Saturday, August 27, 2016

Events and Narratives in American Presidential Campaigns: Are Americans listening to either of the Presidential candidate for 2016 White House?

KEYWORDS OR TERMS: Campaigns; Hillary Clinton; Donald Trump; Undocumented Immigrants; Conflict of Interest; Clinton Foundation; America Voters’ Priorities; Gun Violence; Safe Borders; Safe Communities; Job Creation; Illusory; Marginalized; US Congress; President of the United States; America Life; Nationhood; Race and Economic Divisions; Mudslinging; and, Harmonious Society

Are American voters listening to 2016 Presidential Candidates – are they paying particular attention to statistics, mudslinging and or narratives coming out of either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton campaigns regarding issues of unemployment, immigration, race relations, globalization and reckless gun violence in America? Does Donald Trump sound credible with the message of deportation of “millions” of undocumented immigrants in the first hypothetical hundred days of his administration; or, his two-pronged message on what he intends to do with undocumented immigrants if he had his choice? Are Americans now forgiving of Ms. Clinton’s email scandal or murky waters of what Clinton Charity Foundation has been unto or is currently involved regarding funds changing hands between donors and the foundation? Is the issue of conflict of interest surrounding the Clinton Foundation bemoaning the chances of Hillary Clinton for the White House oval office?

Further, Can Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton mitigate the unprecedented criticisms against their candidacy for whatever reason by critics or independent observers? Are American voters poorly served, over several decades, with ineffective policies on unemployment, justice, trade pacts, gun violence, loose national borders and sometimes inconceivable promises of either of the major political party candidates, to deliver to America whatever may alleviate the stress of life when either candidates get into the White House? Are American voters’ priorities in many realms, economic, social and political, including the burning issues of safe communities, gun violence and jobs creation, being watched or paid closer attention by either of the 2016 White House candidates? With some American firms and companies closing shops and moving overseas, are the doors to economic opportunities permanently being shot against Americans, while their choice to replacing outgoing President of the United States, President Barack Obama, inauspiciously being limited to two candidates with too much personal or political luggage, that Americans would rather prefer other candidates that are not members of the two major American Political Parties; and or, prefer a redo of the 2016 political party’s primaries and caucuses?

Regardless of how either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump crafts their campaign messages, there is this apprehension among some voters that both candidates are probably not the best of choices at this time in American Politics. Further, there are some firm convictions in some quarters that Donald Trump is race baiting while at the same time, peddling fears and discontent among Americans in the public arena. Corollary, there are fears as well in some quarters that the issue of trust in Hillary Clinton’s candidacy for the White House oval office, is probably lost with her State Department email issues and most recently, the difficult and unprecedented circumstances that she may have played in furthering the goals of the Clinton Foundation, while Ms. Clinton was the US Secretary of State. In addition, there is the notion that both 2016 White House candidates are hardly discussing or presenting better ways out of the malaise that continue to hold Americans back on the bread and butter issues; with critics of either candidates claiming that for the most part, Donald Trump has been playing political football on the campaign trail, hoping to get back his campaign on the right course after three reorganizations because of many inflicted comments and or tweets from him. Albeit, Hillary Clinton’s proposed policies in some realm of nation building, continue to be patronizing at best; and, almost anything else that her campaign is currently advertising is failing to meet the needs and urgency of some of the national problems.

American voters are weary of difficult pronouncements from the Republican Candidate for 2016 White House that appear not attainable. They are worried that the safe community campaign messaging from Donald Trump’s campaign is nothing but a spin to give hope to an issue that can hardly be resolved, without more proactive and reflective legislation on second amendment rights and gun ownership in America. We understand that for decades the nation has been confronted with gun violence issues; and on many occasions in the past, neither the US Congress or the sitting President of the United States, has been able to actualize legislation that satisfies the biases of the extreme opposition groups to the debate on gun violence and second amendment.

