President Trump, a flawed man, that’s true,
Like each of us, with faults in plain view.
Yet judgment, I leave to God up above,
For I do not seek another pastor’s love.
I cast my ballot for political sway,
Not for a shepherd in golden array.
I only weigh what’s good and right,
To defend America’s moral might!
But the defiant minority—them I must judge—
So abhorrent are the sins in which they indulge.
And I blame the progressives; the liberals;
The deviant Democrats who enable them all.
In retrospect,
My self-righteousness is a means to an end.
I just can’t comprehend why, they don’t believe,
That my vote will make America great again!
In choices deep, we’re stuck in our plight,
Navigating shadows in a flickering light.
Once together, now divided and stark,
As we march into dusk and then into dark.
I see the tricks, the games populists play,
Yet their “bait and switch” doesn’t dismay.
Their culture wars, a path to power’s claim,
A chance for evangelicals, a stake for fame.
The scales are tipped; the path is clear,
My Republican Party, I must endear.
Between the rhetoric and lies that arise,
I only have one option that I can recognize.
In this campaign, I stand at the gate,
Yearning for discourse, but anticipating hate.
Each side—entrenched in their echoing walls,
While logic and reason fade and then fall.
The narrative is spun in a web of mistrust,
Where hope for compromise is lost in the dust.
With every tweet, every cheer from the crowd,
Divisions deepen, and tensions grow loud.
In every encounter, an opportunity is missed,
And in the clash of voices, the one is dismissed.
As I build my defenses, society isolates,
Driven by fear, community disintegrates.
With a burdened heart, I search for a sign,
But only find barriers, where unity can’t bind.
So I’ll speak my truth, yet wonder if in vain:
From this ideological jail, can I break the chain?
No longer can I hope for a bridge to unite;
In this island of contention—assimilate or fight!
As I search for answers, made so complex,
I’m left with the question: which path won’t vex?
In the end, I wonder what future we’ll meet,
As the goodwill of humanity begins to deplete.
In a world so confused, where conspiracies abound,
I search for connection, but refuse to turn it around.
By: ElRoyPoet, 2024
Trump’s not the problem. He’s a symbol of 4 bigger issues.
How Trump Duped Conservatives and White Evangelicals into Believing He Was on Their Team
Donald Trump’s ascent to the presidency in 2016 marked a seismic shift in American politics, particularly among conservative and evangelical voters. Utilizing a cunning blend of populist rhetoric, celebrity status, and opportunistic alliances, Trump, with the help of his Sycophants, successfully constructed an image that resonated with these groups. Trump and his allies deceived conservatives and evangelicals into believing that he was aligned with their values, this deception was backed by persuasive messaging and strategic manipulation of media narratives.
Sycophantic Support and Strategic Alliances
• Creation of a Loyal Base: Trump’s rhetoric often appealed to long-standing grievances within conservative and evangelical circles. By positioning himself as an outsider opposed to the “establishment, the political elites or the swamp” he cultivated an image of authenticity.
• Playing to Religious Sentiment: Trump made overtures to evangelicals, emphasizing his commitment to traditional values, freedom of religion, and appointing conservative judges. This strategic alignment gave many the impression that he was representing their interests in government.
• Manipulation of Media Narratives: Trump’s relationship with networks like Fox News played a significant role in shaping narratives that aligned with his support base. By frequently interacting with such platforms, he fostered a sense of trust among his followers, making it easier for them to accept his often-unorthodox statements and policies.
The Dangerous Generalization of MAGA Voters
One poignant perspective is captured in a fake quote often attributed to Trump: “If I were to run for president, I’d run as a Republican. They’re the dumbest group of voters in the country. They believe anything on Fox News. I could lie and they’d still eat it up. I bet my numbers would be terrific.” This statement, encapsulates a troubling generalization of MAGA voters:
• Disregard for Critical Thinking: This sentiment illustrates a belief that the zeal of many conservative voters renders them susceptible to misinformation. This perception labels them as uncritical and easily swayed, fostering a divide between the informed and the misled.
• Echo Chambers: Many Trump supporters regularly consumed media that reinforced their beliefs, contributing to an echo chamber where dissenting ideas were disregarded. This isolation made them more vulnerable to the types of misleading information that were prevalent in Trump’s messaging.
