Just a couple things to note: Inflation is happening globally and we already know that U.S. Presidents have little control over the economy, so I don't think Trump or Biden can be measured by the economies under their respective administrations as those simply aren't theirs to control (or to take credit for). Crime rates are down and hav…
Just a couple things to note: Inflation is happening globally and we already know that U.S. Presidents have little control over the economy, so I don't think Trump or Biden can be measured by the economies under their respective administrations as those simply aren't theirs to control (or to take credit for). Crime rates are down and have continued to drop, particularly a noted decrease in violent crime last year, but again it is hard to say how a sitting President could possibly affect crime rates that dramatically either way.
You raise several points, though, and those are definitely worth considering: whose border policies do you support? Where do you stand on isolationism vs. military support for allies? I do think it is very important to vote for Presidents on the things that are actually within the scope of their job.
Also: I think you can look at her record as a prosecutor, a DA, and the AG of California to see what her priorities are in terms of public safety/security. She was pretty innovative in her approach there and she was AG for like 7-8 years. She also has a voting record in the Senate before becoming VP. I found an interview from her 2020 presidential campaign where she talks about her vision for healthcare reform (a public/private hybrid system) to lower healthcare costs but still provide a private option for both healthcare and insurance.
I am no expert on global economies but I do know my household expenses are about 4x higher in the last 4 years. Also, I live in a border community and the lack of border policies have added to what feels is a hopeless and exploding homeless population. Crime in my County has increased over 100% and our DA seems tougher than what I read about in other California communities. If these are not within the scope of their job or influence, then who's job is it. We do know the Biden Harris administration changed/reversed nearly 100 policies in place at the beginning of their time in leadership and some that have directly impacted inflation and immigration.
I first want to say that I hear you, and I don't want to be AT ALL dismissive of your experiences and lived reality of the last four years.
I responded to you because I do think it's important to point out that the President is not a king (we fought a war pretty specifically for that!) and now, even more than at our inception, our country is very large with very, very many layers of governance. A lot of these things - local crime rates, local costs of living - are far outside of the realm of the President's power and fall squarely onto the local elected officials *and* the external conditions of a specific place. I live in Maine, and our housing costs are sky high because of a combination of local zoning for short term rentals, a seasonal tourist economy, and challenges to infrastructure the closer you move inland. President Biden can't fix that - neither could President Trump or President Harris. So for me, personally, I can't vote for a president based on an issue that they can't fix.
Immigration policies are definitely influenced by the President...but not completely. Our members of Congress, as law-makers, are supposed to be handling this issue as well. IMO, that's why it's so important to know what a President does not control as much as we should know what they *do* control, because then we get to pay attention to the other folks 'down' the ballot and what kind of a job they are doing. My local zoning board has an equal impact on my life, in many ways.
Thank you Emily for a respectful discussion, it is rare these days that strangers can have a conversation without hate or vitriol so I appreciate your thoughtful insight. I do understand that there is a process for many of these issues that effect our daily lives and there is not a direct line to the President. Generally speaking our local, federal and state issues have declined and are largely governed by one political ideology. Housing is definitely one of those areas that I feel is affected by the federal government and primarily interest rates which when they are high or low effect other parts of the economy. Fuel prices are also largely affected by the federal government and policies associated with drilling and trade and again impact other parts of the economy. IMO I feel immigration policies should be a controlled process where people are vetted when they have a desire to become a productive citizen and have not had that opportunity in their country of origin. Most of those crossing the border in San Diego do not have that goal in mind and this is evident by the activity we see. The majority of the people crossing are dropping their ID's at the border. They then are transsported to the airport for free, given a special gate at TSA without ID and board a plane with no customs review. My husband and I recently traveled and we saw it first hand. Why is this process such a secret? Why are Americans/legal citizens treated differently than people who have chosen an illegal means to cross the border? This is supposedly the VP's main job and the fact that she has rarely if ever visited the southern border is insulting. If you are basing your opinion of her record on how she did in California, look at San Francisco and Los Angeles (and San Diego) and all of the major corporations who have left the State due to high crime rates and the smash and grabs and their inability to keep their employees safe. She has brought that same ideology to the Federal level and will continue to push her policies that allow criminals to not be held accountable. I think politicians these days start at the local level, then state and eventually federal and their ideas are now our reality. I sincerely hope that people take a look at the drastic decline of California and see who has been in power (Pelosi, Newsom, Harris, etc.). The most significant of these declines has been in San Francisco and Los Angeles where they governed at the local and state levels. I would be interested to hear about the immigration plan details that congress and republicans did not pass. Most people have to be asking why the former president is such a threat to democrats? I know I am wondering why anyone would go to such extreme measures, most of which are unlawful, to keep him out of office.