In fact, the issue of gun violence in recent memory has ultimately been perplexing not only to American voters; but also, to the current occupant of the White House, who once acknowledged that the national issue of gun violence has been one of the failures of his presidency. Former and current American political party leaders have failed to address the issues of gun violence and crime in the street from gangs and ruffians, because of some competing priorities, which if you ask many sane minds, would poo-poo any of their biases to stay on the extreme end of solution to this national problem. Prioritized and patronized legislation by Democrats in US Congress to address the issue of gun violence and second amendments were fought actively and aggressively by Republicans in the past seven years and any message of finding a permanent solution to the problem, immediately after a reported gun violence in America, including mass killings of first graders, has always been derailed and somehow illusory. Marginal and sometimes robust opportunities to find a practical and permanent solution to the problem of gun violence through enactment of common sense gun control laws have either received lukewarm response or collapsed in US Congress floor debates, many times over.

A better approach or alternative means of reaching middle ground reconciliations on some very important national issues, have remained unattainable, not because America does not know what to do, but because of the continuous ideological fight between the far right and left and the ever present pandering of lobbyist groups and institutions. Our legislatures have refused to define the goals of having reasonable gun control laws, not just in terms of what solace and or peace it can offer public safety, but also the desirability of such laws in the course of reality of enervated gun violence in our various communities. Turf survival on second amendment issues from opposing debate spectrum appears to be the order of the day. There are many subtle ways that opposition groups have played on the immediate strains and grief brought upon America by gun violence; however, it appears no one must expect immediate solution to resolving the gun violence issues on American streets because of the skittishness of some legislators to do what is right and in the better interest of the public. Americans must not put their hopes on any presidential candidate promising change on issue of gun violence unless a resolution on what reasonable second amendment rights actually entails in current day parlance of American life and nationhood, are thoroughly interpreted and elucidated, and compromise on many grounds accepted as the best option forward, in tempering the constant hostilities between the opposing groups to the debate.

If you think no promise could be enough to assail the challenges of inner city gun violence; or spoon long enough to permit America to sup with the devil regarding correction to inner city gun violence, you probably need not look further than recent gun-related violence, especially in either cases where an innocent citizen was shot while pushing a baby stroller in inner city, Chicago, Illinois, and or, the brutal stabbing and killings of two nuns and nurses in one of the most deprived areas in the state of Mississippi? From the onset of increased gun violence in the past two decades, we have ruled out the possibility of any challenge to our second amendment rights to bear arms. The greatest opportunity for compromise on our second amendment right has been lost several times over; and, much as many communities impacted, have sought help to confront the malaise of gun violence, most have been left frustrated by the antagonistic debates over the possibility of limiting the second amendment right of citizens in a bid to confront exacerbated gun violence in many inner cities. The current White House had issued some executive orders just to keep America safe after the failure of US Congress to pass reflective legislation to address this problem on more than three occasions, immediately after heinous mass shooting events across the nation. Can a new presidential candidate sell the nation a promise to do anything about this problem? For now, probably not. All we’ve heard from 2016 Republican flag bearer is that he is going to roll back those executive orders that have kept Americans safe relatively, once he is elected the President of the United States!

How about the new terrifying over dose deaths of Americans seeking to get high, or seeking a greater buzz, in many American communities? Many people say this is now an epidemic and probably a national calamity. Since solution to this calamity, like that of gun violence, can only come through mutual trust and compromise; it is imperative that Americans with opiate or drug dependency issues, understand there is need to seek and accept help to help them kick the habit. The nation also has an obligation to face the reality that this unconventional problem, just like gun violence, is not going to go away except, we actively respond to it with proactive public health policies and laws, that will decriminalize drug use and facilitate behavioral adjustment and treatment for many to get off opiate addiction; or, fashion out a new direction for the distribution of killer opiate drugs in the pharmaceutical network in America. America can confront this epidemic, not by promises from presidential candidates that may not materialize, because of the recalcitrance in US Congress and failure of some of our legislators to support reasonable legislation, that may correct another anomaly, but rather, the absence of a desire to resort to necessary adjustments that will discourage consumption of opiate drugs or drug use dependency in American communities.