• Cult of Personality: The fervent loyalty displayed by MAGA voters transformed Trump into a messianic figure for many, leading them to overlook contradictions in his policies or actions. The mantra of “Make America Great Again” resonated deeply, crafting a narrative of reclaiming lost values rather than critically engaging with the reality of his governance.
Impact on Conservative Ideals and Values
• Shifting Political Alliances: Trump’s tenure has seen a significant shift in what constitutes conservative values. Once a party that emphasized fiscal responsibility and traditional moral standards, the Republican Party has adopted an increasingly populist and confrontational stance.
• Long-Term Consequences for Evangelicals: The alignment of evangelical leaders with Trump raised questions about their commitment to Biblical principles. Many religious leaders overlooked Trump’s personal conduct to support his policies, leading to a re-evaluation of what it means to be Christian in America today.
• Internal Divisions: While Trump solidified an energetic base, his presidency also created fractures within the conservative movement. Traditionalist conservatives found themselves at odds with his populist twist, leading to existential debates about the party’s future.
In conclusion, Donald Trump’s orchestration of a narrative that resonated with conservatives and evangelicals was a masterclass in political manipulation. By skillfully leveraging loyalty, media influence, and religious sentiment, he crafted an identity that allowed him to deceive many into believing that he was on their side.
The implications of this misrepresentation extend beyond mere political allegiance; they challenge the foundational beliefs of conservatism and raise vital concerns about the permanence and longevity of our American democracy. As the landscape of American politics continues to evolve, it is imperative that the Republican base remains vigilant, fostering a culture of critical thinking and discernment rather than blind allegiance to populist leaders and an autocracy in the making.
How America will change if Trump wins
“The problem isn’t any one election in which a politician, who prefers socialism over individual freedom, prevails. It’s the extremist view—left or right—that an electoral victory is a mandate to dismantle the institutional framework that protects minorities and blocks the ambitions of absolutism. Extremists organize the aggrieved and work to stir their passions, creating conflicts on every level and undermining security. Media, the arts, academia, science, political activism and the judicial system become illiberal weapons. Nations don’t vote for despotism. But looking back at Lenin and Hitler, Mr. Hinds shows that when a nation is seduced into handing over broad discretion to a messianic figure, that nation seals its fate. “Leaders play a crucial role in unifying people around a destructive idea. But such leaders emerge in response to a demand from the people,” Mr. Hinds writes. “Hatred can turn populism into destructiveness,” he observes. But then, that’s the point—as can be seen in Chile. The extremists who managed the victory of President-elect Gabriel Boric last week want to destroy Chile’s institutions on grounds that they are constructs of the establishment. Chile is very different from Venezuela. But Chile’s activists aren’t different from their fellow travelers in Venezuela who backed the democratic election of Hugo Chávez in 1998, or the extremists in Bolivia who championed the candidacy of Evo Morales in 2005. Sandinista Daniel Ortega also returned to the presidency via the ballot box. What began in each case as promises by a strongman to make society fairer has ended in tears.” Excerpt from: O’Grady, Mary Anastasia, “When Populism Turns to Tyranny” Cato Institute.
How Republican voters provide cover for Trump
In the contemporary political landscape, individuals often grapple with the moral and ethical implications of their choices, particularly when it comes to voting. The case of Donald Trump serves as a focal point for this dilemma, where personal flaws and political efficacy collide. While it is undeniable that Trump has many flaws, it is essential to recognize that these imperfections do not preclude him from serving as a viable candidate for the presidency. This argument aims to explore the complexities involved in political decision-making, the stigmatization of marginalized groups, and the pragmatic implications of party allegiance.
Flaws in Leadership
First and foremost, it is crucial to acknowledge that all individuals, including political leaders, possess flaws. Trump, like any other human being, exhibits a range of personal shortcomings. Political leaders frequently face scrutiny, not merely for their beliefs but also for their character. Nevertheless, the question remains: should we allow personal flaws to overshadow political effectiveness? According to voting surveys, approximately half of Americans express a preference for candidates who achieve results, even if they do not align perfectly with their moral compass (the moral state of American politics). This suggests that a significant portion of the electorate prioritizes pragmatic governance over idealistic principles.
