Tag: Donald Trump

An Open Letter to America

Since when did America, a country founded by immigrants, by freedom fighters, by naysayers oftyranny and monarchy, decide that fear would instill hatred, instead of courage and the offering of help?

Building walls, real or symbolic, has the same effect; distrust. Distrust in country-men who are supposed to stand up in arms for each other, speak up for each other, watch after each other.

This is not the world I want to live in.

More importantly, it is not the world I want my children to live in.

The influence of an individual with so much power is not just strong, but inevitable. He will shape the minds of thousands just by existing and by being given a platform to do so, so publicly. Lest not forget that already half the population thinks the way he does, voting for homophobia and misogyny and racism every time they cheer his name at a rally. And with every mind he influences and heart he hardens, hate propagates, and hate wins. If the consequences of one person pushing such cruelties is catastrophic, imagine the effect thousands will have. It will be devastating. It will be nuclear, like the codes he will hold.

Every act of hatred is a step backwards. This is not the future in which I want to raise my children.

The truth is, I am not sure he is as hateful as he claims to be. He is racist of course, gross in the way he treats women, and disloyal to the bone, but he lacks the conviction of a true hate monger. He is weak, and he is selfish, and combined this might be the most dangerous threat we have yet to face. One who will sell himself, those he loves, and definitely those he is indifferent to, for power. The most consequential job in the world, given to the most inconsequentially oriented man, is a recipe for disaster.

Our country is safe, but still we lead precautious lives. I am afraid to walk alone in the dark, and in the light, because my monsters look just like me. They are colleagues and neighbors, coworkers and fellow students. They have been fueled by an anger they recognize in themselves, and feel entitled to act as they may, following the largest and loudest example.

I am afraid for all those who do not look, worship, or talk like President Trump. I am afraid for the children born in America who will be sent away, expected to reappropriate themselves with a culture that is unfamiliar, and not truly their own. Worse, I am afraid for the children whose parents will have to leave, and who’s American dream will be cut short.

I am afraid for women, and our suffrage. It feels halted, all of a sudden. In my lifetime, I might never see a woman in the White House. It seems inconceivable that we will be respected, considered equal, by an individual who believes women exist for his taking and pleasure. Who can be grabbed, touched, shaped, lengthened, thinned, and rated as he wishes. How will we recover?

I am afraid for love. Legality can and should span the threshold for action and conspiracy, but not for that of emotion. Laws that govern emotions should be illegal, but alas, it is the emotions that will be regulated. I am very afraid for love.

And lastly, I am afraid for America. Your legacy has been one of strength, tolerance, hope, and dreams, please hold on to this. Thomas Jefferson said, “If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so.” I believe this applies to the governing authority, and I believe your trust in authority is at its most tested and precarious. Do not underestimate the deep rootedness of hate in your country, for it is real, and evidently prominent. Stay strong, acknowledge and celebrate acts of kindness, large or small. Keep fighting for goodness. This is how you will win the election, after the fact.

Good luck.

– Maya Botti, mechanical engineering student at Concordia

Categories
Opinions

Why I think America needs Hillary Clinton

Exploring the possibility of electing Mrs. Clinton

While I was watching the third and final presidential debate in a downtown Montreal bar, one of my friends texted me: “Who’s winning?” I responded that the ultimate winner was cynicism. Although I am not enthusiastic about the Democratic nominee, I believe America needs to elect Hillary Clinton.

Most Canadians care about American politics as much as they care about their own. “Geography has made us neighbours, history has made us friends, economics has made us partners, necessity has made us allies,” John F. Kennedy once said in a speech. It seems, this year more than ever, as election day closes in, many Canadians are most interested in knowing how this reality TV-like campaign will end.

The two candidates’ personalities and past actions have undeniably stolen the show away from party policies. It is evident to me that we need to think of nominees as leaders of their own movement before leaders of their party. In fact, many Republican members of Congress have said they will vote against their nominee, Donald Trump, according to a report published by the American news outlet, The Daily Beast.

For the last month or so, we’ve been preoccupied with the three presidential debates. Although it allows candidates to expand on their values and ideas, I believe its main purpose is to reveal their demeanours their attitudes toward opposition. From this perspective, Trump proved to be downright unfit to be president. His condescending tone, his odious claims and his constant attempts to interrupt both his rival and the mediator spoke volumes about the kind of leader he would be.

