Five Fixes For Our Primary/Caucus Fiasco

Voting FAIL

Voting FAIL

For decades we have been given this advice about our system for electing Presidents:  “If it’s broken, don’t try to fix it.”

People get nervous about elections and major changes are automatically assumed to create new problems…and it’s true. Any change will create new issues; however, the question is whether or not the new issues are really significant, or whether they are just the Elmer’s in the room who try to find a problem even if it is absurd.

First, we have to accept that our current political system works for some people. People with money and power really, really like the current system because it is easy to manipulate. In addition, people who have more pull in the political system than they should have really, really like it because the current system gives a handful of Iowans and New Hampshirites much more of a punch to our political system than they should have under an all voices are equal” system.

But the United States of America is spiraling out of control because our system of electing our leaders has become a type of reality TV show where entertainment is rewarded and common sense is punished. So how do we fix it?

ONE:  Corporations Are NOT People
It is hard to fathom how absurd the justification was for the Supreme Court to rule in favor of Citizens United. Free speech is our greatest foundation of democracy. Each person has a right to voice his or her opinion. What the Supreme Court did was to dilute our voice and say that not only do individuals have free speech rights, but some privileged individuals can amplify their voice to have a greater access to free speech than the common individual. It’s a perversion of the First Amendment and everyone knows it.

The ruling has to be reversed if our political system is to be restored.

TWO:  Tax Big Donors
The mega-contributor to political campaigns is now the tail wagging the political dog. Our country’s dignity has been slowly eroded by the wholesale purchasing of politicians by wealthy individuals and organizations. Yes, that means unions and corporations.

Contributions that exceed $500 in a two-year period given directly or indirectly to a campaign or cause should be taxed at 100%. Give a million dollars  to a campaign, pay an additional $999,500 to the government entity the candidate or cause will serve or impact.

THREE:  Government Established Primaries
The idea that political parties can establish any method of choosing a candidate is ridiculous. It plays into the hands of the buffoon who suddenly  decides that the method was unfair and then we are off to the courts. Every State should have a Primary, not a Caucus and it should be done under the same rules in every State.

FOUR:  Fifty Primaries in Fifty Days
By lottery pull the names of each State. The first State pulled holds their primary on February 1st. The second State pulled has their primary on February 2nd, etc. Candidates can begin campaigning in a State three weeks before the primary for that State.

FIVE:  Use both Internet and In-Person Voting
Voting is going to be done by the Internet. It’s coming. Why not start with the primaries? Keep the in-person option available, but allow people to vote on a secure website.

Each registered voter is given a unique code for each election. They register for the election website and set up a password. On the election date they sign in, enter their unique code, and vote.

1 Comment

Filed under Government, Information Technology, Internet, Politics, Taxes, US History

Why Trump is Really Missing the Debate

Trump Sad

The Debate Strategy: Trump has the idiots right where he wants them. Now he needs to step out of the light and let Bush shine a little. (Image credit: TheBusinessPundit.com)

Donald Trump is playing the “poor little o’ me” card in his justification for missing the next debate, but there is likely another reason for Trump to not take the Fox News stage on Thursday.

He’s doing his job to well.

Five months ago I suggested that Donald Trump was not running for President (SEE: The Trump Card,) and that he was likely trying to corral the less intelligent Americans into one group so he could deliver them to the Republican Presidential nominee this summer.

Last month I predicted the approximate date that he would drop out and tell his drooling, weak-minded supporters that they have to vote for Jeb Bush or else Hillary Clinton will win (SEE: Trump Dropout Countdown.) 

But why isn’t he going to the debate on Thursday?

The problem is that Jeb Bush is having a hard time looking like a leader when the Republican class clown steals the stage. Bush needs to move up in the polls and this debate is a perfect format for him to do that….if Trump is not there.

 

GOP polling 27 JAN

Bush needs to leap over Ben Carson and Marco Rubio after this next debate (Poll analysis credit:  Huffington Post)

Bush can probably hold his own against Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio. Cruz and Rubio are usually victims of their own stupidity and at this debate Bush has the opportunity to make himself look like the kinder, gentler, more sane candidate than the rest of the pack.