The Pragmatic Vote
As a voter, one’s overriding responsibility is to select a leader who can effectively govern and implement policies that align with their values and beliefs. The assertion of not voting for a “pastor” but rather for a president reflects a common sentiment among evangelicals who seek pragmatic solutions to pressing political and cultural issues. The notion of separating personal moral judgment from political decision-making allows for a more strategic evaluation of candidates and their policies. In this case, Trump’s alignment with Republican ideals serves as an avenue to promote policies that resonate with a particular constituency.
Moreover, the Democratic Party’s emphasis on social programs designed to assist minorities and the disenfranchised carries its own complexities. While these programs are rooted in compassion and a desire to uplift marginalized communities, they often face criticism for perpetuating dependency rather than fostering self-sufficiency. Research indicates that well-meaning social welfare policies can sometimes lead to unintended negative consequences, including a lack of motivation to seek employment or self-improvement. This can inadvertently stigmatize those who benefit from these programs, leading to a broader discussion on personal responsibility and societal expectations.
Economic Policies and Party Allegiance
In evaluating the comparative merits of Trump’s policies versus those of the Democratic Party, one can argue that economic stability and growth remain paramount concerns for many voters. Supporters of Trump underscore his focus on boosting the economy through tax cuts and deregulation, which proponents claim fosters job creation and bolsters individual financial independence. Conversely, Democratic policies, which often involve increased taxation and regulatory measures, may be perceived as hampering economic freedom for the middle class. For voters who prioritize economic concerns, choosing Trump may seem like the only logical option.
Acknowledging one’s free will in choosing a candidate further emphasizes the importance of individual agency in the political process. Voters possess the autonomy to assess candidates based on their policies and strategies rather than solely on their personal characteristics. This freedom allows for a more nuanced understanding of what constitutes “good” and “right” in a political context, ultimately guiding one’s decision-making process.
In summary, the complexities of political leadership expose the multifaceted nature of voters’ choices. While it is essential to recognize the flaws inherent in all individuals, including those in leadership roles, it is equally critical to assess the pragmatic implications of political decisions. The stigmatization of minorities and the disenfranchised in political rhetoric draws attention to deeper societal issues and necessitates a response grounded in both compassion and pragmatism. Ultimately, voters must navigate these complexities, weighing their values against the functional effectiveness of the political leaders they choose to support.
I can’t bring myself to vote for Trump. But let me tell you why other conservatives can.
The concept of “bait and switch” generally refers to a deceptive marketing tactic where a company advertises a product at a low price but then tries to persuade customers to purchase a different, often more expensive, item. In the context of Trump’s relationship with the Republican base, the term can refer to the idea that he campaigned on a set of promises and ideals that diverged from traditional Republican principles, creating a perception of loyalty among his supporters while shifting the party’s platform in ways that some believe were unexpected or contradictory. Here are a few ways in which critics argue Trump executed a “bait and switch” with the Republican base:
1. Populist Promises vs. Traditional Policies
• Campaign Promises: During his campaign, Trump positioned himself as an outsider who would disrupt the political establishment and advocate for the “forgotten” American worker. This included promises to bring back manufacturing jobs, oppose trade deals perceived as detrimental, and support populist economic policies.
• Shifting Policies: Critics argue that once in office, Trump’s policies often favored corporate interests over the working class, including tax cuts that disproportionately benefited wealthy individuals and corporations. Many supporters felt that this shift did not align with the anti-establishment, worker-centered rhetoric he had campaigned on.
2. Rhetoric vs. Presidential Conduct
• Style and Tone: Trump’s campaign was characterized by a confrontational and populist style, often using language that resonated with many in the Republican base. His promise to “drain the swamp” was particularly appealing.
• Changing Norms: As president, his approach often included controversial rhetoric and actions that departed from traditional Republican decorum and principles, leading some to feel disillusioned about the party’s direction under his leadership.
3. Foreign Policy
• America First: Trump’s “America First” policy resonated with voters who felt neglected by internationalist policies traditionally supported by Republicans. He criticized NATO and other alliances, claiming they were not in America’s best interest.
• Mixed Messaging: While some in the Republican base appreciated the new direction, others were concerned about the apparent isolationism and lack of support for longstanding allies and international commitments, leading to divisions within the party.
4. Judicial Appointments
• Promises and Expectations: One of Trump’s key promises was to appoint conservative judges, which he delivered on with the appointment of three Supreme Court justices and numerous federal judges.
