2016-10-25_12-38-28

EP11: For Whom I’m Voting, and Why (Unc)

We decided to do our own, individual podcasts to let you know for whom we’re voting, and why. This is Unc’s version of that. And whomever you decide to support in this election, it is crucial to GET OUT AND VOTE!

Show Notes

For whom I am voting, and why

If you’ve listened to any of our prior podcasts, you’ve probably heard us talk about how I consider myself a moderate conservative, and Brendon considers himself a moderate liberal. He and I have been talking about doing a show in which we would discuss who we intend to vote for, and why.

But as we thought more about that, for a variety of reasons, we decided it made more sense to record separate shows in which we would tell you our decisions, and share with you some of our reasons for making those decisions.

This podcast is intended to summarize my response to the most pressing, important question facing most Americans today: “For whom will you vote in the 2016 United States presidential election?”

First, I want to state that, in many respects, it’s unfortunately true that we’re faced with a classic “lesser of two evils” scenario. The candidates both come complete with relatively full sets of sets of baggage, and with closets relatively overflowing with skeletons.

That said, not all sets of baggage, and not all closets full of skeletons, have been created equally. In addition, lost in the maelstrom that is the 24/7/365 political news cycle is the fact that one, and only one, of the two primary candidates is significantly and uniquely qualified to effect the kind of sweeping, radical change necessary to get this country back on track and moving in the right direction.

For those reasons, and many others reasons that comprise the bulk of this opinion pice, on November 8, 2016, I will be casting my  vote for Donald J. Trump.

I know that many of you will probably stop listening at this point, but I would humbly ask that you keep listening, as I‘ve gone to fairly great lengths to be as objective as possible, and to do as much research as I could before reaching this decision. In various places within this piece, you’ll find I am quite critical of Trump.

As evidence of that, I prepared a “Scandal Scoresheet,” which summarizes all of the scandals for both candidates, and I did my best to lay out our findings with as little spin as possible. The truth of the matter is I learned quite a lot about BOTH candidates that I didn’t know before doing that research.

So, if you get nothing else out of this podcast, perhaps you might go to uncphew.com/scandal and download that document.

Those things said, here are my reasons for voting the way I intend to vote:

Because he has a proven record of success and accomplishment.

I think if people answered truthfully, and if he weren’t running for the highest office in the free world, a very high percentage of people would answer “Donald Trump” if they were posed with the question of “who’s the most successful living business person in America.” And even if Trump isn’t your #1—because maybe you thought of Bill Gates or William Buffet before you thought of Trump, and that’s totally reasonable—he’d still very likely be in the top 3 or, at worst, the top 5.

Does he have his share of business-related issues, challenges and even scandals? Yes, he does. And I’m not going to lie, he has more of those than I would prefer. From Trump University to Trump Institute to various anti-trust issues to even using undocumented workers to build his signature Trump Tower in NYC, he HAS been involved in a bunch of stuff, and some of it is quite unflattering.

But one thing I’ve learned from studying business the entirety of my adult life, and from founding or co-founding a few businesses that have done somewhat OK, is that almost every mega-successful CEO has more than their share of such baggage. And not only that, but the competition, and the very specific NATURE of the competition, at the level that Trump operates is way beyond what most of us can understand, appreciate or even fathom.

Pick any large company in the world and do a reasonable level of due diligence on them. What you will undoubtedly find is hundreds of examples of entanglements, controversies, disputes and lawsuits. It’s simply the nature of the beast once a company reaches a certain level of significance, success and profile. Why would we expect anything different in the case of an empire the size of Trump’s?

Ergo, even after taking all of the negatives into consideration, the guy is still among the very elite in terms of business success. Not just in America, but in the entire world.

And yes, I do know that his father loaned him money to kick off his career, but I would still argue that very few people could ever accomplish what he’s accomplished, even with the kind of head start he admittedly had. You simply cannot build an empire without a certain skill set, and there is no question in my mind that Trump has that specific skill set as much, if not more, than any other person alive at the moment.

He has taken that relatively modest beginning (something between $1 million and $14 million, depending on the source) and turned it into an empire worth at least $3 billion. From any perspective, those are extraordinary, spectacular results.

And the truth is that we need–desperately need–someone in charge of our government who actually understands business, finance and fiscal policy. We simply cannot sustain the level of debt that’s been built up over the years. Further, while America does occupy an unusual place in the world in terms of our historical generosity and largesse, and we should help other nations less fortunate than us, we simply can’t spend money internationally without first providing for our very pressing domestic needs.

Without big change in terms of economic policy—like undoing or revising trade deals we’ve made in the past that have cost us millions of American jobs as businesses have relocated their operations far and wide across the globe—we’re going to be handing down a literally bankrupt nation to our kids and grandkids.

And even though I have neither of those things, I still think being responsible with money is just the obvious and right thing to do. What we absolutely cannot afford is a continuation of “business as usual” the way it’s currently being done in D.C. The national debt has nearly DOUBLED during Obama’s two terms in office. That’s insane, and it’s absolutely unsustainable.

To have the kind of leadership necessary to navigate all of these very complicated economic challenges, we need someone with a big, proven record of success in business.

I think Trump checks that box in a very real and convincing way.

