Home arrow Commentary arrow op-ed arrow Predicting the Winner of the Presidential Election
Dec 31 2007
Predicting the Winner of the Presidential Election | Print |  E-mail
Op_ed
By Rosemarie Jackowski   

Translation

Predicting the Winner of the Presidential ElectionImage

Pundits, poll-takers, and politicians have taken over the airwaves. The operation of our government has become more and more like a game - the terminology of the "race" - questions about who the "winner" will be.

Since I successfully predicted the outcome of the previous presidential election, I will go out on a limb again. Last time I predicted that the winner would be the candidate that most voters would choose as a beer-drinking partner.

The mood in the country is different this time around. Being a good beer-drinking buddy is no longer the most important consideration. Things have not been going so well for many - lack of health care, mortgage foreclosures, a Congress that has been unresponsive to the voters.

Sorry folks, you have been screwed again by those you voted for. Anytime you have been the victim of a con, a lesson should be learned. The typical US voter is notoriously a slow learner when it comes to affairs of the State. Even now, as the pundits lead the masses down the garden path, there is very little outcry.

There have been blips of resistance. Talk about Impeachment seems to be counter-productive because it trivializes the crimes. A movement to arrest the Bush/Cheney gang has been started in Vermont. The movement is based on the Principle of Universal Jurisdiction and deserves support, but there is a downside. It exonerates the Congress - those who have abdicated their Constitutional responsibility and who are now cowardly hiding under the skirts of the Executive Branch. We have a "Don't blame me, I didn't do it, the dog ate my homework" Congress.

Many candidates say they voted for the war because they were lied to. The voters deserve a better explanation than that. Any candidate who is that gullible is dangerous, and should never be in any position of leadership.

Kucinich has been silenced by the media. Shunning by the Press has been a problem for years. Think Nader. The control of the debates has been taken over by the one-party system. Choice, what choice? Why not have three or six or ten political parties - it would energize the masses, it would allow other viewpoints to be expressed.

There are many deficiencies in the system. For one thing, too many people vote. How about a campaign that would encourage people who have not studied the issues to voluntarily stay home on election day. Their votes cancel out the votes of those who have done their homework. Then the inevitable happens. Within days of the election, voters' remorse sets in and then four years of national whining begins.

The ultimate responsibility for the current mess is the voter. Forget Bush and the Congress. The voters could have voted for other candidates if they had really wanted to.  Searching out third, fourth, and fifth party candidates is not a difficult process.  Voting for an Independent candidate is an empowering experience.

Maybe the idea of political parties should be re-examined. The system is not working. Why not have a system that would choose leaders by a national lottery? It might result in having a president who actually could represent the people. It would raise the possibility of opening up the Presidency to those who are not wealthy. There would be no need for campaign finance reform or term limits. Imagine having a farmer, or teacher, or nurse as our president. How refreshing that would be. My Aunt Helen would make a better president than any I have seen in my lifetime.

This prediction of the outcome of the next election is not based on the pundits, but on what ordinary citizens have been saying on talk radio. It is based on letters to the editor in newspapers across the country. It is based on the current mood of the voters.

The news is not good. Albany, New York - Hazleton, Pennsylvania and other cities around the US have exhibited a mob mentality when dealing with the immigration issue. The candidates know this and each has taken a public position on Immigration.

The fear of terrorists is also a hot button issue. How often have we heard that we have to keep killing them "over there" so we don't have to kill them here. Every voter remembers 9/11. Very few remember that more US citizens die every year from lack of health care than were killed on 9/11.

Paranoia and xenophobia will rule the next election.

The winner of the next presidential election will be the candidate who is most willing to abuse immigrants and also most willing to bomb those in other countries. For the sake of humanity, I hope that this prediction is wrong.

Rosemarie Jackowski is an advocacy journalist living in the USA. She was arrested, tried, and convicted for her participation in a peaceful protest of the war. The conviction was appealed and overturned in the State Supreme Court. The government then announced plans to retry the case. Finally, after years of legal proceedings, all charges were dropped. She can be reached at: dissent[at]sover.net Articles by Rosemarie Jackowski at MWC News http://mwcnews.net/rosemarie-jackowski 

This_Category
Category:: Op_ed

Recommend this article...




Did you enjoy this article? Please bookmark it onto:
Digg!Reddit!Del.icio.us!Newsvine!Blogmarks!Yahoo!