• Shifts in Focus: While this was a significant boon for traditional conservative voters, some argued that his administration’s overall focus on culture war issues and executive actions diverted attention from these judicial achievements.
5. Nationalism vs. Traditional Conservatism
• Populist Nationalism: Trump’s embrace of nationalist rhetoric and policies, including immigration restrictions and focus on “American exceptionalism,” represented a departure from traditional conservative ideals of free-market economics and a more open, internationalist approach.
• Impact on Base: While many in the Republican base rallied around this nationalism, others who identified strongly with conservatism expressed concern that these shifts undermined the foundational principles of the party.
6. Divisive Politics
• Polarization: Trump’s presidency was marked by a high degree of political polarization, rallying his base around opposition to Democrats and the media rather than uniting the party around traditional conservative principles and policies.
• Bait and Switch Perception: Many supporters who were drawn to the idea of reform and change in Washington may have felt betrayed by the increasing division and hostility that characterized his administration.
While many supporters embraced Trump’s message and policies, there are compelling arguments that he executed a “bait and switch” by transitioning from an anti-establishment populist narrative to a presidency that at times aligned more with established interests, including corporate and nationalist priorities. This has led to ongoing tensions within the Republican Party as it grapples with its identity and future direction, particularly as Trump’s influence continues to shape its trajectory.
Trump embodies certain core values and policies that align with traditional Republican conservatism, especially in economic matters and appointing conservative judges. However, his populist approach, emphasis on nationalism, unconventional rhetoric, and occasional departures from established conservative principles reflect a shift within the Republican Party.
Overall, while Trump has provided a new identity and direction for a significant part of the Republican base, he has also challenged and transformed elements of the traditional conservative platform, leading to an ongoing debate about the future of conservatism in the party. The implications of these shifts are still being defined, particularly as the party navigates its post-Trump identity.
Why Conservatives and White Evangelicals traditionally vote Republican
The shift in public opinion toward the Republican Party, particularly the belief that it is better suited to improve the culture of society, is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon that has evolved over several decades. While identifying a single point of shift is challenging, several key historical events, cultural movements, and demographic changes have contributed to this transformation. Here’s a timeline and analysis of some significant moments and factors:
1. Civil Rights Movement (1960s)
• The Civil Rights Movement brought significant social change and awareness of racial injustices in the United States. Following this movement, the Democratic Party increasingly aligned itself with progressive social issues, which included advocating for civil rights and social justice policies. The Republican Party, particularly under leaders like Barry Goldwater and Richard Nixon, began to attract white voters in the South who felt disillusioned by the Democratic Party’s embrace of civil rights (the southern strategy).
2. The Rise of Conservatism (1970s-1980s)
• The election of Ronald Reagan in 1980 marked a significant turning point. Reagan’s presidency (1981–1989) championed conservative economic policies, a strong national defense, and traditional social values. His ability to connect with middle-class voters who felt threatened by social and economic changes helped solidify a conservative base that viewed the Republican Party as a defender of American values and interests.
3. Cultural Backlash and the “Culture Wars” (1980s-1990s)
• The term “culture wars” emerged in the late 20th century to describe the rising tensions in American society over issues like abortion, LGBTQ+ rights, and educational curriculum. Conservatives framed these issues as battles for the soul of America. Events such as the Supreme Court’s ruling on Roe v. Wade in 1973 galvanized the pro-life movement and solidified opposition to abortion as a key issue for Republicans.
4. Post-Cold War Era and Economic Change (1990s)
• The end of the Cold War marked a shift in priorities for the Republican Party, which began to focus more on domestic issues, emphasizing free-market economics and reducing the size of government. The perceived success of Republican policies in the 1980s led many to associate the GOP with prosperity and security.
5. Rise of the Religious Right (1980s-2000s)
• The Religious Right emerged as a powerful political force within the Republican Party, advocating for conservative stances on social issues, including family values and opposition to abortion. The alignment of evangelical Christians with the Republican Party further solidified perceptions that the GOP represented traditional American values.
6. The September 11 Attacks and National Security (2001)
• The events of September 11, 2001, shifted public focus toward national security and foreign policy, areas where the Republican Party was often viewed as stronger. The framing of the War on Terror and issues of immigration and national identity solidified conservative perspectives on safety, patriotism, and cultural cohesion.