Hillary Clinton recently assailed the character of her opponent on racism and bigotry; while her opponent, Donald Trump countered she is just as guilty of the same allegation, she has fashioned against him. Race and Economic divides have paralyzed many aspects of American promise; however, America is now left with a perplexing challenge of bringing up honest discussions of race relations and the increasing economic divides among social and economic strata. The unforeseeable internal cataclysm or racism that have over the decades cannibalize the psychic of some Americans, have left some very dire and menacing situation on how America moves ahead on resolving issues of racial conflict, or bringing about harmony among her peoples. To some people, racial harmony is just another opportunity to violate long held beliefs and privileges that have benefited the largest fraction of Americans – ‘the White Privileged’.  While the extreme and radical members of this group have maintained that current stratification of the population and opportunities are sacrosanct and must not be challenged, there are many progressives who maintain that the cherished ideal of equality of persons and races as embodied in America’s Constitution, is the ultimate narrative for a solution to the issue of racism and racial inequality. Neither current White House candidates has shown a strong backbone or valuable credentials to address this burning national issue, except for name calling, no actual policy proposal are concretely in offing; and, unless we address this and other socio-economic and political issues confronting America today, we are less likely to achieve the so-called American Dream; or narrative of a free and equal society.

More broadly, the two presidential candidates for 2016 White House oval office, must acknowledge that we need proactive policies and legislation addressing issues of racism, drug addiction, gun violence, immigration, unemployment and economic disparities, to achieve a more harmonious, just and equal society. The nation need insightful policies and legislation, far beyond what is available on the books today, in order to urgently address these problems and or associated dilemma that have prevented the nation from achieving the promises embodied in her ethos. Current presidential undertaking through executive orders fashioned to address issue of gun violence, inequality and bigotry, are just temporary bridges; and the nation owes it to herself to do better; to confront her fears and to build on her potential to achieve a more equal union among the races and economic classes. The new deal of the thirties, helped the nation transition from extreme poverty to home ownership and better health status with the introduction of Medicare and Medicaid. OBAMACARE has afforded other opportunities for a better pluralized healthcare delivery and system. Failure at a reconciliation between extreme groups in addressing gun violence and second amendment rights or, underestimation of the subliminal effect of racism and the ever ready promise from Republicans to abrogate OBAMACARE, continue to compound economic and social freedom; and are parts and parcels of loss of opportunities that could have corrected for economic disparity, health poverty, judicial system injustices and or racial harmony.

Mutual understanding across races, through more exposures to nuances of each race is a reachable dream, not distant as some demagogues would want Americans to believe. After five decades of the Civil Right laws, it appears that some segments of the population have not made up their minds to accept the reality of equality of races and opportunities under the law. We, as a nation, cannot reduce the contemplation of uncertainties of economic opportunities from legislation facilitating equality of races, sexes, religions, national origin and sexual preferences under the law because of the fear of the unknown; or because of our past preconceived notion that having equality of races, will only erode long standing privileges and opportunities that the greatest fraction or specific majority of American population have longed enjoyed. We must challenge ourselves with the words of Bobby Kennedy: “There are those that look at things the way they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not.” Let us see the goodness in our fellow men and women, no matter our differences; let us help ourselves by expanding opportunities for all Americans, men and women alike, let use learn about the frustrations and pleasures inherent in denied opportunities for peoples of all races, sexes, national origin, religion and sexual preferences; and, accommodate those who are different from us, in whatever realm; and, make America, a better livable space for all God’s children.

Again, old illusions must be discarded. Fatter paychecks and huge and obscene corporate profits through the enslavement of labor may make corporate America richer and plumper; demagoguery may even look fashionable, appealing and appeasing to a singular segment of Americans in current campaign for the White House oval office; however, all these will never make America Great– indeed, they may end up reinforcing a much negative stereotype of individual races in America; and, result in a less harmonious American Society or Culture. Dependence on exploiting racial tension and differences may seem logical to winning votes in a general election cycle; however, they will never eradicate the extreme tension that seem to degenerate the nation to a less hospital environment and livable space. America must reverse the trend and say No, to politicians who continue to divide us for their selfish end; and, work to bring peace among all the peoples of our nation; and continue to work hard to see that America remains that shinning beacon of hope for every man and woman on the globe.