As a final comment here, I believe this point is especially important given the absence of such a record of accomplishment on the part of his opponent. I sincerely tried to be objective, and to give real weight and consideration to her biggest successes.

Unfortunately, I couldn’t think of any.

Because of his candor.

The very thing that turns so many people off to Trump is probably the #1 thing I like about the guy: he speaks his mind.

Does he say some really dumb things, and does he say those dumb things too often? Yes, he does. I cannot deny that.

However, given how fake and phony and–let’s get real here–dishonest so many people have become, in large part because of political correctness, it is so refreshing to encounter someone like Trump who tells you exactly what he’s thinking a relatively high percentage of the time.

I’ll even take my criticism a step further and say that I am disappointed that Trump has at times seemed wholly incapable of keeping his mouth shut, or learning from his prior verbal gaffes.

On a number of occasions, this has absolutely enraged me. Sometimes, it feels almost like he’s an enabled two year old who has been raised by parents from the dreaded “self-esteem generation,” meaning specifically that he has been given the wholly incorrect worldview that he can say whatever he wants to say, whenever he wants to say it, irrespective of context. I keep hoping he’ll gain a little bit more self-control, learn to curb his tongue, not be so easily riled up and not be so blatantly knee-jerk reactionary.

Does he have more work to do in this area? Without question. But all that said, I would STILL rather have someone like Trump, who for the most part is telling you what he really thinks, rather than the classic, duplicitous, two-faced, hypocritical career politician who lies as often as not, and who tailors every word for whatever crowd they happen to be facing at that very moment, without regard to what they’ve said in the past.

I’ll take candor over glib, polished “politi-speak” any day of the week.

And whether you love or hate Trump, you have to admit that the man is nothing if not candid.

Because he is not a Washington insider.

There has never, in the course of the entirety of American political history, been ANY candidate so universally despised, disliked, attacked and vilified by such a high percentage of Washington insiders.

Pretty much all Democrats hate him, and a surprisingly high percentage of even his own party members seem not to like him. Not to mention the press (but I consider them an extension of the American political machine at this point, so that observation is somewhat redundant).

But you have to ask yourself, why do so many seem to hate him so much? There can really be only one logical answer: because they know that, if elected, he’ll come in and make an honest effort to overhaul government and truly change things. And that is the very last thing the entrenched powers-that-be can allow to happen.

In my humble opinion, our country is heading in a very, very wrong direction. And, to be clear, I am not laying all of that as Obama’s feet. There were things that Bush did that I absolutely did not agree with, so this point I’m making here is aimed at both parties.

This is not about placing blame. This IS about doing what’s best for the future of this country.

That said, I think we desperately need a radical change of direction and a significant course correction. Without such actual change, we’re going to just keep driving toward the abyss at a very high rate of speed every single day.

Because Trump is the very definition of a political outsider, I think that makes him the better candidate in terms of effecting real, meaningful and lasting change.

Not only that, but his opponent has spent the last 30+ years living at or near the very epicenter of the public eye. We know this woman. We know her nature and we know her character. She is the quintessential Washington insider. Beyond that, ask yourself these questions:

  • What has she truly accomplished of note, ever, in any of her official capacities?
  • If she has had any truly innovative, original or exceptional ideas, why has she not shared those things with America by now? She has had so many opportunities to do so, as she has functioned as First Lady, Senator and Secretary of State. Few people have had so many different opportunities in which they could have made a difference. Few people in American political history has been less effective in so many different contexts.
  • If she has not produced any truly innovative, original or exceptional ideas to help America after all these years, why do you think she’ll be able to do that now, especially given her advancing years and seemingly suspect health?

Because he can admit when he’s wrong.

I want to be really, really clear on this point: I think Trump was WAY in the wrong regarding this whole “locker room talk” controversy. And I’m not saying this because it’s the politically correct thing to say. Because, if you know me in real life at all, you’ll know that being PC is not at all my thing. I am saying it because it’s what I really think.

That said, Trump did apologize for his comments, and I thought his apology was sincere. It was refreshing to see someone own up to something for a change, as the current MO of almost every politician–on either side of the aisle–is to lie, lie and lie some more when confronted with something of this nature.

As one example: Bill Clinton, on live national TV in 1998, looked into the eyes of the American public and said, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman.” Eventually, after being trapped by a mountain of evidence, including his own DNA (Google “Monica Lewinsky blue dress;” for even more fun, Google “Lewinsky cigar”), he admitted he lied. He was then impeached, becoming only the second President to disgrace the office in this manner (and the first since 1868).

Trump did something admittedly dumb, he was outed about it, and he took responsibility and apologized to the world more than once. No, that does NOT absolve the original sin. But what it does do is demonstrate an ability to admit it when he’s wrong, and this country needs a leader with that capacity at this point.

Further, to my knowledge, he also did not attack the source of the “leak” of this unsavory incident. He didn’t claim some conspiracy, or blame Russia, or anything of that nature. He simply stood up and dealt with it like a man.

As opposed to the current administration, which is doing everything it can to divert your attention away from the incredible litany of things being unearthed in all of the WikiLeaks releases. If you’ve been paying attention, the Democrats are not telling you the things being released are inaccurate. What they are doing is creating every conceivable manner of subterfuge and misdirection (publicized cyberattack on Russia, anyone?) to make sure you don’t look too closely at the hundreds of roaches scurrying out from under the rocks that Assange keeps picking up for us.