Quote this article on your site | Views: 1141

Comments (23)
RSS comments
1. 31-12-2007 19:03
People who DO study the issues GET INVOL
They don't just sit on the sidelines and wait for a stupid "pollster" for the "Obsolete-Stream-Media" to call them on their land-line phone. See which candidates the KNOWLEDGEABLE and ACTIVE people in the US are spending their efforts: Candidate Meetup Maps Comparison
Guest
2. 31-12-2007 22:19
jkhutaman
Thanks for the comment. Could it be that you are a Republican/Democrat? If so, that is exactly my point. It is time to stop thinking in the Repub/dem box.  
I know that Ron Paul supporters are enthusiastic and active, but I have found many of them to be lacking in knowledge about the reasons that so many in the U$A are poor, homeless, and without access to health care.
Guest
dissent@sover.netNOSPAM! ">rosemarie jackowski
3. 01-01-2008 05:20
American Murdochracy
I hope you will be wrong Rosemarie but unfortunately you probably won't be.  
 
In Australia we had elections in November 2007 in which the neo-Bush-ite Rudd Labor Party (Oz "Democrats") thrashed the Bush-lackey, Bush-ite conservative Coalition.  
 
However Murdoch owns 70% of the city daily newspapers; there is an ignorant, brain-washed , greedy public; the lying, racist mainstream media steadfastly IGNORE the horrendous Indigenous deaths in the Occupied Iraqi and Afghan Territories (post-invasion excess deaths 1.5-2 million and 3-6 million, respectviely); Labor leader Rudd played a game of patriotic "me-too-ism" with a veneer of "reason" and "evidence-based policy" to keep the Media happy. 
 
Rudd Labor has been in power for a month and I have been writing a series of Rudd Australia Report Cards (Rudd has demanded progress Report Cards of his Ministers). I have published the first 3 (IGNORED by the Mainstream media of course) and Rudd Labor has FAILED: 1. Many but NOT all of our forces will leave Iraq but only by mid-2008 to keep Ameerica happy; 2. for all its fine Climate Change talk Rudd Labor helped Bush scuttle the Bali Conference and its stated policies will actually INCREASE climate criminal Australia's already HUGE, world-leading annual per capita CO2 pollution by 50% by 2050; Rudd Labor will continue to have Australia participate in the Afghan Genocide (see: Rudd Oz & Iraqi Genocide; Bali-wrecker Rudd Oz & climate genocide; Rudd Oz & Afghan Genocide). 
 
As well illustrated by Australia's neo-Bush-ite Religious Right Rudd (R3) and America's Religious Right Democrat Al Gore - whose President Clinton to Gore's VP actually did NOT sign Kyoto and who is tainted with 1.2 million dead Iraqi kids from Sanctions - both the Australian Murdochracy and the American Murdochracy play a game of "good cop, bad cop" , "nice" Rudd to awful Bush-ite Howard, "nice" Gore, Obama, Hilary etc to the awful Racist Religious Right Republican (R4) Bush-ites. 
 
