It has been said, “ The only people who want change are babies in wet diapers.”

Well that apparently does not apply to this election season for 40% +/_ of the registered voters are supporting DT (Donald Trump), the most apolitical, most unlikely candidate, the change candidate and the other 40% +/_ are supporting the saying’s thesis by supporting HC (Hillary Clinton) the “steady as she goes” been-there-done-that Washington politician. And we have “two” third/ fourth party candidates who are pushing other ideas, obviously not as popular, sharing the balance of the electorate.

I find myself in a position that doesn’t happen very often. I don’t fully support either candidate, which then gives me room to critique each with less bias.

First the change candidate; the one contradicting the saying, the one who is not like your typical political insider, the do and say what the base wants to hear candidate (whether he believes it or not), the candidate whose demeanor and outlook are nothing like we have ever seen in our elections, the candidate who contradicts his own statements time and time again with no concern for the truth, whose air about him is “ I’m rich, I’m great, I’m bigger and better than anyone, I’m…I, I, I, me, me, me… on and on to the point of ad nauseum.

His characteristics are those of the right wing person but to a staggering high degree. He thinks he is better than anyone, he thinks he knows what is best for everyone, he thinks he has the right to dictate how others should live, he feels he has the knowledge and insight to simplify and fix ALL of this nations complicated problems with a mere sweep of his hand. He even has said he could shoot somebody and wouldn’t be held accountable because people love him so much.

This candidate can only be DT.

No one running for the Presidency of the United States has ever been so obviously lacking the qualities, the characteristics, the wherewithall of a quality candidate. Yet he has been polling 40 plus/minus percent of the populous. How can that be? What would move people to support someone who so obviously misses the mark? This is a question I have tried to understand and answer. All of my thoughts and answers have holes and don’t stand up to scrutiny. But here goes my best shot at an answer:

People are so sick and fed up with our politicians and their inaction for the benefit of all American citizenry (or at least their own benefit) that they are reaching for anyone, and I mean ANYONE, who doesn’t walk like a politician, talk like a politician, act like a politician, look like a politician, do anything similar to a politician, even run like a politician.

They are reaching for anything that will shake up the system that they perceive has not served them well. The status quo is not the in-thing right now. Change is needed and is in the air. Consider the run by Bernie Saunders that ended unsuccessfully, largely due to the DNC’s blocking and pushing their candidate HC. He was/is a beacon for change for the American people who have been stymied, taken advantage of, and stepped on by the status quo.

Politicians like McConnell and Ryan are Sander’s supporter’s enemies in this political battle. He, Bernie, supports all economic levels where they, McConnell and Ryan, are perceived as only supporting legislation that benefits the wealthy. Looking objectively at their actions, talking points, ideas, and voting records one would have to agree that they are totally opposed to anything Obama, anything with a hint of liberalism attached, anything that resembles working with the Dems or compromising, and some think anything that advances our country if it contradicts their strict ideology.

So the end result is a congress that doesn’t work for the people and has the worst approval rating in history, and the people are fed up. And they reach for the most un-Washington like candidate to support, the one that says and does outrageous things, the one they feel with his outrageousness will somehow bring the wanted change. They don’t see the structured, long evolving careful, planned logically thought-out change; THEY WANT CHANGE NOW! Worse, they don’t see the dangers in unrestricted change.

(If you want to see what unrestricted people can do look no further than the bank actions that fueled the great recession of 2007-2008.)

That leaves us to consider the other candidate, the one that supports the thesis that people don’t like change. They are looking for “politics as usual,” same old same old boring, do as was done, don’t change what seems to be working, don’t look for too much improvement too fast. President Obama ran on an idea of hope and now HC will look to continue that hope and continue down the trail Obama blazed. And with his approval rating higher than most Presidents and continuing to climb so she should.

There will come a time when the divergence will begin and she will blaze her own trail. That trail may be in line with the progressive plan outlined quite largely by Senator Sander’s influence, again a plan that speaks to change. Change that looks to reverse the “trickle down” economic policies and effects of the Reagan era continued by the Bushes: the policies that have seen a shift of wealth from the masses to a few at the top, CEO pay ratio with workers going from 30 to 1 to 300+ to 1, huge tax loopholes that see the wealthiest among us pay a lesser percentage that their secretaries, office workers, servants, etc.

And will she work with Senator Warren and Senator Sanders in their fight to break up the money monopoly of the big banks, Wall Street dominance, hedge fund theft (yes theft … they make nothing, product nothing, serve no benefit to society yet they skim millions from our economy)? Will she turn her back on the wealthy that have helped her with her foundation and her campaign, her finances? Will she be honest with the American people about her closeness to high finance and her true feelings about what to do to right the listing financial ship of the middle class?

Since beginning this blog the sexual escapades of DT have shifted the poles to heavily favor HC. And I must admit that makes me feel much better as I view DT as a huge embarrassment for this country in the eyes of the world. How can a country that claims to be the greatest democracy the world has ever known run someone so opposed to that democratic process? Perhaps DT is a great example of that democratic process, that is, it can challenge and attempt to destroy itself using it’s own processes.

Oh I am feeling ill are you? If so take two aspirins and call me in the morning…….