Some months ago I wrote here that this year’s election, while involving two candidates whom I cannot support, will at least make for good political theater. What an understatement that was!
So now we see the media engaged in a feeding frenzy over a candid tape of Trump talking of his womanizing, and Trump is now implying that he’ll go after Hillary Clinton for her old attacks on the “victims” of Bill Clinton’s womanizing.
Meanwhile, the (alleged) leaked contents of Hillary’s Wall Street speeches, which also came out yesterday, is getting less coverage, rather muted. This is understandable — the media are in a business and sex always sells — but there is at least genuine bombshell in the speeches, in which Hillary says her dream is open borders.
Tomorrow we have the big debate. But interestingly, there will be a televised debate among Chinese-American supporters of both candidates, in Chinese, this evening, (http://wcmi.us/). See the South China Morning Post (English) article, which has the odd subhead, “Debate, in Mandarin, has been endorsed by Chinese embassy in Washington.” I watched the first few minutes, and I think the organizers were pretty even-handed in providing both sides a chance to support their candidates.
Upon Closer inspection 
Norm,
I have a slightly different theory of how we should vote in the upcoming election. I too would like nothing more than for Bernie Sanders to win.
Given that: The only reason that we do not already have a 3x increase in H1Bs is due to divided government. Due to divided government, comprehensive immigration reform (that would greatly raise H1B quotas) cannot pass, even though both parties pretty much agree with the H1B part.
Given that: Gerrymandering in the House of Representatives pretty much guarantees that the House will stay Republican.
Given that: The only way to make comprehensive immigration reform less likely is to keep the government divided.
Given that: Republicans are 4 seats ahead in the Senate, and that at least 60 votes in the Senate are necessary to get anything done.
We must:
1. Keep the presidency Democratic by voting for Hillary.
2. Make the Senate balance closer to 50:50 by voting Democratic (unless of course you can vote for Grassley or Sessions)
3. Vote for whoever you want in the House, possibly based on other issues besides H1B
BB
LikeLike
But you are leaving out the SUPREME COURT factor. The trend in the past few years has been to sue the Government to get what you want, and then have the Supreme Court bypass both parties and implement their own vision of what’s “just” and “right”. *Whichever* party gets the WH this time, that party is likely to swing the Supreme Court to its side, with as many as 4 new justices in the next 4 years. Thus the issue is: Which party is likely to do the least damage in selecting and approving the new Court? I suspect you may want to revise your analysis.
LikeLike
You are right, I did leave out the Supreme Court factor. But adding it does not change my strategy.
1. It is important that the Senate be as close to 50:50 as possible to prevent any radical changes from happening. Obviously there will be one new SC justice this time, but it is unlikely that there will be three more within the next four years, at least three more that have an effect on the balance of the court. While there is always the possibility of a random death, the usual way that SC justices leave is by resigning during the term of a president of their own party.
2. I doubt very much that any democratic or republican Supreme Court will ever find H1B or most other immigration law unconstitutional. For one thing, it seems that no one has sufficient legal standing to sue, at least under the current rules, so a case would never make it to the Supreme Court in the first place.
What is your strategy?
LikeLike
Oh, its such a mess. Choose between open borders with increased H-1B workers (we are collateral damage) and Wall Street – versus the extreme frat boy “The Donald”. Oh, and Gary Johnson who cannot name one foreign leader. Love Bernie, but he’d be open borders, too, without Wall Street.
I agree with some that more bombshells will emerge leading up to the election.
I talked to someone from the UK, and the world is laughing at us. I laughed at his BREXIT and said the next time we’d speak that Scotland and North Ireland would leave the UK for Europe.
How did we end up here, that there is no good moderate candidate?
LikeLike
Why would you not act in your own self-interest and vote for someone who is against open borders and hopefully the H1-B? At least with Trump we have a chance back to work again. ( I was never in a frat. ). I like him because of the Globalists do not like him and the Globalists forced me to compete with low wages and workers from a country that has 3x the number of people we do.
LikeLike
Ordinary people have little to say about the candidates. The Political Class, big business, and wealthy donors are in control. For those of us removed from the early primaries, the candidates are decided without any input from us.
We are in for a rough couple of years no matter who wins. The discord that has been sown by the media reports will linger. The challenge will be how to heal the divide which now seems to be as big as the Grand Canyon so the country can move forward. I do not think either candidate has the vision or support to do so. The attacks on Americans who have opinions differing from those of each candidate have caused such loathing for the candidate. The lack of hope for the future by so many – especially young workers – is devastating.
LikeLike
Obama called Hillary ” The Senator from Punjab” There is alot of meat on that bone. She has been getting paid to promote Indian companies and H1Bs for over 10 years. She helped the largest H1B Indian Co – TATA set up their US Headquarters in Buffalo NY while serving as NY Senator.
LikeLike
Yep, and if you notice, Trump has NOT used that material.
LikeLike
He has been criticized for hiring guest workers.
In my view it it far worse for an elected representative of American workers to advocate for their replacement than for an employer to follow the laws in place.
LikeLike