The question I always ask myself when analyzing political ideas is fairly straightforward: does the candidate, or the party, advocate for equal treatment of every individual? Trump, for instance, claims that America needs his kind of thinking, which allowed him to turn the money inherited from his father into an enterprise worth billions of dollars. Reaganomics—economic policies introduced by President Ronald Reagan—proved marginal tax reductions to be successful for improving the middle-class quality of life.

However, I don’t believe that being lenient with corporations and the wealthiest citizens, banking on them to make it rain on the middle-class, is the right thing to do for a fairer country. Trump is offering a short-term solution, whereas Clinton aims to attack the loopholes in the corporate tax system and to implement regulations that ensure multi-billionaires pay not only a reasonable share, but also fair surcharges. Given that some corporations and individuals make more money than they spend, while some other are unable to live a decent life, there’s no way to make America a better place if there is no will to ease the greed.

Although Clinton is only a mild progressive, she appeals to me because Bernie Sanders’s ghost constantly follows her. The former Democratic candidate said in a video interview for NowThisNews, that he believes in about 80 per cent of Clinton’s platform. He encourages everyone who took part in his movement to stand up and ensure Clinton realizes this 80 per cent of the platform. I’m confident Sanders’ supporters won’t give up their cause.

Personal attacks between the two candidates have gotten slightly out of hand lately. Both of them have been involved in multiple scandals. I do not hold either of them in such high regards for that matter, though I’m aware there are wild manipulations from both parties’ establishments.

To be frank though, if I were American, I would rather have a president who does “politics as usual” and hides things from the population than a president who’s a complete misogynist. We tend to forget that there’s a large structure behind the president who, although it is theoretical, will ensure the transparency of a possible Clinton government. Because the president is America’s face, I worry more about Trump’s perpetuation of rape culture than Clinton’s little secrets.

My position pro-Clinton ultimately lies in her apparent perception of the American Way and the American Dream. Unlike Trump, who believes in equal opportunities for everyone to stamp on their fellows to get rich, Clinton claims she’ll advocate for equal opportunities for everyone to live a decent life, no matter where you come from. My trust in her has, of course, diminished, especially the since the Clinton Foundation donations, which question her ethic. Yet, I can’t not support her, given that Trump goes against everything I stand for in terms of fairness.

Moreover, The Democratic Party Platform plans to fight for women’s, LGBT and disabled people’s rights. Republicans have this frustrating propensity to want to impose their beliefs on everyone, especially when it comes to LGBT and abortion rights. Donald Trump has not held a consistent discourse regarding his views on same-sex marriage, according to the Human Rights Campaign. From this perspective, it would be no accident that he chose Mike Pence for Vice President running mate. Pence “has been an outspoken opponent of equal rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender citizens,” according to a report from the Washington Post.

Hillary Clinton is far from being an ideal candidate. But given the other option, I do think she needs to be the next president of the United States. As I consider the polarization of voters that will lead to an inevitable dissatisfaction, I hope to see a government that will be concerned with economic fairness and social justice.

Categories
Opinions

Donald J. Trump is my personal choice

A look into the Republican candidate’s policies before next week’s election

Bill Clinton’s job approval rating reached 73 per cent, his highest recorded, after his infamous sex scandals and impeachment. Clearly this, and numerous unconfirmed sexual assaults, have not stopped him from being beloved for his policies.

Policy is what matters in an election, not whether or not candidates are good people. Neither candidate is a good person, so from here we must discern whose policy is better. The clear answer is Trump’s.

Trump is the peace candidate. People claim he’s divisive and dangerous, but Clinton’s policies have politicians fearing World War III. And no, I am not being hyperbolic.

Clinton doubled down during the third debate on her plans to enact a no-fly zone over Syria and establish safe zones for Syrians. According to The Guardian, many military personnel feel this would likely lead to an air occupation and open conflict with the Russians, who were invited into Syria by President Bashar al-Assad. Some believe it could lead to nuclear war.

Mikhail Gorbachev, the Soviet leader at the end of Cold War, said the situation has “reached a dangerous point.” After the Kremlin stated it would shoot down Western aircrafts, Gorbachev told the Russian news agency, RIA Novosti: “We need to renew dialogue. Stopping it was the biggest mistake.”