Even if you're wrong Rosemarie and the Dems win it won't make too much difference and the killing will continue at home and abroad under different guises (20,000 American infants and 0.5 million Iraqi and Afghan infants will CONTINUE to die avoidably EACH YEAR under Hilary as under Bush and Dr Rice aka Dr Death) - UNLESS of course Dennis Kucinich gets up, but that seems a faint hope in the corrupt, dishonest, racist big-money-buys-TV-time-and-votes American Murdochracy.
Guest
gpolya@optusnet.com.auNOSPAM! ">Dr Gideon Polya
4. 01-01-2008 15:43
Dems are no better
Dr.Polya...Thanks for the comment. I have been following some of the news about the election in Australia. Seems to be a world-wide death wish going on. 
I believe that the Dems are at least as bad as the Republicans - maybe they are even worse because the Dems pretend to be anti-war but anyone who checks the voting record of Congress can see that that is not so. 
I am saddened if the news is correct in reporting that Nader has endorsed Edwards. Many Nader supporters will feel betrayed if he endorses ANY democrat or republican.
Guest
dissent@sover.netNOSPAM! ">rosemarie jackowski
5. 01-01-2008 21:42
Dems are no better
Kucinich as president would be a total waste: he has to get past a Congress that won't do anything to disburb its money base. Kucinich as legislator has more power, more mouth in his consciousness raising. But why bother? The cogs in the system are as broken as the system: replacing one with another only perpetuates the broken system. Anyone notice how the communist countries, all dictatorships and people-oppressive, are called Red States AND all Republican states in America are called Red States...and the US map looks red all over? The few who are aware of what's going on do anything, outside of complaining; when most have no idea what's going on, due to media hype, there's no possibility of an uprising: "That's taking place? Oh, I don't think so. I don't see it." That kind of mentality. While America becomes dulled and comatoform, somee people here in China are questioning, albeit slowly and carefully; the young kids are asking "why" questions and questions of the meaning of life. Just an interesting observation from my limited experience.
Registered
6. 02-01-2008 05:55
Dems are no better
Abuse immigrants? I haven't seen any candidate on either side even mention immigrants. Only two candidates I know of want to prosecute criminals who sneak here under the guise of being immigrants, giving immigrants a bad name.  
My vote will be for the guy that wants to aggressively enforce our existing laws about illegally entering this country.  
That is the only issue that matters, if it is not dealt with nothing else will matter.
Guest
cbriggs@ee.netNOSPAM! ">SKEETER
7. 02-01-2008 06:45
Dems are no better
Gee, cbriggs, that means all us black and white and yellow people will be tossed out because we're ALL ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. We stole the land and killed the people...all in God's name. Who's giving whom a bad name?
Registered
8. 02-01-2008 15:49
Dems are no better
That is a bad spin and a lie. Most of our ancestors came here when there either was no immigration laws or according to the existing laws. Very few people here have ancestors that came here against the existing laws.  
Not to mention most that came here in the past already had relatives here that supported them when they came, or had some other means of self support and didn't have to come here and abuse our social systems.  
Either way, for the first time in 35 years of voting I will have to vote for a republican for president because of this issue. Like MANY other democrats will be doing.
Guest
cbriggs@ee.netNOSPAM! ">SKEETER
9. 02-01-2008 17:53
Dems are no better
So...if there are no "existing laws" it's alright to maim and kill and rape and steal, am I reading your logic correctly? Your argument is specious. It slides around the issue. Your assumption is that if it was before US law, then there's no problem and all's cool. As if to say, there's no civilization before the US. Because immigration happened before a law was passed about immigration, it wasn't immigration. Yep. Yore raht. That's damn goo-ood logic an it shore don' make no diffrunce whut kinda govmint yo git, it's gonna be whatchu deserve.
Registered
10. 02-01-2008 19:08
Dems are no better
I didn't say all of that, I simply said most of our ancestors are not illegal immigrants. Which is a fact. And it is a lie to say they are not. Some of the original settlers may have been IMMORAL immigrants , but that is a different topic. Mine were not, my ancestors both came here legally and morally and were indigenous.  
My statement still stands. And I am still voting FOR citizens and AGAINST criminals.
Guest
11. 02-01-2008 20:42
We are criminals
Skeeter...There are NO innocent citizens of the USA. All who participate in any way in the economy, help to support an illegal war of occupation. We are all in violation of treaties and are in violation of International Law. We ARE criminals. International law requires us to resist the illegal acts of our government.  
 
Nuremberg Principle IV 
 
"The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him."
Guest
dissent@sover.netNOSPAM! ">rosemarie jackowski
12. 02-01-2008 23:32
We are criminals
You can use all the justifications you want, but the law is the law. Illegals are criminals, and should be run back to where the came from, and the dude that promises to do that gets my vote.  
Using your logic I should be able to rape and rob all I want. Because after all, my ancestors might have. Who knows?  
If you really felt so strongly that this country really does not belong to you you would go back to where your ancestors were indigenous. That isn't brain surgery.
Guest
cbriggs@ee.netNOSPAM! ">SKEETER
13. 03-01-2008 00:11
We are criminals
Now, if that isn't good fascist logic! I heard that concerning hippies in the 60's nd 70's. Ahhh...how little mentality changes. Your logic is still slipping but, even so, we do rape and kill and maim and murder and commit mayhem, as in the past, as with our ancestors and we do it for the same reason very many of them did: in the name of God. Make me vomit! 
 
What, really, have you done that's positive? That's a strike against oppression? Ever put your life and/or your job on the line for what you believe? 
 
