I wish there were more sources of political information that were not strongly favoring one side. So I’m trying to contribute to that. I don’t know that I’ll offer much new information, but I can at least say that I’m not leaning strongly towards one party, so if you’re in the same boat, you might find this interesting. To prove that I am really torn, I’ll say that I’m mostly Republican and Libertarian but voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016. Different issues may be important to you and I am sure that you will consider many factors that I do not mention, so as you go through the exercise of thinking through each candidate holistically you may reach a different result (I’m still not quite sure of what result I’ll reach, but I think I will soon).
Now, if you have very strong feelings in the direction of one candidate, perhaps based on feelings against the other, I understand. Slight variations in the sources you trust and information you care about could easily lead to a strong opinion. I’m happy for you!
You may find this article extremely broad, and covering way more than allows any focus. But in our political system, don’t voters have to look at things very broadly? We have a citizenship duty to look at the huge spectrum of issues that exist, almost all of which we have no expertise in, and choose a candidate.
My policy/ideology views are basically Republican, with the main exceptions being that 1) I want entry and legal status for refugees and other immigrants, and 2) I place even greater emphasis on low government spending than most Republicans. Another way to state my views is that they’re basically Libertarian, except I want the government to impose more restrictions on drug possession and abortion than most Libertarians. Integrity of the candidates being equal, I think I would generally vote Republican over Libertarian, at least in part because Libertarians are unlikely to win in the short run (more on that later).
Beyond the issues, looking at a person’s integrity or moral character is important. One reason is that it is indicative of how true the candidate will be to the candidate’s professed good-will towards the country. Additionally, everybody has some expertise in judging moral character. As we strive to improve our own character and ponder good character qualities, we (often excessively) notice the character of others. In choosing a candidate, these observations are helpful. Hence, with my limited knowledge, I have analyzed both the policy views and character of the candidates.
Regarding what I have called character, I have looked at evidence of what the candidate does outside of the public eye, which inherently is harder to discern the facts of. The character-related information from the links I have inserted is unpleasant, and I only put in the links so that you can look more into it if you think it will help you make a better voting decision.
President Trump
President Trump is a little worse than most Republicans in that he emphasizes limiting all immigration (including that of refugees), he has been less free-trade oriented, and his family values and behavior definitely seem worse. Additionally, rather than addressing the concerns of my favorite politician, Arizona Republican Jeff Flake, President Trump called the former senator “flakey” for sticking to his values and not just following the party. President Trump has, as I personally expected and hoped, cut certain regulations. His administration has consistently supported cuts to the federal K-12 education budget. (See https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/education-k-12/news/2020/02/11/480384/trumps-k-12-education-budget/.) But like George W. Bush, President Trump has increased the government debt. Part of that is due to what I think is excessive military spending.
I think that behavior in family relationships is very indicative of a person’s character, which will affect our country. “[W]hen the wicked rule the people mourn. Wherefore, honest men and wise men should be sought for diligently, and good men and wise men ye should observe to uphold; otherwise whatsoever is less than these cometh of evil.” Doctrine and Covenants 98:9-10.
So, related to that, I think the evidence is clear, coming from President Trump’s former attorney Michael Cohen as an inherent part of a guilty plea to a crime, that President Trump paid money to a pornography model in order for her to keep their affair a secret. I would hope that President Trump would show an example of repentance after something like that, and he has not. Instead, he unconvincingly argues that nothing illegal was done, when in fact there are larger questions than just whether a campaign law was broken. The following is an interview with President Trump on the topic: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/01/28/trumps-fantasy-claim-that-michael-cohens-hush-money-payments-were-no-crime/.
While other claims of sexual misconduct do not have as much proof as the Michael Cohen incident, I think many of them are likely true. If he did not do the acts, then I do not blame him for simple denials. However, some of his responses are highly disrespectful. Regarding a recording of him speaking inappropriately of women, and potentially admitting to misconduct, he said they were “just words.” Regardless of the exact acts he has done, he could do a lot of good in the world by emphasizing that words and actions in our relationships are important. This article puts together the accusations: https://www.businessinsider.com/women-accused-trump-sexual-misconduct-list-2017-12.
I was concerned enough about President Trump’s character that I voted for Hillary Clinton. In President Trump’s defense, I will say he has done better than I expected: We are not much more at war than before, the economy has done well given the circumstances, and he nominated Supreme Court justices who share some originalist/textualist views with me and write clear opinions. While I do not regret voting for Hillary Clinton (because I like having a point of commonality with my liberal friends), in these ways I am happy Donald Trump won.
And I do agree that media outlets which I used to view as middle-of-the-road, like the Washington Post, are wildly biased against him. For example, criticism regarding his treatment of the coronavirus situation has been constant, but I think he has been relatively level-headed and I do not really know what people have expected of him.
But my faith in the importance of living God’s commandments, and the eventual effect that living honestly has on our decision-making, still makes me very hesitant to support him. Given the specific character-related concerns with President Trump, it might send a nice message if President Trump were to lose but Republicans were to keep control of the Senate or gain the House, a result that is uncommon since voters for the president usually vote for the same party for Congress.
Joe Biden
Joe Biden has fairly standard Democrat views, though unfortunately with immigration, where I agree with the Democratic Party the most, he is less inclined to focus on immigrants than most Democratic candidates. So he doesn’t get many points with me for policy views, except that he is less extreme regarding large government spending than some, like Bernie Sanders. For me, perhaps the scariest things about Democratic nominees generally are their nominees to the Supreme Court. Those people will be on the Court a long time and can do a lot of good or harm in terms of protecting religious liberties, checking the government in constitutionally appropriate ways, and allowing democracy to continue strong.