The premise of this essay is that both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton hardly share the dream of many voters regarding some national issues that continue to hamper our dream of a more equal union and harmonious society, where we can build on the promise of America excellence and narrative of promise. Neither Donald Trump nor Hillary Clinton appropriately crystallized the needs of the average American in their current campaign efforts. This is why, we are hearing campaign mudslinging similar or in the nature of: 1) Hilary Clinton once called black youths Super Predators; 2) Donald Trump referring to Mexicans as rapists and drug lords; and 3) Some party’s stalwart discontenting the probable negative impact of derogation comments about minorities. We all know better. Minorities in America of whatever classification or stratification have sacrificed for this nation to be as great as it can be; they have and continue to work hard to reap the promise of a more equal union, where one race does not see itself as marginalized, one religion bemoaned; or one segment perceived as unwelcome and not deserving. America deserves accommodation of all peoples of her constituents; and the root of demagoguery must not be allowed to fester any longer.

Truly, we all deserve to live in a more equal society, protected by equal laws that make all of us know and understand that we have a skin in nation building. Are some races privileged than others? Are some groups less likely to be penalized for egregious crimes just because of the color of their skin? Let us now work to correct the abnormality in the system without succumbing to the mischief of politicians seeking to divide us. Our nation still has a lot of work to do to make America a just society. Corporations need to be better citizens, refusing to move opportunities for employment overseas, under the pretext they would not face higher labor cost and so can sell cheaper goods on the market. Cheaper goods, higher corporate profits are not necessarily the end results of better decisions; nor a companies’ decisions to increase corporate profit by shifting production overseas, ever going to completely put these companies ahead of the competition, while, millions of Americans are being thrown under the bus because no one is asking them the accountability question for being member of Corporate America. Globalization issues and trade pacts like NAFTA and other regional trade pacts continue to be bone of contention; however, they do not offer the full story about the challenge ahead of the nation.

Finally, we must now realize or appreciate the fact that, leaders are priceless; however, politicians running on promises are clearly a long shot at delivering on policies that can alleviate the status of poverty and insecurity in America. Let us now resolve only to give the best and most prepared and cautious the mantle of leadership come November 8, 2016.

Monday, August 1, 2016

Comparison of Acceptance Speeches of the two major political party nominees for 2016 White House

Keywords or Terms: RNC; DNC; Lincoln’s Party; Donald Trump; Cleveland Ohio Convention Venue; Hillary Clinton, Philadelphia, PA Convention Center; Bigotry; Apocalyptic; Inspiring; Smart, Tender and inclusive; Bernie Sanders Championing Voter’s cause; American Political Campaign Observers; Lincoln party; Islamic Religion; Immigration; Police Violence; Collective Efforts; and Party Nomination Process

For about eighteen months Americans have been exposed to a lot of campaign messaging for 2016 White House oval office. The campaigning messaging reached a crescendo on July 21, 2016, when Republican Presidential Nominee, Donald Trump, gave an acceptance speech at the Republican National Committee (RNC) Convention in Cleveland, Ohio; declaring close to what is now perceived in some quarters, as the worst demagoguery coming from a major political party presidential nominee in about half a century. Donald Trump, 2016 Republican nominee for White House, had declared an apocalyptic state of America in his acceptance speech, adding a world of dismay, some say, non-existent state, only perceived in the festering minds of the nominee and his avowed supporters. Mr. Trump had offered what many establishment Republicans considered rather non-traditional estimation of the state of the nation to an extent that some within the party are wondering how did the party get here; how come the party of Lincoln is presenting a non-traditional candidate for the highest office in the land; and, what exactly must the party do to prevent another lose to Democrats in the coming November general election.

The New York Real Estate Mogul’s acceptance speech was both an embodiment of his past rhetoric of fear, hate, innuendos, and apocalypse; and, a sprinkle of quarrelsome nationalism. If you buy into his type of rhetoric, our nation is a world of anxieties and fears, with multiple forms of social ills, that a future without Donald Trump, a man in the mold of Adolf Hitler, is probably inevitable or inescapable; and, unquestionably necessary if our democracy is to sustain and or blossom for another century. His acceptance speech's declarations reflected a desire and affinity to go back to those days, when minorities were mostly second class citizens; with American women left without political voice or right to vote in party politics, state or federal. His speech called for law and order; a political prospect bemoaned by some Republican Party establishment and many Americans, as inflaming public angst in many ways.