7. Economic Recession of 2008
• The financial crisis and subsequent recession in 2008 led to a growing disillusionment with the Democratic Party, which was in power at the time. Many conservatives blamed government intervention for the crisis, which allowed Republicans to promote narratives of fiscal responsibility and deregulation as solutions to the economic downturn.
8. The Tea Party Movement (2009–2010)
• The rise of the Tea Party movement marked a resurgence of grassroots conservative activism, emphasizing limited government, reduced taxes, and traditional social values. This movement galvanized public opinion and brought a new wave of conservative candidates into the political mainstream, reinforcing the perception that the Republican Party was committed to cultural and fiscal conservatism.
9. Partisan Polarization and Media Dynamics (2010s)
• Increasing polarization in American politics, coupled with the rise of partisan media outlets, deepened ideological divides. Conservatives often turned to media that reinforced their views, shaping perceptions of the Republican Party as the defender of American values against a perceived liberal overreach.
10. Donald Trump’s Presidency (2016–2020)
• Donald Trump’s election in 2016 marked a significant shift in the Republican Party, appealing to a base that felt left behind by globalization and demographic changes. His populist rhetoric and unconventional style attracted many voters who believed the establishment had failed them. This period also solidified the notion that the Republican Party represented a culture of resistance to progressive changes, further shaping public opinion.
11. Recent Trends (2020-Present)
• The COVID-19 pandemic and social justice movements, such as Black Lives Matter, have continued to polarize public opinion. Conservatives often view these movements as part of a broader progressive agenda that threatens traditional values. The Republican Party has capitalized on these sentiments to argue that it is the proper steward of societal culture.
The shift in public opinion regarding the Republican Party’s role in improving culture has been a gradual process influenced by historical events, socio-economic changes, and shifts in demographic and media landscapes. Over the decades, the party has redefined its identity and messaging in a way that resonates with many Americans who value traditional structures, economic opportunity, and a strong national identity. As America continues to evolve, this dynamic remains subject to change, influenced by both internal and external factors.
“If our democracy dies, the reason won’t be that Americans were too apathetic to save it; it will be that they voted it out of existence.” By: H. Scott Butler
Why Trump is partnering with Christian Nationalists
A neuroscientist explains why stupidity is an existential threat to America
“[MAGA] ignorance is not a motionless state. It’s an active accomplishment requiring an ever-vigilant understanding of what not to know.” Excerpt from: Routledge International Handbook of Ignorance Studies, Edited By Matthias Gross, Linsey McGoey [The fact is that more is required than just putting your head in the sand to provide cover for your cult leader. This is achieved by framing truth as ‘fake news’ and disregarding the constitution, in order to not be accused of being ‘woke’.]
Lawrence: Trumpism means ‘never having to say you’re sorry for being stupid’
“Motivated ignorance refers to willfully blinding oneself to facts. It’s choosing not to know. In many cases, for many people, knowing the truth is simply too costly, too psychologically painful, too threatening to their core identity. Nescience is therefore incentivized; people actively decide to remain in a state of ignorance. If they are presented with strong arguments against a position they hold, or compelling evidence that disproves the narrative they embrace, they will reject them. Doing so fends off the psychological distress of the realization that they’ve been lying to themselves and to others. …
In the case of MAGA world, the lies that Trump supporters believe, or say they believe, are obviously untrue and obviously destructive. Since 2016 there’s been a ratchet effect, each conspiracy theory getting more preposterous and more malicious. Things that Trump supporters wouldn’t believe or accept in the past have since become loyalty tests. Election denialism is one example. The claim that Trump is the target of “lawfare,” victim to the weaponization of the justice system, is another. …
Some of them are cynical and know better; others are blind to the cultlike world to which they belong. Still others have convinced themselves that Trump, although flawed, is the best of bad options. It’s a ‘binary choice’, they say, and so they have talked themselves into supporting arguably the most comprehensively corrupt man in the history of American politics, certainly in presidential politics.” Excerpt form: Ex-GOP speechwriter excoriates Trump’s MAGA: They prefer to be ignorant
“Polarization is a choice, not a destiny, it’s amplified by what the media chooses to highlight and what it finds uninteresting. For the rest of us, it’s fed by choosing to stick with our tribe instead of being open to other people and perspectives, even if they make us uncomfortable.” By: Steven Law
“Though liberty is established by law, we must be vigilant, for liberty to enslave us is always present under that same liberty. Our Constitution speaks of the ‘general welfare of the people’. Under that phrase all sorts of excesses can be employed by [authoritarian] tyrants—to make us bondmen.” By: Marcus Tullius Cicero
“The world has enough for everyone’s need, but not enough for everyone’s greed.” By: Mahatma Gandhi
“Ignorance breeds fear. We fear those things we don’t understand. If we don’t put a lid on that fear and keep that fear in check, that fear in turn will breed hatred because we hate those things that frighten us. “If we don’t keep that hatred in check, that hatred in turn will breed destruction.” By: Daryl Davis
“Anger and intolerance are the twin enemies of correct understanding.” By: Mahatma Gandhi
Let Me Explain Why Trump’s Core White Supporters Won’t EVER Turn Against Him
The Complexity of Political Division: Poem Analysis Essay
In contemporary society, political discourse often evokes strong emotions, and this is particularly evident in the poem through its thoughtful and contemplative verses, the poem explores themes of political judgment, societal division, and the struggle for unity, providing insight into the complexities of the modern political landscape.