Trump sees Russia as the powerful nation it is. He has repeated throughout the debates that he wants to sit down and negotiate with Russia and come to a diplomatic solution.

“It’s actually Hillary’s policies which are much scarier than Donald Trump’s, who does not want to go to war with Russia,” said U.S. Green Party candidate Jill Stein during an interview with the American television network, C-SPAN. “He wants to seek modes of working together, which is the route we need to follow.”

Such radically interventionist policies make Clinton a rehash of neoconservatives like George W. Bush. Trump’s outlook on interventionism, outlined in his book Crippled America advocates helping out only if countries can reimburse the U.S. This should be music to people’s ears.

Trump is also pro-ethics and transparency. In an Oct. 18 press release, he promised a constitutional amendment imposing congressional term limits, banning executive officials and members of Congress lobbying for five years, expanding the definition of “lobbyist,” banning former executive officials from lobbying for foreign governments and banning foreign lobbyists from interfering in American elections.

Hillary’s ethical stances simply do not stack up. Although Clinton has said she wishes to expand the definition of “lobbyist” and has historically supported a two-year ban on former government servants taking jobs at companies they oversaw, her relationship with lobbyists is far more concerning than Trump’s.

The Washington Post reported that Clinton’s campaign has received $7 million in donations from federally registered lobbyists, while Trump’s campaign has received no such money. Lobbyists raised an additional $2 million for the Hillary Victory Fund, a joint fundraising committee with the DNC. That’s a lot of owed favours.

WikiLeaks revealed that Clinton participated in the unethical campaign financing that Trump wishes to ban. Clinton advisors took contributions of questionable legality from foreign lobbyists registered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act, according to The Daily Caller. Her campaign accepted such donations based on donors’ relationships with the State Department during Clinton’s tenure there.

Her campaign may have used American lobbyists to launder this money, according to WikiLeaks. Campaign staff admitted in the leaked WikiLeaks emails that donors have pushed policy change onto Clinton. That should be terrifying—she can be bought. Trump, however, is not beholden to the same expectations from lobbyists.

Clinton is corrupt. WikiLeaks showed she took money in exchange for favours from both Morocco and Qatar, using the Clinton Foundation, while she was Secretary of State. These countries have awful human rights records, as both jail homosexuals and allow marital rape, according to Human Rights Watch. This shows she cannot be trusted to put American interests before hers or foreigner leaders’.

While we cannot verify the full authenticity of the WikiLeaks leaks, they raise disturbing questions regarding Clinton’s ethics.

Trump’s zero-tolerance immigration policies, while viewed as promoting inequality, put Americans first. Clinton’s policy, to deport only violent illegal immigrants, would be completely unfair to Americans who’ve attained citizenship legally.

The American Immigration Center explained while wait times for citizenship vary, a person moving to the U.S. can wait upwards of six years before being granted citizenship.

There would be few incentives to obey immigration law in Clinton’s America. The Center for Immigration Studies found that over 2.5 million people entered the U.S. illegally since President Obama took office—an average of about 350,000 per year. Amnesty can only make this number go up. Protecting your citizens, laws and sovereignty is not racism.

Trump’s immigration plan would also benefit current American citizens. The Federal Reserve found youth decline in employment is linked to unskilled, immigrant labour.

Trump plans to create a resumé bank for inner-city youth to help replace jobs made available by the removal of illegal immigrants and the elimination of the J-1 visa program. Trump claims this would greatly help Americans in disenfranchised communities, including many predominantly black communities.

Many accuse Trump of misogyny. While he has said things others deem offensive, it is also worth noting he is campaigning for paid maternity leave. Trump has been accused of being out for the rich, but has proposed a huge tax break on lower-income families, allowing families with a combined income of up to $50,000 to pay no taxes.

Clinton is not the moral candidate. Those siding with her for moral reasons forget she flip-flops on progressivism. Clinton was an opponent of gay marriage until 2013, according to PolitiFact. Some leaked Podesta e-mails imply she still privately holds this view.

Both candidates have scandals, from “locker room talk” to illegal e-mail servers, and neither of these candidates are clean choices. But Clinton’s corrupt, war-hungry policies make it is clear that Donald J. Trump is the candidate to elect. His pro-American policies will Make America Great Again.