Interestingly, the Republican Nominee’s acceptance speech was framed in the context of extreme isolationism from the rest of the world, especially those regions of the world where Islam is practiced. For all intense and purpose, the Republican flag bearer continues to doubt the loyalty of those Americans practicing the Islamic religion; fanning hate to the extent of extreme nationalism that probably excludes the possibility of being considered loyal, if you practice Islamic Religion. No one must now feel safe from probable policies that may undermine new immigrant experience; nor must new immigrants, or those resident in America, feel safe and part of the holistic American exceptionalism experience and experiment. Some cautious American political campaign observers are indicating that the Republican Party nominee is about to take America to a time, where voters are paralyzed by the inertia of the unknown and a fear of unquestionable domination by likes of Donald Trump. A time better forgotten or archaic, when many minorities were classified as goods or properties, and women’s opinions, inconceivable in any serious discussions of social, political, and economic issues. For more reflective observers of national politics, Mr. Trump’s speech appears to have conjured fear mongering, and unfathomable propositions to the extent of elevating one race in America above the rest. Going solely on the content of his rhetoric, listeners to his acceptance speech may surmise that America is about to witness a new direction in the ship of American State; and unless this redirection is led by "Messiah" Trump, it is probably going to be impossible to understand what is meant to be an American in very near future, because of his tone on issues of illegal immigration, police violence, accommodation of those practicing Islamic faith and in-deference to female members of our society.

For Mr. Trump, there is no hope, no confidence, and no other way out to civil liberty except through his prescriptions. It is time to make America Great Again! The Republican Party nominee’s exaggeration of attacks on police as terrorism acts threatening the America way of life was in true display as conceived in Mr. Trump's acceptance speech. His proposed policy to make American Companies who have moved offices overseas suffer some hyperbolic consequences was as admonished as distaste for Islam; and his exposition of a law and order doctrinaire, if not a dogged police state, to enforce public safety, a more than likely probability under a “President” Trump. Further, the 2016 Republican Nominee believes the nation is ripe for a giant wall, built to block illegal immigrants and drug traffics along US Southern Border; a proposal not only of the worst inkling in foreign policy, but one that will definitely engender retaliatory moves from many countries in Southern America, if not the globe. Here comes the reality and possibility of proposals that appear to put members of this nation who do not share the isolationist doctrinaires on pins and needles, regarding Mr. Trump's pronouncements and declarations at the Republican Convention.

With a fervor of belligerence and sometimes erratic nuances, Mr. Trump’s speech attempted to address income growth differentials in America. His attempt and premises to address this problem, as well as those problems of racism, unemployment and challenges of labor laws, were not convincing and were probably close to being elusive; and his relentless bravado as to how deplorable the state of the nation has become, marred any appreciation of what his proposal will be to solve his self-defined national problems. Further, his insinuation of potential solutions to these problems, in his landscape of belligerence statements, provided more clues of bewilderment to potential American voters. In addition, Mr. Trump’s acceptance speech seemed more of a brand of manufactured pandemonium, probably designed to undermine the whole fabric of national unity, to the justification or rise of a not-so traditional major party leadership and President of the United States.

Under a “President” Trump Administration, Americans must resolve to the federalization of some state and local government functions to an extent that, they will probably have to endure a repressive and overbearing federal government; a precursor to what some political pundits are already referring to as the new Nazi brown coats in America. His conservative messaging, pushing ultraconservative policies to a realm of paranoia or brutal awakening, where racial minorities will know their place, or will now have to live in constant fear, real fears and anxieties espoused in ways, that if you are members of either of these classes, minorities and immigrants, man or woman, you would now have to scout for protection to claim a right of American citizenship in the new end time apoplectic America as conceived by the 2016 Republican party flag bearer?

