deductions ensures that some states do not soak the country instead of soaking their own inhabitants when they raise rates. Just today, De Vos made considerable headway to stop "Dear Colleague" on campus, Iran/Venezuela were taken to task for skirting sanctions, and Israel/UAE announced diplomatic breakthroughs unexpected even a year prior. As for going forward for four more years, the Constitution was designed to deal with a useless President. Four more years of a high-noise status quo is far less dangerous to America than a coordinated attempt to cast aside what's been inherited and to replace it with a bunch of Bernie/A.O.C. wish lists. Hillary lost because she was too damn conniving in many moderate's eyes. People simply forget how much they owe to the ideas of their forebearers-- the modern world is a consequence of the competition of many competing interests. When we subject the world to the designs of bureaucrats we lose the power of the free market, the greatest force for good that humanity has ever known. > You didn't ask it but... ...the world isn't as f*cked as reading the New York Times or the Washington Post would have one think. It also certainly isn't as rosy as the WSJ opinion pages would suggest. But, consider, a pandemic is upon us and somehow the social order is not unraveling. We're discussing how, not if, to educate the children. People still plan for decades hence. Private property rights are upheld. Invaders are not on the door step. Pretty much the only thing up for grabs is if the left is going to deep six you for having dared to breathe unorthodox thoughts aloud. They sure do love to destroy their own, no? |