A Bush win would likely put him in third place which lands him within striking distance of a diminishing Ted Cruz. Cruz can’t out Trump, Trump, and Bush looks more presidential, so Cruz will find himself bleeding support to both ends of the GOP spectrum. That will eventually put Bush in second which is where he wants/needs to be until next May when Trump will drop out.

1 Comment

Filed under Politics, Public Image

Time to Repeal Republicans

The Republican party can’t help themselves. They are born to do the wrong thing.

The United States of America was established on the principle that everyone is equal. Yes, there were some many of our founders who didn’t see African Americans as equals, nor were women seen as equals, but they probably also didn’t believe that the Earth orbited the Sun.

Over time we learned that all humans are truly equal. Over time we adopted a system of government that was committed to protecting the rights of ALL people. Over time we became the greatest country in the history of the world not only because of the principles that were the framework of our country, but because we took that framework and made it greater than the people who wrote it.

But there are always those who want to tear it all down under the belief that it is not ‘our’ country, but ‘my’ country. Those people who are too stupid to be let out in public, but want a gun in their purse when they our out among our citizens just in case they see someone they want to kill.

Conservatives have a history of tearing down great things. Guided by the concept that “we can’t,” conservatives have constantly battled for less for everyone else and more for them.

After fifty attempts the Cliven Bundy’s of Congress have finally passed a repeal of Obamacare. Nope, they don’t have a plan ‘B’, except they want American healthcare run by the greedy, not by compassionate. Republicans have proven again why they are the party of anti-Americans. They hate equality. They hate being told to be ethical. They hate paying for the privilege of being citizen of the United States of America.

It’s time we repeal Republicans and put our country back into the hands of the intelligent, the compassionate, and the true patriots.

1 Comment

Filed under Branding, Business, Communication, Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, Health, History, Opinion, Politics, Public Image, Religion, Respect, Taxes, US History, Women

Trump Dropout Countdown

Trump Out of the Race on or about May 17, 2016

Trump Out of the Race on or about May 17, 2016

Four months ago I said that Donald Trump was probably not running for President (SEE: The Trump Card.) Not only am I prepared to say that Donald Trump is not running for President, I predict he will dropout of his ‘pretend’ campaign for President on or about 9:00 am EDT, May 17, 2016.

I know he’s not running for President because:

  1. Any reasonable person would know that his outrageous statements are targeted to a small, unintelligent, USA-government hating, racist group of people who do not have the ability to elect a President.
  2. His statements have alienated the intelligent conservatives to the point that even they would rather not vote than to elect him.
  3. If he were the Republican nominee he would solidify the liberals and moderates leading to the biggest Republican loss in recent history.
  4. With Trump at the top of the ticket, the House and the Senate might both go to the Democrats.
  5. His over-the-top, implausible character is typical of an inexperienced actor who goes for fake drama rather than real emotion.

Trump has been on a mission since June 2015, and that mission has not changed. The field of Republican wackos for President that popped up in the Spring of 2015, was splintering the party to the point that no one candidate would be able to reunite the conservative voters in 2016.

Enter Donald Trump. His mission was to gather up all the wacko voters and get them in one basket. To do this he had to become one of them, and he has excelled in his effort.

One by one Trump has sucked the life out of other GOP wacko Presidential candidates by being the biggest, loudest wacko of them all. His tactics are simple. As one wacko rises in the polls, Trump steps up his antics. Ben Carson starts rising, Trump drops wacko bombs in the media, and Carson numbers start falling. His mission is not complete, but by the Spring of 2016, it will be Donald Trump, Jeb Bush, and possibly two minor also-rans. 

With the exception of Trump, the candidates who went after the wacko vote have been unwilling to commit to the image that appeals to the least intelligent, most racist, most anti USA-government group of voters. Why? Because they actually had hopes of becoming President and they knew that the wacko vote may get them up in the polls, but the wacko image would be suicide in the general election. Trump doesn’t care about the general election because he’s not running for President.

Look who’s floating along. Jeb Bush. He was at around 13% last summer and he’s now down around 6%, but he’s still there. He’s not the target of anyone. He’s not on the public radar. He’s just there. He has no real fear of losing wacko support because he’s not interested in appealing to them. He’s waiting until they appeal to him.

HuffPost GOP President Blend of Polls - DEC 2015

HuffPost GOP President Blend of Polls – DEC 2015 (Go to website)

So what’s next?