You're hiding behind rhetoric and slogans.
Registered
14. 03-01-2008 01:30
We are criminals
I am one of those hippies, thank you. That doesn't mean I completely despise this country and want it to become total anarchy.  
I do not use rhetoric or slogans, I seek out my own info and come up with my own conclusions. Which is why I feel comfortable jumping on the right side of this issue regardless of which side of the fence it is considered to be on. 
Being a liberal doesn't mean I have to have my politics and religion dictated to me any more than it would if I was a conservative.  
And, I am a law abiding citizen, and will have no problem on judgement day answering to my Maker.  
Entering this country without permission is against the law. There are reasons for that. Reasons such as possible terrorists using criminal aliens as a trojan horse. Drug smugglers. Those carrying diseases that were previously eradicated here or never a problem here. We have an immigration policy for more than one reason, and I agree with our policies. Those policies make sure immigrants are safe when they come here as well as make them safe AFTER they are here from those with ill intent who have no respect for our legal system. Immigrants benefit from policies that keep undesirables out as much as we do.  
And again, I will vote for the guy who upholds them.
Guest
cbriggs@ee.netNOSPAM! ">SKEETER
15. 03-01-2008 20:59
You make my point !
Skeeter...you make my point even better than I did. Immigration is really a hot button issue with you and man you do seem paranoid and xenophobic. It is important to remember WHY the immigrants are crossing the border. The CIA has been killing them in their own country. USA corporations have been raping their natural resources. NAFTA has all but destroyed their economy. So I ask you, who is it that is really breaking the law?
Guest
dissent@sover.netNOSPAM! ">rosemarie jackowski
16. 03-01-2008 23:28
You make my point !
Linguistically, coupling terrorist with immigrant, as Skeeter has done, is buying into the Bush-Neocon rhetoric while, at the same time, confusing the issue. Is it immigrants you're talking about? or is it terrorism you're talking about? The two are not the same. When you keep making the same argument over and over again, you are not thinking and, more importantly, not engaging in argumentation or debate. 
 
Look at it this way Skeeter: when you've finally gotten these immigrants out of the US, who's going to do those kinds of jobs? Not any "self-respecting" American, I can tell you--that's why they immigrants come here, for the jobs Americans WON'T do that need to get done. They don't take any jobs away from us white folk--because that's who you're talking about, white folk--the corporations have done that quite adequately...and without any repercussions from the people they raped.
Registered
17. 03-01-2008 23:39
You make my point !
"paranoid and xenophobic" 
"coupling terrorist with immigrant" 
 
You guys are just reciting rhetoric. I am not paranoid, or "xenophobic" which seems to be the new buzz word for anyone who disagrees.  
And, I didn't couple "terrorist with immigrant" 
Immigrants are not even the issue, I am all for immigration. Entering this country illegally is a crime, and those who do so are not immigrants they are criminals.  
I am all for immigration. I am opposed to those who have no respect for our legal system.  
And an open door policy that the bush regime has implemented for their own economy destruction purposes abuses criminals flooding in here, it makes them underpayed slaves and exploits them, as well as exploits citizens of this country by sucking everyones compensation down.  
 
That open door policy makes us wide open to terrorism. And, it creates as I said, the perfect trojan horse.  
Saying as much does not couple immigrants with terrorism. It states the reality that allowing people to come in here criminally creates the perfect hiding place for those wishing us harm.
Guest
cbriggs@ee.netNOSPAM! ">SKEETER
18. 03-01-2008 23:52
You make my point !
"possible terrorists using criminal aliens" -- this doesn't couple terrorists with immigrants? Woah, baby! You speak a different English than I do. 
 
"Possible" terrorists will have a passport and a visa...or be homegrown, like the ones running the show lately. 
 
Running your life on "possible" is paranoia. There are so many possibilities for harm it's not possible to pay atention to them all and still live. "Possible" is fear-mongering. 
 
I don't--and I'd bet Rosemarie doesn't either--know what open door policy you're talking about. 
 
But...let's be very specific, very careful here...what is meant by illegal immigrants is MEXICANS, WETBACKS, SPICS and no one else. Another name for this is "racism."
Registered
19. 04-01-2008 13:17
You make my point !
Don't be so dramatic and alarmist. Get with reality and dump the hype and catch phrases.  
 
