The 2016 U.S. Presidential Election: 75 Days Of Destiny.

By Jerry Alatalo

Stein Baraka

 

 

 

 

 

 

“Those who would treat politics and morality apart will never understand the one or the other.”

– JOHN MORLEY (1838-1923) British statesman

Alphabet Can Green Party presidential candidate Dr. Jill Stein and her Vice Presidential running mate Ajamu Baraka pull off a political, historic and odds-defying “miracle” over the next 75 days and win the 2016 presidential election? Just thinking about such a possible scenario coming to pass on voting day November 8 gives the idea of “the old college try” a whole new meaning and level of intensity.

What can one discern from observing neither Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump have expressed any welcoming of Dr. Jill Stein and Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson to televised debates, marking the 1st time in U.S. presidential political history where four candidates take the stage and engage in battles of ideas? In answer to that question… Because blocking Dr. Stein and Mr. Johnson from debates is effectively blocking democracy itself, the stances of Ms. Clinton and Mr. Trump are equally undemocratic and should lead to conclusion by the American people in rejecting Clinton and Trump as fundamentally unfit for the high office of President.

There is nothing stopping Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump from gladly accepting and embracing proposals for 4-way debates, numerous and lengthy, in the remaining 75 days of the campaign. So, if there is nothing but their own reasons stopping them from welcoming 4-way debates, how do the American people grapple with Clinton and Trump’s persistent choosing of exclusionary 2-way debates meant to “inform” voters on their “leadership options”?

The most important question Americans need to ask themselves is: “what are Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump afraid of?” In an ideal world, at every four-year interval America’s voters attempt to learn about the candidates running for President of the United States – the men and women who’ve decided to present to “We, the people” what they each believe are the best ideas and options moving forward. By firmly denying the fullest range of ideas by candidates with a mathematical chance of winning from occurring, the only logical conclusion is that Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have the real fear that Americans will decide Dr. Jill Stein and Gary Johnson have better ideas.

Again, in an ideal world, perceptions held by most Americans of a good or great President is of a man or woman who encourages and fully welcomes better ideas. By taking positions excluding Dr. Jill Stein and Gary Johnson from debates, both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump dismiss, ignore, and trample over the highest perceived images of the American people regarding what separates potential leaders of the nation, making clear the distinguishing human characteristics of generally held conceptions of leadership, and making identifiable those who fall short of the mark, the mediocre, those who are very good, and the (hopefully) truly great.

Students of history are aware of humanity’s fundamental evolutionary nature. In the year 2016, those who disregard the wishes of Americans and people around the world for more inclusive and full-range discussions about the future of life where they reside and across the Earth place themselves on the “wrong side of history”. They stubbornly maintain a death-grip on ways of conducting politics, business, economics, militarism and international relations most human beings perceive and have concluded are counter-productive, and the antithesis of evolutionary historical processes inherent to, and inseparable from, the human species.

At this historical juncture in the year 2016 – in the remaining 75 days until Americans decide who they want as their next President – the perennial process of human evolution toward establishment of global conditions most conducive for profound increase in measures of peace, justice and truth must, through unanimous agreement, become remembered and take its rightful place at all tables of serious discussion and debate.

Accurately accounting for the human evolutionary process and acting in concert with natural, inherent workings of life on Earth toward increasing improvement and beneficial choices entailed in building a better “human condition” is nothing less than moral, ethical and honest. “We, the people” are wise enough to listen, compare, assess, imagine and decide the future of life on Earth.

Open up the presidential debates…

(Thank you to RT America at YouTube)

Advertisements

8 thoughts on “The 2016 U.S. Presidential Election: 75 Days Of Destiny.

  1. Very true! But the case is clear: the “Deep State” of the US has decided, Clinton has to be their puppet in office! Any opponent showing a chance to make it will be confronted by a “lone nut” to take her or him out of the game (this even includes Trump)!
    „Deep State USA: Dulles, Dallas and Devilish Games“: https://wipokuli.wordpress.com/2016/04/20/deep-state-usa-dulles-dallas-and-devilish-games/
    Andreas Schlüter
    Sociologist
    Berlin, Germany

    Like

    1. Andreas,
      How are you. It’s probably safe to say Americans and people everywhere wish for their leaders to possess the quality of total honesty. On the very important matter of the deep state, in particular its central role in murdering JFK, MLK, RFK, etc., Dr. Jill Stein and Ajamu Baraka would rise significantly in the eyes of voters were they to reveal the brutal truth of these assassinations. Of course, deciding to expose the truth on these (and other) matters would place Dr. Stein and Mr. Baraka’s lives in danger, and it’s clearly a massively difficult decision for them now at the center of the power arena. Whatever the reasons, Dr. Stein and Mr. Baraka find themselves in a position where their only chance to win the election lies in maximum boldness, complete honesty, and revealing with unrelenting force historical and current facts which paint the full picture of Earthly reality. In other words, their only chance of winning and transforming the world requires the conscious willingness to risk their very lives. Such courageous decisions are very, very rare. Thank you.

