In 24 days, the presidential race between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump will be decided.
Trump has dwelt at times on the nuclear alternative and as president he would have access to the nuclear football, the vessel holding codes to trigger such an event.
His comments about the unthinkable remind me of the TV ad that contributed to Barry Goldwater’s landslide loss to Lyndon Johnson in 1964. It capitalized on a Goldwater proposal to use low-grade nuclear weapons in Vietnam for defoliation in order to bring the war to a quick close. He later claimed not to be an advocate for nuclear use.
The ad showed a 3-year-old girl pulling pedals from a daisy, counting each. When she came to 10, she stumbled and a male voice interrupted with “10,” and followed with 9, 8, 7, etc. The camera zoomed in on the little girl and after 1, a nuclear blast and mushroom cloud filled the screen.
Trump’s mention of the nuclear option hasn’t been followed by admission of a misstep, and like so much of what Trump bellows about, it won’t be. The “Daisy” ad fits with Trump. A nuclear response has to be the last resort, not a way of showing who carries a big stick (with apologies to Teddy Roosevelt).
There is much more on the negative side of Trump’s plate. I’ve watched both debates, listened multiple times to Trump and Clinton speeches, read daily liberal and conservative screeds. I even digested — with a little heartburn — his book, “Art of the Deal.”
After last Sunday night’s debate, I felt somewhat like the New York Times editorial writer who referred to Clinton as the only adult on the stage. Interruptions, snide remarks and straight-out indecencies have no place in a presidential debate. This is serious business, not Saturday Night Live.
Trump’s proclivity for so-called locker room talk, racism, sexism, xenophobia, just about any degradation you can name, gives credence to the fear he would push the apocalyptic button. I have grandchildren, several on the cusp of adulthood, and the last thing I want for them is to live with the result of a nuclear war — if they were to survive.
Clinton has flaws as we all do, but in the scheme of things I think she is the infinitely better candidate — and this is from a life-long Republican, albeit a moderate one.
A few points:
— The environment. Clinton acknowledges what the vast majority of scientists know to be fact, that pollution of the atmosphere is causing a hot-house effect and changing the climate. Polar ice is melting and ocean temperatures are rising.
— Immigration reform. Rather than round up the 11 million immigrants in the U.S. illegally, Clinton is willing to give them an opportunity for citizenship. Most are good people who came here for a better life for themselves and their families.
— The economy. Clinton has proposed raising the pitifully low minimum wage, which leaves many people subsisting in poverty. Also, by engaging illegals as citizens they will be more involved in the economy and add to its health.
— Debt-free higher education. Post-secondary education has the obvious advantages of better-paying jobs and brighter and more productive leaders and workers.
— Terrorism. She would have a reasonable strategy for dealing with those who detest our culture, freedom of religion and way of life. That does not mean branding all Muslims, or any other religious or ethnic group, as unacceptable.