A woman named Tara Reade worked for Joe Biden’s office decades ago and alleges that he sexually assaulted her. She gives her story in an interview with Megyn Kelly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HeZiKvOA0o. She alleges having told some people about it when it happened, which helps her credibility. Additionally, I give some credit to the story based upon the fact that the interviewer, Megyn Kelly, is thought to have left Fox News for not being more supportive of President Trump. So I don’t think the story is just part of a news attempt at helping President Trump win. If the story is true, then it shows a serious lack of respect for others, respect that I expect our president to have. Hence, if it is true, then I can’t give him clear character points over President Trump. The number of accusations against President Trump is greater, but their failure to accept responsibility is the same. Joe Biden has at least made some comments that such women, including his main accuser, should be listened to.
Of course, if they did not do the acts, then I would not expect either of them to accept responsibility, so it is a difficult situation. Essentially, I feel about 60% confident that they are guilty of the most serious accusations against them. And I feel 95% confident that President Trump is also guilty of the less serious accusations against him. It may seem silly to throw out numbers like that, but throwing out those numbers is my effort to pay appropriate attention to the accusations.
Jo Jorgensen
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jo_Jorgensen.jpg
Jo Jorgensen, the Libertarian candidate, is probably the most in line with my policy views. She emphasizes small government much more than either party and thinks that both people and goods should flow across borders freely. With reference to other Libertarians, although she still supports drug legalization, she does not make it her number one platform like 2016 Libertarian Gary Johnson often did.
Jo Jorgensen doesn’t think that the government should interfere with abortions, but she says that she personally does not agree with it. “Keep the government out of it. No subsidies, no regulations,” she said. Saying “no subsidies” could mean she opposes federal funding going towards it. Since states, not the federal government, have traditionally been who regulates abortion, her comment about no regulations may not have too harmful of consequences. Overall, she is a step above most Democratic candidates on the issue.
I am not really sure what kind of people Libertarians would nominate to the U.S. Supreme Court. I could see them wanting originalists for the fact that originalists may view the Constitution as supporting a small federal government, but I could also see them wanting to enforce individual rights more strongly against state governments (stopping state regulations on abortions). I don’t know that I can see even Republican nominees reversing something like Roe v. Wade, and so a Libertarian nominee who is likely to allow the president to cut back on programs like Planned Parenthood might be the best to hope for in a Supreme Court nominee regarding abortion. A libertarian might also be more protective of religious liberties, since that is protecting from government power. However, President Trump’s nominees have already been pretty good on those points, so he probably wins over the wildcard nature of the nominees that Jo Jorgensen may choose.
At this point, I have not found much negative or positive to say about Jo Jorgensen’s character.
While I would most like Jo Jorgensen to win, I do view her third-party status as a major negative. On the one hand, I know that people having the mindset that third parties cannot win is part of the reason that third parties cannot win. On the other hand, I think it’s clear that I shouldn’t vote for my dad or best friend (assuming they were willing) for president, even if I think they are better for the job than anybody else I can think of. It is reasonable to form groups and funnel support in order to accomplish goals that line up with our ideologies, and the smaller groups should often merge with larger ones to accomplish their goals. Our system happens to favor just two major groups, and I don’t think efforts towards electing a Libertarian will ever lead to a libertarian winning. However, I do think that votes for the Libertarian party send a message to Republican and Democratic candidates to line up their behavior more with the Libertarian ideology in order to win votes from those who will vote Libertarian if the Democratic and Republican candidates are too non-Libertarian.
How to View the Result
At all times, and especially after the president has been chosen, I think that the candidates should be spoken of with some level of respect. I think we can do a lot more good, and maintain some harmony, if we “unite with the voice of the people” to some extent. We sometimes may worry that we will be associated with the evils of a bad government if we are not loudly and rudely oppositional to as many aspects of a bad president as possible. But the most influential voices in my life are soft, gentle, and kind-hearted. For example, my wife’s example of love towards our children affects me much more, and certainly much more positively, than all the negative things I have heard about bad parenting. Perhaps the corollary for good citizens and politics is thinking of and suggesting innovative actions and simplifications for the government, either through messages to our representatives or in public discussion. We could also criticize with a bit more acknowledgment of our leaders being human. In addition to the future president being human, he or she will have had the support of tens of millions of fellow Americans, and acknowledging the views and desires of those people is also appropriate. Avoiding “the spirit of contention” is extremely hard to do while pursuing other righteous goals, but I think it is worth it, for our own inner happiness and for our relationships with others.
For many years, I have felt a great sense of community with my fellow members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Our common goals give me great excitement. Likewise, I have found community and safe feelings in various apartment complexes, neighborhoods, and employment situations. In all of these situations, speaking of Christ has increased unity and happiness. From some things I have read and heard, various States and the United States generally have had times of greater unity, and I think it is unfortunate that when I think of the country of a whole I mostly think of division. While I do not know if directly speaking of Christ in our political discussions will often increase national unity at this point, I believe that respecting all as Christ’s example has shown could move us in the direction of an improved national community.
That being said, please comment and share your own thoughts on the candidates. Also, I would be happy to talk with you about the reasons behind some of my policy views, and to learn about your thoughts. I wish you the best as you weigh the factors that matter most to you, and I hope we can get along despite the different values, views, and results that we have.
