Nowadays I try and avoid watching too much news coverage or read about politics as it has become a frustrating and meaningless cacophony of noise that only seems to change for the worst.  I’d rather watch enjoyable, creative entertainment or try and read news articles about the good things that happen around the world.  Unfortunately, for the past year and a half or so the presidential election in America has been inescapable.  So here’s my thoughts on the subject and what I think might be a solution to consider.

First off, let’s look at the candidates.  On the democratic side, we have a woman who is most often compared to Emperor Palpatine of Star Wars notoriety.  Hillary Clinton is not a very likable person by most accounts, and some of her behavior and past activities (like the whole email thing) are possibly criminal.  Really the biggest reason I can see that most people support her is that she is a) not Donald Trump, and b) a woman.  However you feel about Barack Obama, it would be hard to argue he didn’t at least partially win because of his race.  Now we are getting the same thing again.  Many people are blindly backing Hillary because she’s a woman and they feel that having her as president of the united states would be a huge win for the empowerment and equal treatment of women.  Equality in sexes is something I think we should all be behind, as every human should be treated with the same respect and treated the same no matter what gender, race, or religion they are.  But just like the opposite result of things like affirmative action, no person should get an opportunity or be supported because of the gender/race/religion they are.  You shouldn’t vote for Hillary because she’s a woman.  If I said I was voting for Trump (I’m not) because he’s a man, I’d be crucified and burned at the stake, but it’s okay for people to say they vote for her because she’s a woman (although few will admit that’s the reason).  You shouldn’t vote for someone based on something like that, whether to promote it or to down-vote it, it’s wrong either way.

As far as republicans go, oh wow, how did that go so wrong.  I really can’t believe Donald Trump is actually the republican nominee for the President of the United States.  This is like the movie Idiocracy come to life.  It’s absolutely insane that this racist, sexist, narcissistic blow-hard is the other choice to become the “leader of the free world”.  This has happened because of a couple things.  First, we’ve become a society of reality TV, detached from real world consequences and inquisitive thinking, wanting merely the next bit of mindless entertainment and outlandish thing to dazzle our eyes and shock our senses.  Donald Trump is the culmination of that, he says outrageous things that would end most celebrities and politicians careers, but because he doesn’t apologize for them and says them so boldly, people are entranced by it.  They confuse his statements as being someone who’s honest and speaks his mind and willing to stand up for what he believes in.  None of those are actually true, as he often is caught lying, and had changed his position on nearly every subject depending on what he thinks will sound better at the time.  But the scariest reason he’s done so well is a lesson we should have learned from history, not even ancient history, but recently, as in the events that led to World War II.  Trump is using fear and promises of a great nation to motivate support.  Hitler is often used as a comparison to anyone society doesn’t like, as a icon of the ultimate evil a person could be; and usually it’s completely incorrect and a outrageous exaggeration. However with Trump, it’s not quite that far-fetched.  Both of them are using fear of outsiders and other races to scare people and offers to protect them by keeping them out or removing them.  Both Trump & Hitler took advantage of a country who has had hard economic times, promising to make the country great.  Now I don’t imagine Trump an evil man, I don’t see if he gets elected a situation where certain races are killed off like in World War II.  I merely am drawing the comparison to show how he’s using old techniques to trick a nation into voting him into power.

Anyways, I could go on and on about either side and it would be all sound and fury, signifying nothing.  The point I mean to make is that America is being put to a decision of which person do you hate less, or which do you think will be the lesser of two evils and cause the least harm.  We are NOT voting for the best person, or the candidate we think is going to be the best leader.  And this is not what democracy should be about.  Democracy should be where the people are able to choose the person they want to lead them, that is the most qualified and best represents their interests and the interest of their community, state, or country.  But all to often, it most elections in our country, we are not given that option.  We are told, “This is your party’s candidate, vote for them.  The other person is bad, so vote for us.”  Hell, even shows like American Idol are a better democracy than our current government.  There we are allowed to see who the candidates are, which one we like best, which one we think will be a better musician and can make it as a star, and we vote for the person we want most.  But we don’t get that option with our government and in this election.  You choose A or B, and a vote for C or D (some unknown third party candidate), it’s essentially a wasted vote because they have no chance of winning.

SO WHAT IS THE SOLUTION?  Well, I don’t know for sure, but I have an idea.  I propose a “Vote For No Candidate” option when voting in an election.  This is not a vote against any candidate, it’s not a vote in support of any candidate.  This is merely a “I do not endorse or wish to vote for any candidate offered” vote.

What does this mean?  It means that if the the votes for “Vote For No Candidate” option is what the majority (or highest percentage) of people have voted for, there is no winner of that election.  None of the candidates are able to hold the office that they ran for.  I believe this gives us a true democratic option of electing the best and right candidate for the position, because if that many people vote for no candidate, it means the majority of America does not want any of the offered candidates and demands new candidates.

If such a vote was to win, there would then be another election held in a short time afterwards (3-6 months persay), in which NONE of the candidates who were on the previous ballot are allowed to run for that same office.  The big political parties will have to choose new nominees to run for the office.  This would continue until a candidate receives enough votes to win the general election.

There are some issues, like the financial cost of organizing a second or third election.  As well as what happens with the current position holder until a newly elected person is chose to replace them (I’d say they keep their job until replaced).  It also gives less time for the new candidates to become as well known and for people to hear their position on things.  But to be honest, we’ve had almost 2 years with the current candidates and we all pretty much knew who they were and what they stood by the time they announced they were running.  An accelerated campaign cycle would be a whole helluva lot nicer to deal with, and would eliminate a lot of the mundane BS and back and forth bickering that occurs over a long cycle.  I also think it would mean that less money is given to each campaign, which means a lot less advertisements (I can only pray this happens), but also means less time and money from special interests groups can be invested into a candidate, which means they are less beholden to them and can be more independent in their stance and position on important subjects facing the country.

So yeah, what do you think?  Do you agree that a “No Candidate” vote would work?  Am I being crazy?  I don’t think so.  But no matter what, I’m fed up with the way our government works and I believe that the whole system needs to be reevaluated and changed to get back to what it’s supposed to be, a government of the people and for the people.