Facing reality is not paranoia. I don't run stopsigns because I know doind so can cause an accident. Do you call that paranoia?  
And, I don't use racial slurs, what is meant by criminal aliens is anyone who comes in here without permission, I don't care if they are Peruvian, Chinese, Russian, Swedish, or Welsh.  
Sounds to me like you are the one that resorts to racism. You are who seems to focus on nationality rather than behavior. I didn't mention nationality previous to this post.
Guest
20. 04-01-2008 14:25
Racism hiding behind the law...
Hiding behind words such as "legal' and "illegal" is just a ploy. There is no magic about something that is allowed or forbidden by the law. Slavery was legal. Did that make it right? Racism is racism no matter how you frame it.
Guest
dissent@sover.netNOSPAM! ">rosemarie jackowski
21. 04-01-2008 17:25
Racism hiding behind the law...
So you think I am racist against Swedes? And you think I am hiding?  
You are worse than the righties that call everyone who doesn't agree with them friends of Osama 
and unpatriotic.  
When you cannot debate an issue directly, as I have been doing, you try to sidetrack it on historical events or onto rhetorical name calling.  
The bottom line is, this isn't 1492 or 1895, and I can't go back in time and change what happened five minutes ago, let alone decades or centuries ago.  
I am here and now. The laws we have are here and now. If you don't like the laws, set out to change them. The boundary lines to nations are set. Want to change them? Fine. Want to make sure everyone goes back to where their ancestors were indigenous? Why don't we all just try to crowd back into the garden of Eden.  
Some arguments are just absurd. The map is what it is.  
The laws are what they are.  
In the mean time, I want to see them enforced. And if there is any of them I don't like I and I feel strongly enough about them will do my part to change them. By legal and moral means, not simply by defying them, which never works.
Guest
22. 04-01-2008 21:57
The Law
Skeeter, are you saying that you would not have helped any slaves that escaped from their Masters because that would be against the law? 
The point is this...there are also such concepts as Moral Law, International Law, Humanitarian Law, Treaty Derived Law, etc. You are picking and choosing which set of laws you like and ignoring other forms of law which are more important. You are trying to have it both ways saying that you respect the concept of Law while ignoring the other legal systems.  
Is there any nation that is currently in violation of more laws right now than the U$A. I recommend that you read ROUGUE STATE, authored by William Blum, former member of the U$A State Department.
Guest
dissent@sover.netNOSPAM! ">rosemarie jackowski
23. 04-01-2008 23:17
The Law
Often times, Rosemarie, people read through a filter; that is, they read (they see) what they want to read and not what the writer wrote. So far, in every response Skeeter's given, he's sidestepped the issue and, basically, said the same thing in different words...and then he goes off like a madman making connections that just simply don't exist: Swedes, Chinese, Russians, Peruvians,Welsh as illegal immigrants? Why then are these anti-immigrant (anti-themselves) people building fences along the Mexican border? It takes a passport and a visa from all those other countries;no Canadian wants to come here; there are jobs here for the Mexicans--who are very willingly hired by the businesses that need their kind of labor at indentured servant wages because whatever they're paid in the US is higher than no job in Mexico. So many of these kinds of thinkers can only see (are only led to see) one small aspect of a situation and neve bother with the associated causes and effects. When the US no longer has these spics and wetback and chinks and nigs to work the jobs no self-respecting white man would do, all those businesses will go under or move to another country creating more unemployment (because they do employ some white guys in management/operations/personnel) and more homeless and more in court to pay debts to IRS and Visa...and, probably, more crime of one sort or another and more deaths and higher medical costs since they'll all flock to the ERs to get the care they need under one social program or another...and, then,so many great white americans will have to go without more and more. Aside from the inhumanity of cutting people out of a living. How arrogant USians are to think other people's well-being and lives are worth less than theirs!
Registered

Write Comment
  • Please keep the topic of messages relevant to the subject of the article.
  • Personal verbal attacks will be deleted.
  • Please don't use comments to plug your web site. Such material will be removed.
  • Just ensure to *Refresh* your browser for a new security code to be displayed prior to clicking on the 'Send' button.
  • Keep in mind that the above process only applies if you simply entered the wrong security code.
Name:
E-mail
Homepage
Title:
BBCode:Web AddressEmail AddressBold TextItalic TextUnderlined TextQuoteCodeOpen ListList ItemClose List
Comment:



Code:* Code
I wish to be contacted by email regarding additional comments

Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.4


Tags:  Rosemarie Jackowski Presidential Election
 
< Prev Content   Next Content >
 

Translate

Enter Amount: