It is that time of the election cycle again. Voters are told they must back the Republican or the Democrat, lest their vote does not matter. But where do these candidates stand on their own words?
In her 1996 book, "It Takes a Village," Hillary Clinton describes herself as "'middle of the road'—liberal in some areas, conservative in others, moderate in most. In later writings and interviews she claims to be a "modern progressive," despite having largely anti-progressive views.
Like being a Keynesian on economic policy. Both as senator and state secretary she has allied with bankers and supported their public policies. In both her presidential campaigns, her State Department staff, and senate staff included bankers, especially those related to the Federal Reserve, the World Bank, and International Monetary Fund.
In fact, under the presidency of her husband Bill Clinton, she was a supporter of the infamous big business and big government relationship in the 1990s. She is on record defending crony capitalism for over two decades. It should be noted her biggest contributors are diverse members of Wall Street and other state-allied banks and corporations.
Clinton is also an interventionist in foreign policy. Both as senator and state secretary she has allied with neocons and supported their policies. In both her campaigns, and her political staffers are often filled with those who supported the U.S. wars in the Middle East and the drone strikes and bombs from both the W. Bush and Obama administrations.
Furthermore, she supported the Iraq War, troop surges in Afghanistan in both W. Bush's and Obama's wars, Israel-first policies, foreign aid for countries that violate basic human rights, funding terrorists in the Middle East, the PATRIOT Act, NDAA 2012's indefinite detention, and not to mention the drone strikes and bombings of sovereign countries.
Hillary Clinton opposed same-sex marriage up until Vice Biden Joe Biden endorsed it in the 2012 election, supports the drug war, including in regards to cannabis, and has not endorsed getting government out of the private lives of people.
How is she a progressive?
In his books and speeches, Donald Trump comes across as both a liberal and protectionist. His policies reveal that he is very anti-populist, which he claims he is. And his deeply-Democratic Party past includes being a contributor to the Clinton Foundation.
He claims to be a self-made billionaire businessman. However, he did so only through a privileged loan from his rich family, government subsidies and protections, and a series of bankruptcies. Not to mention his lobbying efforts with both Republican and Democratic politicians, largely Democratic ones.
On his campaign team he has a slew of corporatists, many became wealthy on the same political path as Trump. It is of no surprise he favors the policies of the Federal Reserve. Though he claims to support the gold standard and Fed audits, which either means he is lying or being contradictory. He is a fan of the cronyist Janet Yellen, the Fed chair.
While his foreign policy positions seem pretty random, his foreign policy team is filled with warmongering liberals and neocons. He supports the U.S. involvements in the wars in the Middle East, creating more terrorists, using coups and sanctions to bully other countries, and goads the Chinese to war, while praising the Russians. He also believes in Israel-first policies.
It seems the only thing Trump has been rhetorically consistent on, during the election, has been on his mainstay issue: immigration. Though his past his filled with hypocrisy on the issue. Not to mention the fact his Syrian refugee contradiction.
The U.S. government, in his view, is better to screen immigrants, to have a "secure border." But the same government is inferior when it comes to screening Syrian refugees. Either the U.S. government is unable to secure a border or Trump is ignorant on the international crisis in question.
On social issues and civil liberties he has taken vague and hypocritical positions. He is against the first amendment towards people who oppose him, for it towards those who support him. He is for abortion when he is not (during this same campaign, no less). He is for same-sex marriage, but against pornography, cannabis, gun rights, and other victimless acts.
How is he a populist?
With these facts against the major party candidates and the lack of a chance of the third parties to win, why not try Nobody for president?
Nobody can make America great again. Nobody is stronger together. Nobody can save the economy. Nobody can broker peace. Nobody cares about you. And more importantly, Nobody has the support of the electorate.
Nobody has won the majority of eligible voters in generations. This is even after the fact presidential elections have the higher voter turnout. Never in U.S. history, outside the founding generation, has two-thirds or more voter turnout.
Election after election, politicians lie. They lie to garner votes, political favors, and attention away from the private sector and liberty-oriented activists. Every election the people are bombarded with things they do not want to see - the political establishment.
The message is loud and clear: eligible voters are choosing none of the above (NOTA) every election cycle.