As an aside, if we want to go into the archives, there are plenty of things the other candidate has said–being against gay marriage, laughing about getting the rapist of a 12 year-old girl off when she represented him as his attorney (heavily implying that she knew he was guilty, saying, “He took a lie detector test. I had him take a polygraph, which he passed, which forever destroyed my faith in polygraphs,” follow by laughter), calling African American youth “superpredators,” etc.–so I’m not sure how fair it is to go back 11 years to micro-scrutinize an excerpt from a private conversation Trump had, when it seems no one wants to go back into the past to analyze the very public things Hillary has said.

Again, that is NOT to defend Trump. It is to point out the unlevel playing field that has been tilted against Trump during this entire election cycle.

The bottom line: Trump screwed up. He didn’t deny it. He didn’t blame anyone. He offered a heartfelt apology. America needs a leader who can do those things, now more than ever.

And for those of you who might be thinking, “Hey, his opponent said she was wrong for what she did with the email thing,” I would remind you she denied, denied and denied she had done anything wrong (aka, lied, lied and lied) until she was caught red-handed. Then, and only then, did she admit to any wrongdoing.

Because he puts America first.

I know that loving America has somehow been twisted into being viewed as a bad thing, and that being patriotic is viewed by some as being discriminatory or perhaps even racist.

To those things, all I can say is that is quite possibly the most ridiculous, insane perspective and point of view I can imagine.

I for one love this country, and I take great pride in feeling the way that I do. This IS the greatest country in the history of this planet, period.

Is America perfect? God no, far from it.

Does racism and discrimination still exist? Yes, for sure, but I would argue that, until Obama–who seems to have prioritized “racial division” as his number one domestic policy initiative–was elected, racial tension had been on the steady decline over the course of the last 50 years.

Back on point, it is not “anti-other people” to be pro-American. As proof, do you provide for your neighbor’s kids, or do you let your neighbors handle that? If you’re like most, you stay out of that, right? Does that mean you hate your neighbors or their kids? I don’t think so. I think it means you love your kids more, which is perfectly natural and understandable. To love “your own” the is not racist.

Further, do you lock your doors at night? My guess is that, if you’re like most people, you do. Do you do that because you hate everyone on the outside? Probably not. My guess it that you lock your doors not because of a hatred for others, but rather because of a love for those closest to you. Again, that does NOT make you “anti” the people on the other side of your door, or, in this case, the other side of our borders, or even the other side of the world.

From where I sit, one of the major issues I have with Obama and the way he has led is that it’s always felt to me as if “doing what’s best for the world” was a higher priority to him than “doing what’s best for AMERICA. Because these things are NOT always one and the same.

Remember, Obama was twice elected to be the President of the UNITED STATES, NOT to be the President of THE WORLD, or the leader of the United Nations (which, truth be told, is a title much more in keeping with his behavior since taking over the Oval Office). We NEED our next leader to remember what he is the president of, and what he is not the president of.

To reiterate, being pro-American does not make a person a racist or a bigot. I can provide for my family more than I provide for yours, but that doesn’t mean I am against you. It means I have limited resources, and my first priority–obviously and logically–must be to provide for my own.

I believe Trump will do that, and do that well: provide for Americans first. As every American President should do.

Because of his perspective on immigration.

This one is easy: Trump simply wants the existing United States laws on immigration to be enforced, and to protect our borders.

She, on the other hand, wants to continue or even expand Obama’s policies of “open borders.”

On the topic of existing illegal immigrants, I feel compelled to say this, for the record:

  • Illegal immigrants are just that: ILLEGAL.
  • As one who had a long-term personal relationship with a Russian who immigrated here legally, I can tell you from first-hand experience that there are existing laws in place that are fair, logical and reasonable.
  • My personal opinion is that, once a person decides break the existing laws, all bets are off in terms of the future implications of that conscious decision to not obey those laws.
  • In the specific context of potentially deporting people, for liberals to prey on the emotions of voters by using expressions like “tear families apart” is a shameful and sadly transparent attempt to manipulate people. Unfortunately, I am sure the tactic is effective in some cases. But that doesn’t make it any less repugnant.
  • Further, to call such people “undocumented” (as opposed to “illegal”) is a complete slap in the face to people like my Russian friend who did everything by the book and respected our nation and the process and path to becoming a citizen.

Speaking just for me now, I can tell you that enforcing existing immigration laws is probably the #1 issue in this election. I am not opposed to immigration, at all. As already noted, the most important person in my life for nearly two decades was born and raised in Moscow.

But the hard reality is that not all immigrants are created equally. Some want to do us harm. We have ample evidence of that worldwide and within our own borders. I want a President who will err on the side of protecting Americans, and who will put the safety of existing citizens as his highest priority. We know she’s not going to do that at a level he will.

Because we need a reasonably objective press in a free society.

If you’ve been paying any attention to how this election has been covered, it’s been a joke. The lack of objectivity and integrity has reached a crisis level. As the Wall Street Journal wrote on October 16, 2016, “The Press Buries Hillary Clinton’s Sins.” The sub-headline read “As reporters focus on Trump, they miss new details on Clinton’s rotten record.”