Speaking as someone who will not vote for our former president: I find many of his positions to be a genuine threat to our democratic institutions. He attempted to overturn the results of the last election, without any substantiated evidence that there was fraud. And yet, despite still having no evidence of fraud, he is already saying that he will only accept the next election results if they are "fair" ("fair" to him evidently means that he must win). He has said that he would be a dictator, but "only on the first day" - can you recall ever having a candidate who would utter such a sentiment? It's not about his political party. It is, as Sharon says, about putting principles OVER party. Our democracy is not unbreakable. We can lose it. We *could* very well lose it. Piece by piece, one decision at a time to seize power and not relinquish it.
I don't think you need to like Kamala Harris, and you certainly have the freedom to vote without any coercion for whichever candidate you choose, but the next President is going to be one of these two people. I am concerned about the border, and the economy, and criminal justice reform, and so many other things that affect our country. I am also concerned about what we citizens will be able to do to address any of those things if we lose the process by which to do it.
Emily, I sincerely applaud your inner Sharon and your attempts to engage civilly with a fellow commenter who would obviously benefit from the use of more factual sources of information.
I just want to second Emily's response, specifically in regards to immigration being Congress's job. The president can certainly influence negotiations, but Congress has the authority to make and change immigration laws. We were SO CLOSE to having some decent immigration reform last year, but the bill got declined by Republicans after Trump gave the word. And maybe Repubs claim to want to fix immigration, but they sure didn't jump at the opportunity - and that's extremely disheartening to see.
Unfortunately it's an easy issue to use for campaigning and a money maker. I can understand in some ways why a state might want to take the issue on itself after watching Congress not do their job.
The increase in our household expenses are corporate greed. There are many examples of companies having record profits while price gouging consumers. The president has zero control over how companies set their prices on goods.
Yes, I don't think a lot of people are choosing to see that capitalism is eating us alive, and our Congress is loathe to do anything that will help, because they'll lose the big money donors. Wait until the lawsuits come through the floodgates since the Chevron doctrine was overturned... things are going to get very dark if we can't get a Congress and president who will do what's best for people.
Just a couple things to note: Inflation is happening globally and we already know that U.S. Presidents have little control over the economy, so I don't think Trump or Biden can be measured by the economies under their respective administrations as those simply aren't theirs to control (or to take credit for). Crime rates are down and have continued to drop, particularly a noted decrease in violent crime last year, but again it is hard to say how a sitting President could possibly affect crime rates that dramatically either way.
You raise several points, though, and those are definitely worth considering: whose border policies do you support? Where do you stand on isolationism vs. military support for allies? I do think it is very important to vote for Presidents on the things that are actually within the scope of their job.
Also: I think you can look at her record as a prosecutor, a DA, and the AG of California to see what her priorities are in terms of public safety/security. She was pretty innovative in her approach there and she was AG for like 7-8 years. She also has a voting record in the Senate before becoming VP. I found an interview from her 2020 presidential campaign where she talks about her vision for healthcare reform (a public/private hybrid system) to lower healthcare costs but still provide a private option for both healthcare and insurance.
I am no expert on global economies but I do know my household expenses are about 4x higher in the last 4 years. Also, I live in a border community and the lack of border policies have added to what feels is a hopeless and exploding homeless population. Crime in my County has increased over 100% and our DA seems tougher than what I read about in other California communities. If these are not within the scope of their job or influence, then who's job is it. We do know the Biden Harris administration changed/reversed nearly 100 policies in place at the beginning of their time in leadership and some that have directly impacted inflation and immigration.
I first want to say that I hear you, and I don't want to be AT ALL dismissive of your experiences and lived reality of the last four years.
I responded to you because I do think it's important to point out that the President is not a king (we fought a war pretty specifically for that!) and now, even more than at our inception, our country is very large with very, very many layers of governance. A lot of these things - local crime rates, local costs of living - are far outside of the realm of the President's power and fall squarely onto the local elected officials *and* the external conditions of a specific place. I live in Maine, and our housing costs are sky high because of a combination of local zoning for short term rentals, a seasonal tourist economy, and challenges to infrastructure the closer you move inland. President Biden can't fix that - neither could President Trump or President Harris. So for me, personally, I can't vote for a president based on an issue that they can't fix.
