Hold Your Nose and Vote on Tuesday, November 8, 2016: Elected Offices

[mithriltabby]

As usual, I’ve done my research for the upcoming election and written up my notes to share with the rest of the class. I’ve given my conclusions, and invite you to come to your own. Even if we disagree on every issue, I’m happy if this saves you a headache.

• President and Vice President of the United States

  Thanks to our electoral system, there are only two viable choices for President, protest votes are ineffectual, and often regretted. How many Nader voters are happy with their choice in 2000, after George W. Bush got us into a $3tn war in a country that posed no threat to us? If you want more than two choices, I commend your attention to FairVote, who support electoral reform that would give us more possibilities. If you want to make a stand, demand of your representatives that they commit to reform that will make more parties viable, so we can have more than two choices. And if you’re tired of the concept of “swing states” altogether, check out the National Popular Vote compact.

  No matter what you see in the polls, the election belongs to the people who show up to vote; in the UK, people got complacent and wound up with a vote for Brexit that is inflicting ongoing damage to their economy. Please be sure to vote.

  I’ll compare the two viable candidates here:

  • On the economy, Clinton’s policies would be good for the country and Trump’s would wreck it, cost 4 million jobs, and bloat the national debt; an analysis of his latest tax plan says it’s a giveaway to the rich that will raise taxes on middle-class single parents and large families. The Economist describes her fiscal plan as fiddly, his as absurd.
  • On taxes, Hillary has a plan that will help the very poor and Trump’s tax plan would raise taxes on millions of middle-class families.
  • On the environment, Trump has called global warming a hoax, and plans to appoint a climate change denier to lead the EPA transition and has an oil executive on his shortlist for the Interior Secretary, overseeing national parks and wildlife refuges. Hillary Clinton has detailed plans for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
  • On civil rights, Trump has pledged to revoke Obama’s LGBT-supporting executive orders and sign a law permitting discrimination against LGBT people. Trump wants to open up libel laws to stifle free speech. Hillary Clinton has gradually “evolved” her position on LGBT rights.
  • On health care, Clinton supports a public option— essentially, Medicare buy-in. Trump’s plan would cost half a trillion dollars over the next decade and double the number of uninsured, causing 21 million people to lose coverage.
  • One really interesting contrast is in how they handle surprises. Take a look at how they react when a protestor jumps a protective barrier at their respective rallies. (Discovered that via this Twitter thread.)
  • On foreign policy, Clinton has served as Secretary of State and Trump openly advocates for committing war crimes and features in terrorist propaganda videos. Supporting the us-and-them narrative plays into the terrorists’ hands: they want Muslims to feel that they aren’t part of Western civilization. When Muslims are seen as friends, family, coworkers, shopkeepers, and war heroes in this country, that threatens the narrative that al-Qaeda and Daesh want to promote.
    There’s also Russia to worry about. I have no worries about Clinton’s ability to handle brinksmanship with a nuclear-armed state, and however many disagreements I had with Bush, McCain, and Romney, I didn’t consider them at risk of getting us all killed. Trump prides himself on being unpredictable, which is the last thing you want when Mutual Assured Destruction is still a possibility. Given that “heighten the contradictions” has never worked in the past, I think Trump getting us all nuked is more likely than Trump making things bad enough that the proletariat finally unifies to usher in a socialist utopia. I am also rather unhappy with Trump playing useful idiot for the Kremlin. (Claims that Trump is an actual Russian agent are nonsense. He doesn’t have the self-discipline for it.)
    This is not to say that I’m without concern for Clinton’s foreign policy. She vacations with a war criminal, which has got to affect her sense of what’s reasonable, and I’m concerned that she’ll go on bombing wedding parties like Bush and Obama, which is a very effective way to grow terrorists at home.
    