I’m purposely curbing myself from writing several thousand words here; I will just say this:

  • Hard evidence exposed to the light of day by WikiLeaks has proven conspiracy between the press and the Clinton campaign.
  • Hard evidence exposed to the light of day by WikiLeaks has proven many other things that, individually, might rise to the level of a felony offense (obstruction of justice, electoral fraud, mishandling of classified information, etc.), and, quite possibly, treason.
  • The mainstream media’s coverage these things has been minimal at best. Many of the individual things noted in the WikiLeaks releases dwarf what Richard Nixon did in the infamous Watergate scandal by an enormous margin, and he resigned in dishonor for what he did.

With even a reasonably objective media, Trump’s opponent would have bowed out of the race by now (or, more likely, would have been indicted).

Will Trump’s election change any of this? I don’t know. Maybe not.

But what I do know is that, if his opponent wins, we can say goodbye to an objective press in America for the foreseeable future.

Because I own a small business.

As far as I can tell, there is no one in the current administration who understands the plight of small business owners.

Without writing a book here, as one example, let me just say that Obamacare is killing my business, and the businesses of a number of my friends and associates.

How? Because, as a result of that disastrous legislation (thank God we passed it so we could find out what was in it), I had to choose between paying for health insurance for my employees, or reducing their hours (to get them below full time) or let them go altogether.

I chose the latter.

Because I could not afford the former.

So, people lost jobs in my company specifically because of Obamacare.

Beyond that, one of my business owner friends just informed me that, over the course of the last few years, his premiums have gone from $350 per month to $1,250 per month, and his deductible jumped from $4,000 per year to $16,500 per year.

Yet another told me his premiums have increased an average of 17.5% over each of the last four years, and–just to be able to afford insurance for his 20 employees–they’ve had to increase the related deductible to $15,000 per year per employee. He told me, if things continue on like this, he’ll have to stop providing insurance for those 20 employees and their families at some point, or he’ll simply go out of business attempting to carry the incremental expense load.

Obamacare needs to be repealed ASAP. In response to those of you thinking “and then what?,” pretty much anything short of a single payer concept will be preferable to the train wreck that is Obamacare.

Way beyond that singular point, Trump knows business.

I sincerely believe he’ll do things that will spur growth in small businesses like mine.

Because I hope to have health insurance in five years

Continuing parts of the prior point, at the current pace, I figure I will not be able to afford health insurance in about five years or so.

My premiums continue to rise, along with my deductible, while my coverage gets smaller and weaker year after year.

In the mail just yesterday I received a letter from my health insurance provider. Under a big, bold headline that read “Your Blue Cross health care plan will stay open for 2017,” I learned that my premium increased by 22%, and my deductible increased by 44%.

At some point, should such increases continue, I will simply have to stop buying the coverage because it will be beyond my reach.

Here’s a lesson in Econ 101: you cannot entitle a person without doing the opposite to someone else. For every person who received coverage because of Obamacare, someone else lost coverage, or paid more, or ended up with coverage of reduced quality.

I think Trump will take action to clean up this toxic mess. His opponent, however, is rooting for Obamacare to fail, so she can replace it with a single payer system. Such a system is likely to be even worse than Obamacare, which doesn’t seem possible, but, alas, it very well could be.

Because Trump is not a racist.

This is a little bit redundant of a prior point, but I think it’s worth mentioning anyway.

The media has done a sadly brilliant job of misquoting Trump and or not providing full context around the more misperceived of Trump’s supposedly racist comments. Are the words he chooses perfect? No. Not even close. Does he say things that often come off as potentially racist, particularly given today’s context of hyper-political correctness? For sure. Do I sometimes cringe at the things he says? Without question.

But here’s the thing: if you take in the full context of what Trump says, in most cases–not all cases, but most cases–his true point is usually logical and reasonable.

As a primary example, that he wants people to immigrate here LEGALLY should not be even remotely controversial. And yet he’s framed that specific, reasonable intention in a variety of malapropisms and mangled syntax that make it way too easy for the ever-present social justice warriors to jump in and shred him like a school of piranha on raw meat.

And the end result is that he often looks like something I truly believe he is not: a racist.

As a final point here, don’t you find it a bit strange that Trump has been in business FOREVER, and yet very little has been said about him being a racist before this election?

Further, Jesse Jackson, of all people, praised Trump in the past for “reaching out and being inclusive.” He also called him a “friend” who embraced the “under-served communities.”

Why haven’t you heard about this recently, you ask? Because it doesn’t fit the current narrative of the mainstream media at large.

Because his being a “womanizer” has been exaggerated.

If you think Trump has been sexually abusing women all his life, why haven’t there been a litany of lawsuits on this point?

Has he had some issues in the past? Yes, he has. But nothing to the level that the left is alleging at the moment.

And don’t you find it a bit odd and a little too convenient that all of the women who have come forth in recent days and weeks alleging some manner of sexual misconduct on the part of Trump–the majority of whom weren’t credible from the get and or who have since had their stories completely exposed as complete lies and exaggerations–remained silent all those years until JUST BEFORE the election?

Do I think Trump is pure on this point? No, I don’t. I cannot lie about that.