Categories
Opinions

Trump wins gold in Mexico

The New York magnate cleared the imaginary wall to take home the imaginary gold

The wall dividing the United States and Mexico is, as of yet, unbuilt. But that didn’t stop Donald Trump from winning the gold medal in the realm of political gymnastics.

While Trump discussed building this wall with Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto, when the two met last week, he soared clear of one petty pecuniary part: who would pay for it.

“We did discuss the wall,” Trump told reporters in a Q&A session following his private talk with Peña Nieto. “We didn’t discuss payment of the wall. That’ll be for a later date.” However, Peña Nieto later tweeted that he did make it clear to Trump at the beginning of the conversation: Mexico would not pay for the wall.

Given that the wall is estimated to cost between $15 and $25 billion, as reported by The Washington Post, deciding who’s going to pay for it is a little more serious than deciding who’s going to pay for the first date – we’re settled on ‘you ask, you pay,’ though – right Donald?

While it’s still uncertain who will pay the bill, one thing is certain: Trump may one day be president.

And as president of the self-proclaimed “freest nation in the world,” Trump must lead by example.

In theory, he should be building society up by tearing down the walls that divide us. However, his behaviour so far, mired in the past, seems more insistent on taking us all two steps back.

If anyone should be taking two steps back, it’s Trump himself so that he can learn from past president and Republican favourite, Ronald Reagan.

On June 12, 1987, Reagan stood in front of the Berlin Wall and delivered a speech that torched the pages of history. He called on Mikhail Gorbachev, leader of the Soviet Union, to tear down the wall dividing East and West Berlin. “If you seek peace, if you seek prosperity, … if you seek liberalization, Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate,” he said. “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!”

Today, Trump’s turn away from Reagan’s anti-wall politics would make the 40th president turn over in his grave.

Categories
Opinions

Over-combing frivolous lawsuits

Donald Trump may be ranked the 278 richest man in the world by Forbes, but he is not the smartest. Most people his age give out those hard, taffy candies to people; Trump hands out lawsuits.

In the past month, reports have surfaced of two different possible lawsuits brought out by Trump.

Back in October, the mogul took to the Internet to make a big announcement. Trump said that he would donate $5 million to any charity of President Obama’s choice, so long as Obama released his college records and passport application. Trump called Obama “the least transparent president in the history of this country.”

Trump has a real dislike for President Obama. His Twitter resembled that of an angry fangirl during the elections, as he expressed his support for Obama-related conspiracies.

Bill Maher, comedian and host of Real Time with Bill Maher made a comment on Jay Leno about Trump’s statement. He mocked him by saying that he would also donate $5 million if Trump would hand over his birth certificate as proof that he was not a “spawn of his mother having sex with orangutan.”

Funny, but the comment wasn’t exactly the talk at the water cooler the next morning. Yet Trump decided that, in the true American fashion, he was going to threaten to sue Maher anyway.

Trump coughed up his birth certificate, proving he is not the product of ape and human relations and followed up by suing the comic for the $5 million he says he owes to charity.

Now, most people who possess an ounce of logic and even half a sense of humour know that Maher was joking. However, according to Trump and his FOX News appearance earlier this month, he believes Maher wasn’t just taking a stab.

To be honest, I do not think Trump cares much about the money going to charity. He was being ridiculous in the first place trying to get Obama to give up personal documents by using money for charity as incentive.

This is Donald Trump. Him, his legal team, and most of us watching know that not much will come from this lawsuit, but he is still going through with it. Why? Publicity.

Instead of dangling your money and betting on what and how much will go to charity, just give your money away. The charities’ names are being dragged into this, but how much money have they received? Some things matter a little more than pride.

Trump also recently threatened to sue a man named Angelo Carusone. Carusone is leading a campaign called “Dump Trump,” which is trying to sever ties with Trump and American department store giant Macy’s. Trump is a spokesperson for the store. The petition was started online in November.

The lawsuit is set at $25 million. According to the Huffington Post, Trump called Carusone’s actions “mob-like bullying and coercion.” Carusone said that Trump will not silence him, and compared his behavior to that of a bully.

I seriously think there should be some sort of law against frivolous lawsuits. Trump often just speaks to hear himself. I say we just get him a camcorder so he can film his bizarre tirades for personal viewing only. Save people time, money, and brain cells.

If not, I am just going to start suing everyone who makes me angry. Look out, Trump.

Exit mobile version