Enough is enough. Believe it or not, the civil war occurring within the GOP party should teach all of us something. While back-biting, dirt-digging, mud-slinging antics are nothing new, the 2016 Presidential debates might as well take place on elementary school grounds. So much has surfaced from these debates, rallies, interviews and other political coverage. The desire for someone poised, full of grace and polished with experience is all but tossed out the window and being replaced with love of pure childish hyperbole and outlandish insults. Nevertheless, two of the most interesting nuggets to come up in this disturbing race to the White House seem to raise questions that many are not asking.
1. Should politicians and voters have to choose between their political party and the good of the country and;
2. Does disdain for the “establishment” mean a total demolishing of all things government?
The catalyst prompting the first question is arguably one Donald J. Trump, the Republican frontrunner whose bombastic style, questionable history, convenient waffling and vagueness on policies has set the nation on its heels. When GOP candidates were asked during a recent televised debate if they would support Trump if he were to become their nominee, the answer was a near resounding yes preceded by slight hesitation and explanations.
Florida Senator Marco Rubio basically said he would support the real estate mogul simply to keep Democratic candidates Bernie Sanders and Hilary Clinton out of the White House. Texas Senator Ted Cruz also agreed to stand by the nominee because he gave his word to do so. Ohio Governor John Kasich stopped short of showing his full conflicting feelings by conceding his support.
This is the answer given despite relentless attacks on Trump and the brewing campaign to stop the frontrunner from soiling the Republican Party’s own list of past and future U.S. Presidents. All, say they love their country yet expressions and opinions depicting Trump as unfit for office run sky high. Is it better to nominate a deemed disqualified person, someone who is accused of being a con artist, for the highest office in the land because of fierce loyalty to a political party than to follow one’s conscience for the good of the country? What is really more important?
Secondly, many fed-up Republican voters have been clamoring for the New York billionaire to be their next president. In part, this rally cry is due to a full blown distrust of the so-called establishment leaders. It should be noted that anyone running for a political office will officially become a, wait for it, politician. He or she will be a moving part of the “establishment” circle. No matter who is elected, they will operate by the rules of government. The Oval Office will not turn into a CEO’s boardroom. The President of the United States will still have to rely on congress and other establishment officials. Like it or not, the government universe is far different from the world of business.
Anger can be a well-deserved emotion, but oftentimes wise decisions are not made while angry. Loyalty is an admirable quality yet there are times when it would be prudent to know where and when to draw the line. If character is lost, greatness will never be gained.