Unfortunately, many men in positions of power suffer from this sort of thing. Truth be told, I think many people (yes, maybe even a few women) would likely fall short of perfection if they had beautiful members of the opposite sex constantly throwing themselves at them.

All that said, I think Trump is a flawed human being who has shown some flaws in this area. Last time I checked, every human being has some issues. I can assure you the other candidate has more than her share.

Because he supports law enforcement.

This is another area where I think Obama has failed America miserably, and where I think Hillary is very likely to maintain the status quo. At every turn, Obama has chosen to escalate tensions rather than diffuse them when it comes to the issue of “the people vs law enforcement.”

At every opportunity, he’s said as many, if not more, incendiary things about the police than he’s said in support of the police. He has unfailingly remembered the names of the “victims”–even when those victims turned out to be hardcore criminals, which was usually the case–and never mentioned the names of police officers killed in the line of duty.

Not even in the aftermath of the Dallas police murders, in which he DID mention the names of the “victims” killed just prior to that…but not those poor Dallas cops killed in cold blood on live national TV.

And if all of that wasn’t bad enough, Obama met a number of times in THE WHITE HOUSE with leaders of the Black Lives Matter movement, and even PRAISED THEM for their “outstanding work.” Not to mention sending representatives from the administration to attend the funerals of various “victims,” which is yet another slap in the face of law enforcement.

And who can forget the US Government standing back and watching a number of our cities be looted and torched, and doing nothing to stop any of those things. You DO realize that Obama could have ordered anyone and everyone below him to do whatever he wanted, right? Letting those cities suffer was a conscious decision on this part, done–in my opinion–with a very specific political objective in mind.

And even after the New York Times (not exactly a bastion of conservatism) published an article about a study–authored by Roland J. Fryer Jr., an African American Professor from Obama’s alma matar, Harvard–showing that police killing blacks disproportionately in comparison to other races was simply not true, Obama’s rhetoric never changed one degree. Not one iota. The larger media all but ignored the story.

Now, to be fair, I cannot realistically lay all of that at the feet of Trump’s opponent. So, to be clear, this is not an attack on her.

What I am saying is this: the cold, hard reality is that a free, normal society cannot stay free or normal without laws, and without a healthy respect for law and order. It just can’t.

At some point, the good men and women in blue–who do jobs most of us couldn’t even CONCEIVE of doing, who risk their lives for us day in and day out doing work that is incredibly dangerous, largely unappreciated or even vilified, who are often underpaid, and who have been stone cold assassinated in ridiculous numbers this year, and who worst of all have been de facto undermined by the highest office in the land–are just going to start resigning in large numbers. I cannot believe that hasn’t happened already.

If Trump is elected, I believe respect for law and order, and for law enforcement, will return to normal levels almost immediately. His support for law enforcement is clearly established, and no one disputes that.

As a final comment here, I am not suggesting there are not some bad cops out there. Of course there are. But when you truly examine the facts– particularly the Harvard study I mentioned a moment ago–you’ll see that the level of the current rhetoric simply doesn’t hold water. It just doesn’t.

Because he supports the military.

Very similar to the last point, morale in our military is at near-historic lows. Personally, I have or had a number of family members in the military, and what they have said is consistent with what I’ve seen over and over in the media, which is that, by and large, the military loathes Obama.

Trump is a big supporter of the military. He often talks about how wrong it is that we have not placed supporting and caring for members of the military as a high-enough priority. Obama has made importing and providing for refugees a higher priority than taking care of the many veterans who have made massive sacrifices to defend our country and our way of life, which is the envy of the world. 

I am positive Trump will change that if elected, and I think this is really important. We have relative safety (at least for the moment) because of all the great work done by the military in other parts of the world, so the fight does not take place on our soil.

Trump gets that, he respects the military, and our country desperately needs such a perspective back in the Oval Office ASAP.

Because he’s not doing it for the money.

Personally, I don’t care what Trump’s net worth is. All I know is that it’s a LOT, and “needing the money” is clearly not why he is running. Not only that, but he is primarily self-funding his campaign, so, very much unlike his opponent, he will be beholden to no one if elected.

I find it refreshing to finally have a candidate in the mix who is highly unlikely to be swayed by money, or to be for sale to the highest bidder. Or to accept donations from other countries, or from foreign governments of countries where their cultures are fine and dandy with throwing gay people from rooftops, cutting off the heads of Christians and considering women “possessions” who can be bought and sold on the street.

Because he will call a radical Islamic terrorist a radical Islamic terrorist.

Trump has repeatedly talked about something that really upsets a lot of Americans about the current administration: their outrageously well-documented refusal to call radical Islamic terrorists by their real name.

To be clear, in the aftermath of a terror attack, I am ALL FOR not jumping to conclusions and not making assumptions that truly would be indicative of a prejudiced, racist perspective.

But when we have documented evidence, for example, that a person who committed an act of terror aligns with Islam, aligns with ISIS, or yells “Allahu Akbar” while shooting or blowing up innocent people whose only crime is not being Muslim, I don’t think it’s “racist” to refer to them as “radical Islamic terrorists.” 

Trump has made it clear he will not shy away from the use of such terminology. And if that strikes you as anything other than reasonable, logical and normal, then you, my friend, have bought into the brainwashing hook, line and sinker.