Trump will continue to be the Wacko Pied Piper. He will continue to suck the wacko voters out of those candidates who built their campaigns on wackoism. On or about May 1, 2015, Trump will start making statements about his concerns that he may not be electable in the general election. He will then work to scare the wackos into submission. He will tell them that the first priority to the country is to make sure Hillary is NOT elected as President.

On or about May 15, 2015, the media will receive a leaked story regarding Trump having a “secret” meeting with the Bush campaign. Soon after that Donald Trump will fall on his rubber sword and instruct his wacko supporters that it is their duty to the country to support Jeb Bush. Jeb, having already secured the established conservatives, will then suddenly become the ‘conservative cause’ for the wackos. Two months later he will be the “Miracle Candidate” to be lauded at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland in August.

And Donald Trump will get anything he wants from the Republican party for the rest of his life. Donald Trump will drop out of the race on or about May 17, 2016. It’s a done deal.

2 Comments

Filed under Government, Politics, Public Image

Colorado By Any Other Name

Colorado

The sign may have accidentally got the origin of the name correct

Growing up in Colorado I was drilled in the origin of the name. From elementary school to adulthood I was told over and over that Colorado is Spanish for “color red.” It sounds logical because Colorado sort of sounds like Color Red. The rest of the tale is that it is based on the red in the Colorado River. Again, it almost sounds logical, so it must be true. Even today, a Google search of the origin of the State’s name will usually refer to the same story.

The problem is that “color red” in Spanish is “color rojo” which doesn’t sound quite like Colorado. If that was the real story the name of the State would be Colorojo, or Coloroyo considering how we English-speaking Caucasians butcher other languages.

In addition, rivers in the West can be reddish, but only for relatively short periods of time.

Now that I’m learning some Spanish the origin of Colorado would seem to be logically from the word, “coloured” or “colored,” which, in Spanish means many or multi-colored. Only in Spanish it is pronounced color-ed and if you properly enunciate the final consonant it sounds like “eda.”

The Spanish word for ‘many colored’ would seem to be a more logical explanation for the origin of the name “Colorado,” because if you have actually seen any significant river in and around the West, the colors change depending on season and runoff.

In the Spring and after a thunderstorm the runoff will often put the red, iron laden soil in the river, which can make it reddish; however, that is not the typical color of rivers for the rest of the year. Rivers like the Rio Grande and the Colorado are often a green to deep green color on a summer or fall day, and steel-gray in overcast skies and during winter.

Many Colored Colorado, or Color Red Colorado?

Many Colored Colorado, or Color Red Colorado?

Many colored is not only a more appropriate description of the Colorado river, it is a better description of the State in general. Perhaps we need to stop repeating the tales of early settlers who often made up stuff to impress people on their wisdom and knowledge, and instead used common sense to find the truth about the origin of names, places, and things. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Communication, Generational, History, Recreation, US History

The Joy of No

_DSC1990No is a perfectly acceptable answer….providing,

  • The idea or suggestion lacked thought or had no basis in fact. (e.g.; Would Donald Trump be a good President?)
  • The idea or suggestion has obvious flaws. (e.g.; Should we let a gun be in a room with a bunch of 2nd grade children?)
  • Is a matter of personal opinion or seeks personal approval. (e.g.; Would you go out with me?)

But when an idea or suggestion doesn’t fall under any of these categories, the “no” answer becomes a potential weapon of personal destruction for the person saying it, and a beautiful opportunity for the person on the receiving end.

Being the youngest of four boys, my brothers and parents became accustomed to telling me ‘no.’ I was constantly asking questions and making suggestions, and the ‘yes’ answer was likely to encourage me. In those situations where I actually had a good idea, it was enough that as the youngest member of the family, a ‘no’ answer was valid.

As an adult, I never had any expectations that my ideas and suggestions would be better received, so hearing ‘no’ was an irritation, but I accepted it as part of life.

However, I as grew older I noticed that some people seemed to enjoy telling other people ‘no.’ Often these people were in leadership positions and their tactic was to dominate and/or intimidate others. In some cases people would act as a dictator within the organization, silencing the ideas and opinions of others with a type of ‘no’ answer that implied dire consequences if the person didn’t drop the subject, or the idea was treated so lightly as if the person was unintelligent for making the suggestion. For years I thought that part of being a good manager was to have the privilege and responsibility to tell others, “NO!” 