Many of Mr. Trump’s declarations regarding trade negotiations and public safety, deny possible collective consensus regarding the type of leadership and commitment from all Americans to resolve them. From the darker tone of the 2016 Republican Party Nominee acceptance speech, one may readily identify with one of the past rival of Donald Trump, Ohio Republican governor, John Kasich, who once derided what Mr. Trump campaign messaging stood for: pure Nazism. Despite all the mean spirited declarations from sweaty eyed Nominee Trump, his conviction nevertheless showed some determination that make you wonder, if this Republican candidate is not out for a spoiler. The Republican Nominee probably managed to convince many of his usual Republican faithful, with other added outlandish declarations that only people who seek to be boohooed would subscribe. How about the ridiculous hyperbole that: “America is being terrorized by Islamic radicals and illegal immigrants, who are committing heinous crimes with impunity; acts that have stolen too many innocent American lives?”

Unlike Donald Trump’s acceptance speech however, Former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s acceptance speech was a breath of fresh air. As if repudiating many declarations of the Republican Party flag bearer’s acceptance speech, the Democratic Party flag declared: “Powerful forces are threatening to pull us apart,” … “And just as with our Founders, there are no guarantees. It's truly is up to us. We have to decide whether we will all work together so we can all rise together.” Even when modest deference was given to Mr. Trump’s declaration, if at all, Ms. Clinton reminded her audience that: “America is great because America is good.” As if further concertizing her dislikes of the tone of the acceptance speech of the Republican Party Nominee, Ms. Clinton added the following at various junctions of her speech: “Don't let anyone tell you that our country is weak. We're not. Don't let anyone tell you we don't have what it takes. We do. … And most of all, don't believe anyone who says: 'I alone can fix it.'"

The Candor of Ms. Clinton’s acceptance speech of July 28th at the Philadelphia Convention Hall, demands a comparable introspection; a candid reflection on what is probably best about America and why any slogan from the republican flag bearer, of Making America Great Again, must be dismissed without much funfair. The former US Secretary of State impressed on her audience, the promise of America for all peoples, men, women, and all residents of the United States. Rather than fanning hate like her Republican counterpart, the first female nominee of a major American political party declared: “We will rise to the challenge [facing America], just as we always have. We will not build a wall. Instead, we will build an economy where everyone who wants a good paying job can get one. And we’ll build a path to citizenship for millions of immigrants who are already contributing to our economy. We will not ban a religion. We will work with all Americans and our allies to fight terrorism.” Discountenancing further some of Donald Trump’s declarations at the Republican Cleveland, Ohio convention, Ms. Clinton added: “[Trump] has taken the Republican party a long way – from ‘Morning in America to Midnight in America.”

Not counting the multiple and diverse voices of speakers before Ms. Clinton’s acceptance speech at Democratic Party convention on Thursday July 28th, including men and women of different races, religions, physical abilities and sexual orientation, the Democratic Party flag bearer acknowledged the achievements of her former arch rival within the party, Bernie Sanders; admonishing him and supporters with the following statements: 1) “I want you to know, I've heard you. Your cause is our cause;” 2) “Our country needs your ideas, energy, and passion. That is the only way we can turn our progressive platform into real change for America.” With this type of admonition, she couldn’t be said to have blundered as her Republican counterpart who said: “Safety will be restored”, as if safety went on vacation lately in America. The preconceived notion that the solution to all of America’s problems, including: “the attacks on our police and terrorism in our cities that appears to threaten our way of life” as narrated in Mr. Trump’s acceptance speech is, through force, can hardly be tenable with the tone and imagination in Ms. Clinton’s acceptance speech.