If a caucasian Christian commits an act of terror, it’s not racist to call them a “radical Christian terrorist,” is it? I don’t think it would be. Nor should any white American “be offended” if such a person were to be labeled in that manner. It is what it is. To cite facts does not make one a racist.

As an aside, for those who may object to the term “radical,” the only alternative to that would be “normal Islamic terrorism.”

And I think that sounds a lot worse.

Because he won’t aid and abet the #1 sponsor of global terrorism.

The deal Obama struck with Iran was a major mistake, in my humble opinion. I say this for the following reasons:

  • Iran is the world leading state sponsor of terror worldwide.
  • By lifting economic sanctions, “an economically whole Iran will have more resources to support Hezbollah and other militant proxies in the region.” There are also concerns “that the country will be permitted to buy ballistic missile components in eight short years” (quotes from an article that appeared in fortune.com).
  • Iran will be freed of restrictions on its missile program which experts believe is being designed as a nuclear weapons delivery system Iran’s missiles could currently hit Europe and it is believed to be developing ICBMs that could strike the United States.
  • Form Senator Joe Lieberman had this to say about the deal: “What began as an admirable diplomatic effort…dissolved into a bilateral negotiation over the scope of that capability. The agreement…ultimately allows Iran to become a nuclear weapon state, and indeed legitimizes Iran’s possession of nuclear weapons capability… This is a bad deal for America, a bad deal for Iran’s neighbors in the Middle East, and a bad deal for the world.”
  • Beyond the particulars of the deal itself, the manner in which the deal was ratified shines a light on the unsavory manner in which the Obama administration made this happen. More specifically:
    • At a UN Security Council meeting, Obama pushed through a resolution ratifying the deal, thus officially committing the United States as a nation to its implementation—in advance of any congressional action.
    • The deal should have been submitted to Congress first, and it should have been submitted as a treaty (which it obviously is). That matters because Obama knew he would not be able to get the required votes in the Senate (not even close, in fact, as at one point during the process only 42 Senators supported the deal, while 67 votes were required to pass it). Not only that, but a 2015 Pew Research Poll showed the American people opposed the deal by a staggering 28-point margin.
    • The point: Obama bent rules and disrespected the process to ramrod the deal down our throats.

This is admittedly a very complex issue, and I’m certainly no expert on the topic. That said, the shorthand that I read in this is that there is now a clear path to Iran becoming a “legitimate” nuclear power. Even taking the most “trusting of Iran” stance on this, all the deal does is delay Iran’s ability to manufacture nuclear weapons. There is much more nuance to this, of course, but I believe these are the points that matter to the average American voter.

Given the historical nature of our relationship with Iran, and given their repeated public declarations to annihilate both Israel (our historical only true ally in the Middle East) and the United States (you know, us), I for one do not trust Iran, at all. The thought of them having “legal” nukes in a decade, ish (that’s what many suggest, and some much sooner) is terrifying. Ten years might seem like a long time. It isn’t.

And if none of that moves you, consider this little tidbit, which surfaced in a WikiLeaks release on October 14, 2016.

John Anzalone (Anzalone is a partner at Anzalone Liszt Grove, a public opinion research firm) to John Podesta (Podesta is the Chairman of Hillary Clinton’s Presidential Campaign) (quoting Sen. Kirk of IL): “This agreement condemns the next generation to cleaning up a nuclear war in the Persian Gulf… This is the greatest appeasement since Chamberlain gave Czechoslovakia to Hitler.”

John Podesta’s reply: “Yup.”

Yes, that’s right.

They are EXPECTING a nuclear war. Unless I cannot read the English language, I’m pretty sure that’s what was said in that exchange.

Again, because of the Iran deal.

Looking beyond the deal itself, as written in the Wall Street Journal, “The Obama administration secretly organized an airlift of $400 million worth of cash to Iran that coincided with the January release of four Americans detained in Tehran, according to U.S. and European officials and congressional staff briefed on the operation afterward.” The hostages were released the same day the cash arrived. The administration spun a story about how this was not a pure cash-for-hostages ransom deal, but Iran itself bragged that it was.

All that said, I am highly confident that Trump will address this in some manner. In the third and final debate, held October 19, 2016, he called the Iran deal the “stupidest deal of all time.”

Because he is an egomaniac.

Yes, that IS what I meant to say: Trump is an egomaniac.

Would anyone really dispute that? I don’t think so.

How and why, you may be asking, is that a good thing?

It’s a good thing because of this: the only way HE WINS is if WE WIN.

If his Presidency is anything short of a huge success, it will end up being the ultimate black mark on his legacy. And most people with enormous egos are very concerned with perception and legacy.

So, I think, if elected, Trump will kill himself to ensure he does all he can to “Make America Great Again.” Because, if he doesn’t, he tarnishes his most valuable and beloved asset: the Trump name.

Because he is not Bill Clinton.