Flawed Figures and Personal Judgment
At the crux of the poem is the acknowledgment that political leaders, including former President Trump, are fundamentally flawed. The poem opens with a recognition of human imperfection, emphasizing that everyone has faults, thereby setting the tone for a more nuanced discussion about leadership and accountability. The speaker posits that judgment should ultimately be left to a higher power, suggesting a sense of resignation or a call for compassion. This perspective challenges the reader to consider the broader implications of casting judgment on political figures, each of whom represents diverse interests and backgrounds.
The Role of Voting and Political Sway
The poem transitions to the act of voting, describing it as a mechanism for political sway rather than a quest for spiritual leadership. The speaker emphasizes the importance of free will in making informed choices to defend the values and issues facing America. This assertion highlights a growing political sentiment where voters seek to assert their preferences through elections, often motivated by immediate concerns rather than profound ideological affiliations.
The Perception of the Opposition
As the poem progresses, it addresses perceptions of the “defiant minority”—a group characterized by the speaker as morally flawed. The speaker attributes blame to progressive and liberal ideologies, portraying a deep-seated animosity towards those perceived as deviants undermining societal values. This sentiment reflects a common theme in political discourse: the tendency to vilify the opposition, which can further entrench divisions rather than foster dialogue and mutual understanding.
The Struggle for Unity Amid Divisions
Moving on, the poem explores the disintegration of a once-unified society into starkly divided factions. The imagery of wandering into dusk mirrors the growing darkness of political and social division. The speaker expresses concerns about the erosion of logic and reason, replaced by echo chambers that reinforce existing beliefs. This phenomenon is indicative of modern political environments influenced by social media, where discourse is often superficial, and opposing viewpoints are dismissed rather than engaged with.
The Impact of Mistrust and Isolation
Continuing this theme, the poem delves into the complexities stemming from a web of mistrust, which leads to further isolation. It suggests that while people may seek connection and understanding, pervasive divisions fueled by social media exacerbate tensions. The lines addressing “every tweet” and “every cheer from the crowd” underscore the relentless nature of communication in the digital age, hinting that rapid-fire exchanges can deepen divides instead of bridging gaps.
The Quest for Understanding
The speaker’s quest for understanding leads to a realization of isolation—a sentiment echoed in the call for “a sign” that symbolizes hope for unity. The notion of an “ideological jail” represents the constricted thinking that can accompany rigid political alignment, indicating a yearning for a way out of divisive politics.
A Call for Reflection
In its concluding verses, the poem calls for critical reflection on the future of political discourse. It poses the unsettling question of whether a genuine bridge to unity can be constructed amid ongoing contention. Ultimately, the poem implores readers to consider the fragility of community ties, cautioning against succumbing to conspiratorial thinking while misplacing trust in emotionally charged environments.
Poem Prompt: “Why I’m voting Republican and what people see in former President Trump’s MAGA plans, the virtues, the specifics. Trump is a man with many flaws, as we all are. I don’t sit in judgment of him — that’s between him and God. But God did give me free choice to reason what I think is good and right, and when it comes to a choice between Trump and the Democratic hierarchy, there is no choice.” Excerpt from: Column: Why I’m voting for Trump
elroypoet.blog 