      Like

  2. Reblogged this on Wobbly Warrior's Blog and commented:
    “There is nothing stopping Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump from gladly accepting and embracing proposals for 4-way debates, numerous and lengthy, in the remaining 75 days of the campaign. So, if there is nothing but their own reasons stopping them from welcoming 4-way debates, how do the American people grapple with Clinton and Trump’s persistent choosing of exclusionary 2-way debates meant to “inform” voters on their ‘leadership options’?”

    Like

  3. “Accurately accounting for the human evolutionary process and acting in concert with natural, inherent workings of life on Earth toward increasing improvement and beneficial choices entailed in building a better “human condition” is nothing less than moral, ethical and honest. “We, the people” are wise enough to listen, compare, assess, imagine and decide the future of life on Earth.”

    Extremely well said Jerry, I have commented on several Dandelion Salad posts at some length recently ~ probably too much! Only the exceptional times we are living through call for bold statements. I do not think we can overestimate the gravity of this political moment.

    Democracy is truly a two edged sword. It can empower but it will also (continue to) debilitate, if the majority chooses to condone tyranny. Ralph Nader spelled it out with crystal clarity back in 2007 (reposted on DS last week,) depicting the naked truth of US corporate controls and its dire implications for wholesome, healthy political discourse & creative action..

    I am deeply optimistic and supportive of the emergence of the present strong US Green platform, but retain serious misgivings about the numbers needed to make a real difference and swing the momentum toward coherent ecological justice, institutional integrity and honest reform.

    It would be a miracle indeed to witness the triumph of reason, & we should do everything we can to seed the message of intelligent, constructive change, and the value of empirical common sense. As John Pilger never tires of explaining, power is a function of consent. The strength and endurance of any structure relies upon its pragmatic foundation ~ an informed electorate.

    We must be foundation builders, community participants, ethical designers, innovators & architects ~ because the present globalist status quo is so utterly demolitionist, irresponsibly lethal and reactionary. This grotesque abuse of power, can never exercise nor even understand the virtue of building trust, so long as it only focuses on how to destroy indiscriminately for profit.

    I think the choice should be stark and presented in no uncertain terms to the electorate: either you/we are voting for broken bodies, for child murder, for extortionate slavery, unaccountable extraction and ecocide or affirming planetary well-being ~ by voting for continuity, species rights, for truth, integrity and authentic governance…government by the virtuous by honest, transparent representation, power exercised for enlightened purposes; not self-aggrandizement & manifest criminality.

    Like

    1. David,
      How are you. Your words describe, summarize and paint the current state of affairs as related to national politics very well. Listened to a recent interview of Jesse Ventura where he described the “15%” in the polls threshold for inclusion in presidential debates as related to his successful race for Governor of Minnesota… Running as an Independent Ventura was polling at 10%, was allowed into televised debates with the (Republican, Democrat, etc.) other candidates, and ended up winning with 37% of the vote. After that the corporate Republican-Democrat controlled presidential debate commission established the 15% rule, with the sole purpose of preventing another instance like Ventura’s, but at the national electoral level.

      The American people aren’t electing dog catcher here, so there’s no reason 4-way debates – perhaps a total of five (5) at three (3) hours apiece on different issues (economics, war and peace, environment, public safety, personal philosophy/spirituality, structure of government, candidates’ questioning each other, etc.) – couldn’t take place. Such debates would draw record numbers of viewers on television or the internet, and provide all citizens – especially younger people – the information necessary for building increasingly more just, peaceful and healthy societies. The issues facing humanity are far too important to limit voters’ decision-making sources to shallow, intellectually insufficient, rigged, exclusive debates and advertising/public relations “experts”. Real, in-depth, no-stones-unturned, broadest-range presidential debates are needed… Thank you.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s