I’m not going to go deep here, because it’s all public record and anyone who wants to find this information can do so with almost no effort. Here’s a link, or just go on Wikipedia and search “Bill Clinton sex.” Here are the larger highlights; for the full tawdry list, consult those sources:

    • In 1999, he was accused of rape by Juanita Broaddrick (and, contrary to recent claims by NBC, Broaddrick’s claims were never debunked).
    • In 1998, he paid Paula Jones an $850,000 out of court settlement relating to alleged sexual harassment.
    • While testifying under oath with respect to the Jones case, he lied about having a sexual affair with Monica Lewinsky, a 24 year old intern with whom he indeed did have an affair. He was subsequently impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice. Additionally, as a result of this incident, he also lost his license to practice law.
    • There are a number of other women who have alleged sexual misconduct on the part of Bill Clinton (note: from the time I started researching this topic a few weeks ago until now, the aforementioned Wikipedia page has been edited rather significantly to reduce what appears on that page).

Closely related, for those of you who are currently using the wildly popular “Bill isn’t running, Hillary is” response to the ever-so-logical question as to how one can attack Trump for things he SAID about women, while giving Bill Clinton a free pass on the incredible list of things he’s ACTUALLY DONE to women, I’ll offer this:

  • Yes, it IS true that Hillary is running, not Bill. But Bill is still Bill, and, if elected, he’ll be back in the White House. I find it really hard to believe we won’t see more of the same behavior from him, and then what? Just more scandals for the Clintons?
  • Here’s one you might be reading more about in the coming weeks and months: Bill has taken at least 26 trips aboard the “Lolita Express,” a private jet owned by Jeffrey Epstein, a billionaire who did 13 months in prison and home detention for “solicitation and procurement of minors for prostitution.” Epstein’s jet “earned its Nabakov-inspired nickname because it was reportedly outfitted with a bed where passengers had group sex with young girls.” Such a great example our former President is setting for women’s rights and feminists everywhere. I’m sure he’ll make a great First Gentleman/repeat offender.
  • Can you imagine if Melania Trump had an affair with a young men half her age, and then lied about it under oath? Can you even IMAGINE the firestorm that would have created among today’s media?
  • Related, Hillary claims to be a feminist, and in fact is on record as saying of sexual assault victims, “Don’t let anyone silence your voice. You have the right to be heard. You have the right to be believed and we’re with you.” Unless, of course, you happen to be a woman who was assaulted by her husband. In that case, I suggest you prepare for a character assassination led by Democratic nominee herself, personally.

And just to make sure you didn’t miss something I noted earlier, allow me to repeat: a huge chunk of America is writing Trump off for something he said ELEVEN years ago IN A PRIVATE CONVERSATION…and what he said was not even remotely as bad as things we KNOW Bill Clinton actually DID to women.

Because he is not her.

Last, and certainly not least–and, in fact, I might even go so far as to consider this the NUMBER ONE reason I am voting for Trump–is simply because he is not Hillary Clinton.

I’d love to give full descriptions of all of her scandals, but that would require several additional podcasts. So, I’m going to limit myself here to one reasonable-length sentence for each of the more significant “Hillary Scandals” (for a more complete summary, including more details on each of the things listed below, visit uncphew.com/scandal). Here goes:

  • Alleged she had a hand in the firings of seven employees that were meant to cover up questionable resource allocations, and other “favors” with which she was directly involved (“Travelgate”).
  • In violation of Federal law, used private email address and private server, sent and received confidential information on that server, and lied repeatedly about those things.
  • Deleted 30,000 emails in violation of a Congressional subpoena to preserve them, used advanced technology to ensure they could not be recovered, and smashed devices with a hammer.
  • Lied about being under sniper fire in Bosnia.
  • Was found to be in possession of more than 700 FBI background check reports on rivals (“FBI background scandal”).
  • Called pursuit of her husband during the Lewinsky scandal a “right wing conspiracy;” he was found guilty of perjury and obstruction of justice and was, as already noted, subsequently impeached (“Monica Lewinsky scandal”).
  • Alleged violations of the Clinton Foundation accepting tens of millions of dollars from foreigners and foreign governments (some of which are known financiers of terrorism), in violation of law which precludes foreigners from making donations to US political campaigns.
  • Alleged violations of IRS rules for charitable organizations relating to the Clinton Foundation.
  • Alleged ties to agitators paid to disrupt Trump rallies, some of whom specifically targeted elderly Trump protestors for assaulting (“Birddogging scandal”).
  • Rigging of the 2016 DNC Convention, in which leaked emails disclosed a known supporter of hers, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, clearly acted on behalf of her to the detriment of rival Bernie Sanders (Hillary then immediately hired Wasserman Schultz).
  • Accepted massive political contributions from Wall Street firms and refused to disclose the content of those speeches (“Speeches scandal”).
  • Blamed an attack on the US Embassy in Benghazi, in which four Americans were killed, on a YouTube video; later evidence showed she knew this not to be the case at the time she said it (“Benghazi cause scandal”).
  • Refused hundreds of requests for additional security from the Embassy in Benghazi, and called the parents of those killed in the terror attack liars (“Benghazi security scandal”).
  • While functioning as Secretary of State, she allegedly took actions to facilitate the sale of uranium to Russian interests, supposedly motivated by over $2M in donations to the Clinton Foundation (which were not disclosed by the Clintons) made by the chairman of a Russian-owned company (“uranium scandal”).

As already stated, Trump is far from an angel. He most certainly has his own litany of negatives in his file. But her record of wrongdoing is extraordinary. It is spectacular in terms of its depth, breadth and magnitude.