Immigration policies are definitely influenced by the President...but not completely. Our members of Congress, as law-makers, are supposed to be handling this issue as well. IMO, that's why it's so important to know what a President does not control as much as we should know what they *do* control, because then we get to pay attention to the other folks 'down' the ballot and what kind of a job they are doing. My local zoning board has an equal impact on my life, in many ways.
Emily I am in Maine too! Yay! ❤️
Maine Governerds unite!! Maybe we can get Sharon to come visit someday 🤭💙
Thank you Emily for a respectful discussion, it is rare these days that strangers can have a conversation without hate or vitriol so I appreciate your thoughtful insight. I do understand that there is a process for many of these issues that effect our daily lives and there is not a direct line to the President. Generally speaking our local, federal and state issues have declined and are largely governed by one political ideology. Housing is definitely one of those areas that I feel is affected by the federal government and primarily interest rates which when they are high or low effect other parts of the economy. Fuel prices are also largely affected by the federal government and policies associated with drilling and trade and again impact other parts of the economy. IMO I feel immigration policies should be a controlled process where people are vetted when they have a desire to become a productive citizen and have not had that opportunity in their country of origin. Most of those crossing the border in San Diego do not have that goal in mind and this is evident by the activity we see. The majority of the people crossing are dropping their ID's at the border. They then are transsported to the airport for free, given a special gate at TSA without ID and board a plane with no customs review. My husband and I recently traveled and we saw it first hand. Why is this process such a secret? Why are Americans/legal citizens treated differently than people who have chosen an illegal means to cross the border? This is supposedly the VP's main job and the fact that she has rarely if ever visited the southern border is insulting. If you are basing your opinion of her record on how she did in California, look at San Francisco and Los Angeles (and San Diego) and all of the major corporations who have left the State due to high crime rates and the smash and grabs and their inability to keep their employees safe. She has brought that same ideology to the Federal level and will continue to push her policies that allow criminals to not be held accountable. I think politicians these days start at the local level, then state and eventually federal and their ideas are now our reality. I sincerely hope that people take a look at the drastic decline of California and see who has been in power (Pelosi, Newsom, Harris, etc.). The most significant of these declines has been in San Francisco and Los Angeles where they governed at the local and state levels. I would be interested to hear about the immigration plan details that congress and republicans did not pass. Most people have to be asking why the former president is such a threat to democrats? I know I am wondering why anyone would go to such extreme measures, most of which are unlawful, to keep him out of office.
Thank you for your responses as well!
Speaking as someone who will not vote for our former president: I find many of his positions to be a genuine threat to our democratic institutions. He attempted to overturn the results of the last election, without any substantiated evidence that there was fraud. And yet, despite still having no evidence of fraud, he is already saying that he will only accept the next election results if they are "fair" ("fair" to him evidently means that he must win). He has said that he would be a dictator, but "only on the first day" - can you recall ever having a candidate who would utter such a sentiment? It's not about his political party. It is, as Sharon says, about putting principles OVER party. Our democracy is not unbreakable. We can lose it. We *could* very well lose it. Piece by piece, one decision at a time to seize power and not relinquish it.
I don't think you need to like Kamala Harris, and you certainly have the freedom to vote without any coercion for whichever candidate you choose, but the next President is going to be one of these two people. I am concerned about the border, and the economy, and criminal justice reform, and so many other things that affect our country. I am also concerned about what we citizens will be able to do to address any of those things if we lose the process by which to do it.
Emily, I sincerely applaud your inner Sharon and your attempts to engage civilly with a fellow commenter who would obviously benefit from the use of more factual sources of information.
I just want to second Emily's response, specifically in regards to immigration being Congress's job. The president can certainly influence negotiations, but Congress has the authority to make and change immigration laws. We were SO CLOSE to having some decent immigration reform last year, but the bill got declined by Republicans after Trump gave the word. And maybe Repubs claim to want to fix immigration, but they sure didn't jump at the opportunity - and that's extremely disheartening to see.
Unfortunately it's an easy issue to use for campaigning and a money maker. I can understand in some ways why a state might want to take the issue on itself after watching Congress not do their job.
The increase in our household expenses are corporate greed. There are many examples of companies having record profits while price gouging consumers. The president has zero control over how companies set their prices on goods.
Yes, I don't think a lot of people are choosing to see that capitalism is eating us alive, and our Congress is loathe to do anything that will help, because they'll lose the big money donors. Wait until the lawsuits come through the floodgates since the Chevron doctrine was overturned... things are going to get very dark if we can't get a Congress and president who will do what's best for people.
I agree 100%