    
  • You can see where Clinton and Trump stand on science, and see Scientific American grade all four candidates. Politifact compares their record of truthfulness, and Trump lies vastly more than Clinton; they also have the top ten campaign promises from Trump and Clinton. The Clinton Foundation is more transparent than the Trump Foundation, and the Clinton Foundation is effective. Their positions on the opioid epidemic are a drastic contrast: she has a plan, and he doesn’t even understand the problem.
  • Trump’s VP, Mike Pence, has a terrible track record. He is disliked in his home state for numerous reasons. He has a terrible record on women’s rights, including signing a bill that makes it a crime to fail to hold a funeral for a miscarriage, and shutting down the only HIV testing center in Scott County, Indiana (leading to a serious outbreak two years later). He’s been anti-gay for a very long time, from opposing them in the military in 1993 to advocating for spending public funds on “conversion therapy” (which drives people into depression and suicide). He claimed “smoking doesn’t kill” as recently as 2000. He has opposed minimum-wage and prevailing-wage laws. He deliberately undermined the will of Indiana voters. And, to top it off, he has argued that Mulan was liberal propaganda.
  • Finally, in the second debate, Trump pledged to jail his opponent if he wins. That is the behavior of a dictator, and completely beyond the pale for the United States of America. (The tactic backfired badly in Sri Lanka.) Anyone so thoroughly opposed to American values should have no hope of coming anywhere near the Presidency. Now he’s claiming that the election is rigged, which is sowing the seeds for civic unrest if he loses. We’ve already seen white terrorists plotting to bomb Muslims in Kansas City and a fire bombing of a GOP headquarters in North Carolina. (You can see that Clinton and the NCGOP are being responsible adults in this situation.) If the American people don’t rebuke this irresponsible behavior, the institutions that make this country function may begin to unravel.

  Wikipedia has an article collection newspaper endorsements in this Presidential election. Note that Donald Trump has held 124 different policies on 20 major issues since he announced his candidacy.

  • Hillary Clinton. Democrat; vice president Tim Kaine. Ballotpedia. Voter’s Edge. Politifact. She has been under intense scrutiny for decades; while there is considerable hype about her, she has enough enemies that if she could possibly be indicted, she would have been by now; her critics conveniently gloss over the scandals of the Bush Administration. She gets things done. Endorsed by the San Francisco Chronicle, Los Angeles Times, the Dallas Morning News (hasn’t endorsed a Democrat since FDR), the Cincinnati Enquirer (hasn’t endorsed a Democrat since Woodrow Wilson), the Arizona Republic (published since 1890 and never endorsed a Democrat; John McCain’s hometown newspaper), Foreign Policy (has never endorsed before in half a century of publication), California League of Conservation Voters, and, most eloquently, John Scalzi. The Nation have 12 Reasons to Vote for Hillary That Have Nothing to Do With Trump.
    People have criticized Clinton for being overprepared for the first debate, which seems completely insane to me. How can anyone be overprepared for a job that includes command of a nuclear arsenal? I’m impressed at just how thoroughly she prepared for it: she set a trap for Trump that included a Cosmopolitan photoshoot and he walked right into it.
    
  • Donald J. Trump. Republican; vice president Michael R. Pence. (Also the candidates of the American Independent Party.) Ballotpedia. Voter’s Edge. Politifact. Reproductive rights will be in serious danger if he is elected. He has a big problem with conflicts of interest, and all available evidence says that he has violated laws against “self-dealing” in his use of the Trump Foundation and bribed the Attorney General of Florida. No Fortune 100 CEOs back Trump; there is extensive evidence of his corruption. As Fareed Zakaria says: Trump is a bullshit artist. He’s wringing every bit of personal profit out of this campaign as possible, spending campaign funds on Trump properties and billing us taxpayers for the Secret Service flying on his airplane; he’s really good at sticking other people with the bill. USA Today has never taken sides in a presidential race before, but this year, they advocate that people vote for anyone but Trump; the Deseret News have stayed out of partisan politics for 80 years, but they have called on him to resign his candidacy. He will be in court for a lawsuit for raping a 13-year-old girl soon.
  • Gary Johnson. Libertarian; vice president Bill Weld. Ballotpedia. Voter’s Edge. He has called for abolishing income and corporate taxes and switching to a “consumption tax” that would lead to the poor (who cannot afford to save) paying a higher percentage of their income than the rich; churches would no longer be tax-exempt. He flip-flops on climate change, and seems to consider moving to another planet as preferable to responsible stewardship of this one. He seems completely unprepared to deal with foreign policy. He opposes both encryption backdoors and network neutrality, is OK with the Citizens United decision, is OK with private prisons; would support a return to the gold standard; wants to privatize the Veteran’s Administration, reduce or privatize Social Security, get rid of all government subsidies (including oil companies), eliminate the federal Department of Education, and cut Medicare and Medicaid by 43% and give the programs to the states to administer; opposes torture, the War on Drugs, requiring photo ID for voters, paid medical and family leave, the minimum wage, transitioning away from fossil fuels, public financing of election campaigns, the trade embargo with Cuba, gun control (even in schools), government studies of gun violence, and cap-and-trade of carbon emissions; supports the TPP (while saying he hasn’t looked at the details at all), wants to repeal Obamacare but hasn’t got a workable “free market” replacement ready. He has had to reverse his positions because he didn’t do his homework; he is now pro-vaccination after previously opposing them. Not doing his homework seems to be a habit; if, by some miracle, he were elected, he would have a steep learning curve about cause and effect. What I find most worrisome is that he has tried to turn ignorance into a virtue.
  • Jill Stein. Green; vice president Ajamu Baraka. Ballotpedia. Voter’s Edge. She believes, despite a complete lack of evidence, that Wi-Fi damages children’s brains, and panders to anti-vaxxers though dialed it back when challenged.
  • Gloria Estela la Riva. Peace and Freedom; vice president Dennis J. Banks. Ballotpedia. Voter’s Edge.

