In a Quandary? - Vote Strategically

Most voters are dissatisfied with the choices they face in the 2016 presidential election.  Hillary Clinton is viewed unfavorably by as much as 55% of the electorate.  Donald Trump’s unfavorable percentage is even higher at over 60%.  Under these circumstances many voters in non-competitive states may find a non-typical path the best option to avoid an unacceptable vote for either of the two major party candidates.  Simultaneously, these voters may have a long term positive impact on future elections.

Sixty percent of voters live in non-competitive states.  In these 34 states the Electoral College votes are pre-determined because the states are so overwhelmingly Red or Blue.  Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are certain of who will win in each of these states.  For the minority-Red voter in a Blue state or the minority-Blue voter in a Red state the vote they cast will make no difference in the election outcome.

This creates an opportunity for minority-Blue or minority-Red voters in each of these 34 states.  Those voters should vote strategically by casting their ballot for either Gary Johnson (Libertarian Party) or Jill Stein (Green Party).  Again, there will be no impact on the election outcome, but a tremendous potential long term improvement in the election process.

The Voter Quandary

A large portion of the electorate faces a quandary in the presidential election.  Quandary is defined as “a state of perplexity or uncertainty over what to do in a difficult situation.”   The tension voters feel from this quandary increases as the November election draws nearer.  The need for a decision to relieve that tension is pressing.  What is a voter to do?

The voter in the 2016 presidential election is faced with flawed candidates from the two major parties.  Polling consistently reflects an electorate that is unenthusiastic about either candidate.   Hillary Clinton is viewed unfavorably by over 50% of the electorate.  Donald Trump’s unfavorable percentage is even worse at nearly 60%.  One recent poll reported Clinton at 55% and Trump at 63% unfavorable - unprecedented in a presidential election.

Faced with such an undesirable choice many voters are looking for alternatives.  In the extreme there are rumors of Hillary Clinton’s health issues forcing her out to be replaced by Bernie Sanders.  On the Republican side it is rumored Trump will quit the race to be replaced by a rescuing hero/heroine riding in on a stallion.  These far reaching scenarios are very unlikely near fantasies.

Cancel South Coast Rail

This week the MBTA announced the South Coast Rail project will cost $3.4 billion - a more than 50 percent increase over the original $2.23 billion estimate. The original completion date of 2022 extends to 2028.   If past is prologue, the cost estimate will continue to rise.  Governor Charlie Baker should cancel this project and refocus economic development funding directly in Gateway Cities.

The South Coast Rail project has been under evaluation since the 1980s.  It would restore old rail beds of the former Old Colony rail line to provide commuter rail service from New Bedford and Fall River to Boston.

The MBTA announcement points out several issues that should concern taxpayers in Massachusetts – MBTA incompetence, over regulation, and a cultural and economic mindset more fit to the 1900s than the 21st Century.

Rejecting Globalism

On May 5, 2016 Secretary of State John Kerry, in a commencement speech at Northeastern University said, "You’re about to graduate into a complex and BORDERLESS WORLD." [emphasis mine]  This is a profound statement, particularly from the Secretary of State of the United States.  It turns on its head a system of political organization in place since the 1600s in which each nation state has sovereignty over its territory and domestic affairs, to the exclusion of all external powers, within the borders of the state.  Kerry’s globalist viewpoint may be out of step with a nationalist moment in history.

Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders reject the notion of a borderless world through their condemnation of international trade agreements.  They revile a political, economic, financial, and media elite that have advanced a global economic system that increasingly operates outside of the controls of the state and the interests of U.S. citizens.  Large corporations move production to the lowest wage labor markets and shift headquarters to escape taxation.   The resultant loss of whole industry sectors like manufacturing in the United States or stagnation of wages in the middle class are the tangible experience of many citizens.

Trump as Mussolini?

Bob Woodward and Robert Costa of the Washington Post interviewed Donald Trump this week.  The interview was described as “very unusual” by Woodward.  The headline makers used that phrase to further validate a narrative that Trump is a kook.  But when you watch a video of the two reporters discussing the interview the impression is that “unusual” is not intended as “odd” or “strange” in a pejorative sense, but “different” from traditional behavior in presidential politics.   Framing Trump as a nut may be a mistake that his opponents use as a primary theme to their peril.

Trump v Clinton – likely, but not yet assured

The party nomination process for this year’s presidential election set a clear direction last Tuesday.  The probability is now very high that Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump will represent the Democratic and Republican parties respectively in November.   However, each faces threats to their nomination.  For both candidates these threats could end their pursuit of the nomination, and in Clinton’s case continue into the general election cycle.

Iowa Caucuses Result

Iowa is the first state in the nation to begin the party nomination process in presidential elections.  It has been that way since 1972.  It is a unique form in the nation using caucuses rather than primary elections.  As Iowa only awards 1% of the delegates it is rather inconsequential, except that it is first.  This brings a great deal of attention to the state.

Beyond being first, what does Iowa tell us?  Its track record in predicting the nominee for the Democrats is only 40%.  With Republicans it is slightly better, but still only 50/50.   So winning isn’t really predictive.  As Iowa is not a winner takes all state and the delegates are distributed based on the percentage each candidate receives its practical meaning in the race for delegates is also subdued.