Then several years ago I joined a service club and became very involved in the organization. I served on several Boards and committees. I discovered that I could manipulate some people because I always knew their response to whatever I suggested would be, ‘no.’

It was then I realized that when someone says ‘no,’ it is a gift. The “No-ee” has done all they are required by making the suggestion or asking the question. The “No-er” has put their reputation and respectability on the line. The ‘no’ answer gives them all the responsibility, and, as a situation plays out, their failure to consider someone else’s idea or suggestion may be the fatal decision that brings them down.

I still find enjoyment of sometimes asking a perfectly legitimate question of someone I know will give me a ‘no’ answer. It is even more interesting to do this when I have more information about the issue or situation than they do and they can’t help but give me an answer that will eventually haunt them.

Still, I have learned that organizations and relationships with ‘no’ people are typically doomed. There’s a time to experience the joy of ‘no,’ and then there are times it’s best to walk away and shake the dust off your sandals.

Leave a comment

Filed under Aging, Business, Club Leadership, College, Communication, Consulting, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Education, Employee Retention, Ethics, Generational, Government, Higher Education, Honor, Human Resources, Lessons of Life, Management Practices, Membership Recruitment, Membership Retention, Passionate People, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Re-Imagine!, Relationships, Respect, Rotary, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, The Tipping Point, Tom Peters, Universities

The Quality of Respect

Respect determines the quality of relationships

Respect determines the quality of relationships

I have had a few instances of being told I was right. These typically come years after the fact when the acknowledgement is almost meaningless regarding the original idea, issue, or choice. The irony is that the issue discussed years ago is irrelevant, but how the person responded to my idea or concern established the quality of our relationship.

Years of interactions with people through work, social, and personal experiences has taught me that relationships are defined by the quality of respect the two people have for each other. Communication is about sharing information and being correct or not about an issue is secondary to the quality of the relationship. We are not taught that in school, but it is something learned as patterns develop with the people in our social circles.

The way a person responds to our ideas and concerns defines the quality of respect they have for who we are as a person, and that defines the relationship.

Dismissive Response
A dismissive response is the lowest form of respect to a person. Adults often are dismissive of children, and that is a valid description of the relationship between two adults when one is dismissive or condescending to another person. The classic, “Let’s just agree to disagree” is a great example of a dismissive response. If this is happening in a work relationship it means that your value to that person is nonexistent and that you should be seeking a different work environment.

In a personal relationship it means that you are a pet or child to the person and you should take action to get them out of your life. Once a person treats you as an inferior, others will model that and everyone around you will devalue your relationship with them.

Deflective Response
The next lowest form of respect is when someone is deflective or derogatory to you when you express concern about an issue. This behavior can be recognized by responses that begin with or include the following:

“You’ve always disliked. ..” or “You don’t know for sure that…” or “Here you go again…”

The point here is that the person is not responding to your concern, just devaluing you and anything you have to say. It is a close cousin to a dismissive response, but the person feels a need to answer your concern, even though the answer is actually an insult to your intelligence.

Illogical Response
Another close relative of the Dismissive Response is the Illogical Response. It is the type of response that has the appearance of a discussion of two people who mutually respect each other; however, the response is often a desperate attempt to suggest Point A is negated by Point B, but in reality Point A has nothing to do with Point B.

An example of this is if Ryan is saying that a school’s quality is on the decline because some of the best teachers in a school are leaving and Barbara counters by saying the school has a great reputation for the quality of education. Barbara’s argument is based on past performance, but Evan’s argument is talking about current and future performance.

Respectful Discussion
The hallmark of any valid discussion is the respect the people involved have for each other. When both people respect each other every attempt will be made to reach a reasonable solution because the relationship is more important than the argument.

Finally, when someone comes back to you years after a discussion and tells you that you were correct, it really is about admitting the lack of respect they had for you, and they are attempting to recognize their error. Never assume that they have found a new respect for you because respect is not a quality that returns once it has been lost.

1 Comment

Filed under Customer Relations, Customer Service, Employee Retention, Ethics, Human Resources, Lessons of Life, Management Practices, Membership Retention, Politics, Public Relations, Relationships, Respect