• United States Senator
  • Kamala D. Harris. Democrat. Ballotpedia. Voter’s Edge. Politifact California. Endorsed by the California League of Conservation Voters, Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter, California Democratic Party, San Francisco League of Pissed Off Voters.
  • Loretta Sanchez. Democrat. Ballotpedia. Voter’s Edge.
• United States Representative, District 17
  Honda is suing Khanna for campaign espionage and Khanna has filed papers to dismiss it; the San Jose Mercury consider it a publicity stunt. They are both endorsed by the Democratic Club of Sunnyvale.
  • Mike Honda. Democrat. Ballotpedia. Voter’s Edge. Endorsed by the California League of Conservation Voters, Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter, California Democratic Party. Honda is a progressive stalwart who has been in Washington DC for 8 terms and has the advantages of seniority; his ethics probe has conveniently not been resolved in a timely fashion.
  • Ro Khanna. Democrat. Ballotpedia. Voter’s Edge. Endorsed by the San Jose Mercury, San Jose Inside. If Republicans are at all open to deal-making in the next two years, Khanna’s background in economics may be valuable in giving them business-friendly talking points to take home to their districts.
  
  
• State Senator, District 13
  • Gerald Hill. Democrat. Ballotpedia. Voter’s Edge. Pro-choice. Endorsed by the California League of Conservation Voters, Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter, California Democratic Party, Planned Parenthood.
  • Rick Ciardella. Republican. Ballotpedia. Voter’s Edge. Endorsed by Republican Party of California.
• Member of the State Assembly, District 24
  Two competent candidates who took the time to come out to the Sunnyvale Democratic Club on a balmy Saturday afternoon; this is a win-win set of choices for District 24. I have a mild preference for Veenker; I think her communication skills would be effective in building support for bills in the Assembly.
  • Marc Berman. Democrat. Ballotpedia. Voter’s Edge. Pro-choice. Endorsed by the San Jose Mercury, San Mateo Daily Journal.
  • Vicki Veenker. Democrat. Ballotpedia. Voter’s Edge. Pro-choice. Endorsed by the California League of Conservation Voters, Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter, Democratic Club of Sunnyvale.
  
