Election 2016 (work in progress)

Caveat
This is an unfinished work in progress.

Convention Summary
For those who didn't watch them, here's my takeaway from the RNC and DNC the past two weeks:
RNC: FEAR. Our country used to be great, and only Trump can fix it (but won't reveal how).
DNC: HOPE. Our country is great, but we can make it even better, together.
Ignoring candidates and party platforms and any actual policy for a minute, this feels like it ought to be a Democratic landslide election.  Even if you're tired of Obama's hope-flavored kool-aid, and even if you think our country is worse off than it was 8 years ago (although, prove it with some data, if you please), there's something to be said for optimists in terms of their ability to inspire action and at least attempt improvement.  Pessimists are much too content wallowing in their own misery to attempt to improve the situation.

Learning From History
When has it ever turned out that marginalizing and persecuting a group of people was the right thing to do, in retrospect?  Scapegoating an entire group of people based on their heritage, gender, religion, etc is a time-honored political tradition, but it's also one that has always made us look back with shame.  Irish weren't the problem, neither were Italians, Poles, blacks, women, Jews, Japanese, and I'm only talking about the United States' long history of persecution.  The current demonizing of Muslims, Mexicans, and the LGBT community doesn't seem any more likely to work out in our favor over the long run.

But She's a Woman!
If you refuse to vote for Clinton because she's a woman, you have to be willing to accept that there are people who will vote for her ONLY because she's a woman, and that their reasons are therefore just as valid as yours.  Both sides are blindly sexist, but at the very least, let's not be hypocritical while we're at it.  There are plenty of other countries who have had female leaders at the national level, and the earth hasn't fractured to swallow those nations whole, so there's no reason to think a woman can't lead a country like the United States.  There's been a lot of talk about the positive message Clinton's nomination sends to our daughters, and some ugly hand-wringing over our "forgotten" sons who will somehow be left out of the new world order.  Who will our sons look up to?  What message are we giving them?  Um, I don't know, maybe try one of the previous 43 male presidents (Cleveland served two non-consecutive terms, remember?).  Or, your gender doesn't decide what job you can do.

Political Families
If you're anti-Clinton because Bill was already President, I get it, but if having a family member be President disqualified you from also serving, can we go back and retroactively unelect George W. Bush, Franklin Roosevelt, and John Quincy Adams?  I realize sons and cousins/in-laws aren't the same thing as spouses, but family ties are family ties.

To Err is Human
We all make mistakes.  Some of us certainly make bigger, costlier, and more public mistakes than others, so trying to compare mistakes is a fool's errand.  What really matters is how we respond to our mistakes, what we learn from them, and whether or not we repeat them.

Third Parties
If ever there was a year for a third party revolt, it might be this year.  Both Trump and Clinton are tremendously disliked, and sometime since 2012, Gary Johnson developed a sense of humor.  He's a likable enough guy and has some bona fide governing experience.  I think the fundamental Libertarian message of "don't tell people how to live their lives and keep your hands off our money" would probably appeal to more people if they were aware of it.

Al Gore 2.0?
No one questions Hillary's intelligence and work ethic.  Even Republicans admit she was a great Senator.  She's shown a lifelong passion for a couple issues, such as universal health care and childhood education.  My biggest concern here is that she's a doer and not necessarily a leader, somewhat like Al Gore, who was tremendously passionate about climate change and technology, but lacked the drive to lead on other issues.  There was a great line in the TV show Commander in Chief (not at all coincidentally about the first female president) where Donald Sutherland's (in his slimiest pre-Hunger Games politician role) speaker of the house asks Geena Davis's vice president why she wants to be president.  When she hestitates for a second, he pounces with something like "if it's not because you want the power, you don't want it badly enough."  Ever since Bill's presidency, Hillary's made no secret that she wants to be president, I just question if she wants it for the right reasons and whether she has the fire and ambition to lead the entire country on multiple high-level policy issues simultaneously instead of being able to drill down and focus on the nitty-gritty of just one or two.

Are You Being Sarcastic, Dude?
I don't even know anymore.  If no one knows when you're joking and when you're being earnest, is it your problem of theirs?  If you're a billionaire businessman, the answer is probably that it doesn't even matter because you can buy your way out of whatever you want.  If you're the leader of a major nation, it's everyone's problem.  Trump has said his quip about asking Russia to hack Hillary's email was sarcasm, and his previous quote about shooting someone on 5th Avenue was equally not meant to be serious, but at what point does his inability to help us differentiate in the moment become a major problem?  International politics requires tact and discretion, two things which Trumps seems to not only abhor, but is perhaps incapable of.