Said differently, even if EVERY SINGLE THING that is supposedly wrong, bad or evil about Trump is 100% true, all of that combined is still a tiny fraction of the things we KNOW to be true about Hillary.

Because we’re electing a PRESIDENT, not a PRIEST.

To hold any candidate to an artificially high standard in today’s day and age is ridiculous, and it’s particularly problematic when that standard seems to be applied unequally to the candidates.

To be clear, Trump is no saint. To be even clearer, she is even worse on this scale.

So let’s all get down off of our high horses and be realistic about the implications of electing another one of these damn humans, what with all of their imperfections and character flaws and what not.

Because all he is does is win.

Maybe you’ve forgotten what a novelty–maybe even a joke, truth be told–the idea of a Trump presidency was back when this whole circus kicked off back in 2015.

You can’t be serious, right? I mean, how long can this clown hang?

And then he started winning, and people still thought it was an aberration and an outlier of sorts that would self-correct shortly.

But he just kept rolling and picking up momentum.

And don’t forget how many times HIS OWN PARTY tried to bury him. Remember when Romney threw him under the bus? And the Bush family? And Paul Ryan and his various stunts?

And yet he just kept going and building even more momentum.

And even at that point–even after people started to think he might be a viable candidate–do you remember when almost NO ONE would admit they were supporting Trump publicly?

I remember it like it was yesterday, because it quite literally WAS almost yesterday.

It took me quite a while to say anything online that might be viewed as support for Trump, because people on the other side were quick to shame those willing to stick their necks out on his behalf.

Now? Wow, things have changed dramatically and radically.

Yes, I know my Facebook and Twitter feeds probably have a disproportionate number of conservatives in them, but I now see FAR more support for Trump than I do for Hillary.

And I know what you’re thinking, “Dude, get real, EVERY poll shows Hillary WAY ahead, you’re smoking crack.”

To that, I’ll reply with the following:

    • If you don’t realize by now just how biased the mainstream media is against Trump, well, then I doubt you’re reading hearing these words, because you probably turned this podcast off stopped reading this as soon as I told you for whom I intend to vote. Ergo, you really need to consider the integrity and ulterior motives of the press at this point. We even did a podcast about this, which you can check out here.
    • Second, in 1980, every major news source had Jimmy Carter ahead of Ronald Regan as the election approached. Gallup, the Washington Post and ABC had Carter’s lead at 9%, Roper had it at 12%, etc. And yet Reagan won by a huge margin, at just under 10%.
    • In yet another WikiLeaks release, this one on October 23, 2016, we learned that the media is “working with Hillary Clinton to release bogus weighted polls that show Hillary ahead of Trump,” and then follow up to “declare the election over.” In other words, directly, intentionally lying to the American public to create a false perception with the specific intention of affecting the outcome of this election. That sure sounds like a crime to me.
    • Ergo, I take “the polls” with a grain of salt in ANY election cycle, and in particular in THIS cycle, given the clear bias that exists in much of the media.

Trump has been beating the odds since this whole things started, overcoming obstacles, expectations, harsh adversaries and bitter betrayals seemingly every step of the way.

Remember, a very short time ago, almost no one admitted to supporting Trump. Now, I see such people EVERYWHERE. Now, it’s her supporters who seem to be the ones trying to lay low.

Because so much is at stake.

You’ve probably heard many call this “the most important election in American history.”

As I’m not 300 years old, I cannot realistically confirm or deny that.

What I can say is that this is–by far–the most important election in my lifetime.

We have social trends heading in all wrong directions.

Free speech is being threatened.

Terrorist attacks are being blamed more on the weapons the terrorists use than on the terrorists themselves.

Racial tensions are very high.

TRUE unemployment is at record levels.

People don’t trust law enforcement.

Political correctness has run amok and is out of control.

We are on the brink of a real conflict with Russia, right this minute (literally, within the last hour as I am writing this, on October 21, 2016, a “flotilla of Russian warships” just passed through the English Channel, on their way to Syria). 

Terrorism is on the rise, and people are afraid of where and when the next attack is going to happen.

People see what “open borders” is doing in parts of Europe, and they fear that type of “immigration” (invasion?) is inevitable in America should another Democrat find her way into office.

(P.S.: It’s not fear mongering to be legitimately afraid when reality punches you in the face enough times; that’s not fear, it’s wisdom).

And maybe most importantly, one, two or even more Supreme Court Justices we be replaced during the next four to eight years.

Those choices are of massive importance. You simply cannot exaggerate how critical those appointments are going to be.

All that said, from where I sit, there’s not a whole lot going well in America right now.

We need a person to kick ass, take names and drain the swamp.

For me, there is only one candidate potentially qualified to do that.

And his name is Donald J. Trump.

I will be proudly casting my vote for him on November 8.

Not sure who you distrust the least? Trying to figure out who has more skeletons in the closet? Interested in finding out where all the bodies are buried? We compiled every scandal we could find for BOTH candidates, and we did that as objectively and as honestly as we could. Click “FREE Download” below to get your free 2016 Election Scandal Scoresheet! We’re not asking for your email address or anything else – we just want you to make the most informed decision possible. Download and learn!

Scandal Scoresheet <— Prior Podcast

Next Podcast—>