  
• Santa Clara County Board of Education, Member, Trustee Area 1. Coverage in the San Jose Mercury and Palo Alto Online.
  • Sheena Chin. Voter’s Edge.
  • Grace H. Mah. Incumbent. Voter’s Edge. I can’t find anything that indicates she needs to be replaced, and experience is valuable. Endorsed by the Santa Clara County Republican Party, Planned Parenthood.
• Foothill-De Anza Community College District, Governing Board Member. Coverage in the Mountain View Voice, Los Altos Town Crier.
  • Gilbert Wong. Voter’s Edge.
  • Eric Rosenthal. Voter’s Edge. Does not appear to be making an effort (no web site, didn’t respond to the Los Altos Town Crier or Voter’s Edge), so I will take that as an indication of his commitment to the job and won’t burden him with it.
  • Patrick Ahrens. Voter’s Edge. Has a good set of endorsements from current and former trustees, and should provide some youthful perspective.
  • Laura Casas. Incumbent. Voter’s Edge. Well-endorsed by her colleagues.
  • Peter Landsberger. Voter’s Edge. Has excellent qualifications and the endorsements of several other trustees, so should be able to work well on the team.
  • Orrin Mahoney. Voter’s Edge.
• Fremont Union High School District, Governing Board Member. Ballotpedia. Coverage in the San Jose Mercury.
  • Roy Rocklin. Ballotpedia. Voter’s Edge. Endorsed by the Santa Clara County Democratic Party. Rocklin is running to replace Nancy Newton, a board member who is stepping down and has endorsed him (as has Jeff Moe, the incumbent).
  • Jenny Yuan. Ballotpedia. Voter’s Edge.
  • Jeff Moe. Incumbent. Ballotpedia. Voter’s Edge.
• City of Sunnyvale, Member, City Council
  • Seat 4: Klein and Cordes are both highly competent candidates. Cordes has a bit more emphasis on green issues, Klein has more on housing, but neither one is going to neglect the other issue.
    • Larry Klein. Democrat. Incumbent. Voter’s Edge. Endorsed by the San Jose Mercury, Santa Clara County Democratic Party, Democratic Club of Sunnyvale.
    • John Cordes. Democrat. Voter’s Edge.Endorsed by the Santa Clara County League of Conservation Voters, Democratic Club of Sunnyvale.
    • Mike McCarthy. Voter’s Edge. He lacks experience and his web site contains outright lies (e.g.: he claims the City Council vote salary increases for themselves, but those are specified in the city charter, Article VI, Section 603 and can only be changed by a charter amendment; they reduced its automatic increase from a flat 5% to the Consumer Price Index back in 2011). He is either gullible, or thinks the voters are.
  • Seat 5:
    • Russ Melton. Republican. Voter’s Edge. His top priorities are completing the downtown, mitigating climate change, reducing traffic, putting in more of the purple pipes that carry greywater, and affordable housing. Endorsed by the San Jose Mercury, Santa Clara County League of Conservation Voters, Santa Clara County Republican Party.
    • Pat Meyering. Voter’s Edge. This guy is so unpleasant to work with that we’ve had a city manager and city attorney quit rather than put up with his antics, and those jobs are not easy to fill. Please do not vote for him. If you are so partisan that you will not vote for a Republican, just leave your ballot blank for seat 5.
  • Seat 6:
    • Nancy Smith. Democrat. Voter’s Edge. Endorsed by the San Jose Mercury, Santa Clara County Democratic Party, Democratic Club of Sunnyvale, Santa Clara County League of Conservation Voters, Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter.
    • Jim Davis. Republican. Incumbent. Voter’s Edge. Endorsed by the Santa Clara County Republican Party.
  • Seat 7:
    • Michael Goldman. Democrat. Voter’s Edge. Rambles on at length when giving speeches, claiming that passing the badly-written Measure M and electing him are the only things that can possibly save Sunnyvale from turning into downtown Manhattan.
    • Tara Martin-Milius. Republican. Incumbent. Voter’s Edge. The most experienced candidate running for this seat. She’s voted for the plastic bag ban, recycled water expansion, a $15 minimum wage by 2018 (indexed to the Consumer Price Index) and is a strong proponent of affordable housing. Endorsed by the San Jose Mercury, Santa Clara County League of Conservation Voters, Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter, Santa Clara County Republican Party.
    • Ron Banks. Democrat. Voter’s Edge. No experience in public service, and he admits that he started out as a one-issue candidate (the issue being manufactured-home parks), but has been doing his homework and broadening his understanding of the issues facing the city. If you are so partisan that you will not vote for a Republican, I recommend voting for him.

Comments

[canyonwalker.livejournal.com]

Thanks as always for gathering all this information.

[kalimac.livejournal.com]

I have to vote for Cordes, then, because without him, if Melton, Smith, and Martin-Milius win, there will be no countervailing voices to the developer-friendly majority on Council. None. It's unfortunate that the opposition candidates are, as usual, mostly either weak, flakes, or Pat Meyering, because there's an important argument here that needs to be made.