Maybe the former first lady and Upstate New York Senator’s acceptance speech at the Democratic Party Convention should be summed up in one of President Obama’s observation regarding the Republican Party flag bearer: "He’s not really a plans guy. Not really a facts guy, either. He calls himself a business guy, which is true, but I have to say, I know plenty of businessmen and women who’ve achieved success without leaving a trail of lawsuits, and unpaid workers, and people feeling like they got cheated." Further, the suspicion of the Republican Party Nominee’s prowess in business dealings by skeptics, especially Democrats, can no longer be seen far from his ambition for the White House oval office. A fear of the worst of intentions on the approach for taking on American problems as contained in the Republican Nominee declarations at the Republican Cleveland, Ohio Convention, was shot down by Ms. Clinton: “And most of all, don’t believe anyone who says: “I alone can fix it.” … Really? [Trump] alone can fix it? Isn’t he forgetting? Troops on the front lines. Police officers and fire fighters who run toward danger. Doctors and nurses who care for us. Teachers who change lives. Entrepreneurs who see possibilities in every problem. Mothers who lost children to violence and are building a movement to keep other kids safe. He’s forgetting every last one of us. Americans don’t say: “I alone can fix it.” We say: “We’ll fix it together.”

Ms. Clinton wants Democrats and American voters not only to be circumspect of the declaration of 'I alone can fix it' campaign messaging of her Republican rival, she wants the voters to: “Remember, Our Founders fought a revolution and wrote a Constitution so America would never be a nation where one person had all the power." The conjecture of Mr. Trump’s declaration of being the only one that can fix America’s problem and his overtures to the Russians in a subsequent speech a little over a week after his acceptance speech, revived a further apprehension of the true intentions of Donald Trump as a party's flag bearer: "Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing." For many intelligence experts and some independent observers, Mr. Trump crossed the line with that overtures; he is not only fanning hate in his campaign for the White House, he is encouraging spying of Americans by a foreign country; in this case, the spying of the flag bearer of a major American Political Party, Ms. Hillary Clinton.

Conclusively, it is justifiable to believe that Mr. Trump’s acceptance speech garnered the spirit and purpose of his campaign, since June of 2015. Many of his campaign messaging have had mostly nationalism flair, including exclusions of many groups, women and minorities, race, religion and national origin. His stance against anyone who does not share the notion of America first doctrinaire in all aspect of things, is very obvious; and his belief in self as the only and ultimate solution for America's broader challenges, borders on the precipitates of narcissism. Further, his brand of campaign messaging that sets groups against each other are well documented, and his acceptance speech has not deviated from most of his past declarations during the Republican Party's  primaries and caucuses leading to party nomination; no attempt at pivoting to the center as is usually the case for many past party nominees that have sought to broaden their base of support among independent voters. No matter how narcissistic and abhorrent his declarations may seem, including many of his tweeted political messaging, he comes across as a quixotic leader, who has reshaped or intends to reshape his political party forever; and with his distancing and thumbing nose at power brokers and Republican Establishment, he has shown he is ready to take the party in a different direction, better imagined than welcomed.

In the opinion of 2016 Republican Party flag bearer for the November general election, the refusal of needed party reforms by establishment Republican politicians, and the crookedness in the nomination process or system, demand someone of his kind to straighten the unwholesome shenanigans that party members are accustomed to in the past. Mr. Trump has not only stirred the Republican pot, he wants to put America first, insisting in his campaign and acceptance speech that, many of the problems the nation faces, including violence, war, poverty and defining terms of trade pacts, come out of past indiscretions of conventional American Politicians, which he is not. To prevent the country from sleeping further into abyss, Mr. Trump is offering  his party and America, his supposedly successful business acumen and leadership, believing those are the missing pieces in the puzzle of resolving America's social, economic, and political challenges, or making America great again!

On the other hand, Hillary Clinton’s DNC acceptance speech is a prototype of transformation, including defining an impressive resume, explaining where she stands on policy issues contrary to her Republican counterpart; and, denouncing the arrogance and bigotry message of Donald Trump. As if building on the collective wisdom of group effort, the Democratic Party nominee proposes, we will fix whatever problem America has together; rather than the position of Mr. Trump: “I alone can fix it.” Ms. Clinton relishes in the aspirations of Democratic Party establishment for America and wholeheartedly subscribes to the essence of collective wisdom in resolving America's challenges as a nation. She will like to borrow a leaf from the experiences and hopes of the last two Democratic Party Presidents, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. While talking about the historical implications of her novel nomination as a major party flag bearer, in the context of gains in women suffrage, she proposes a reflective leadership in America's White House; and, would never subscribe to  the lone wolf approach as proposed by her arch rival of the Republican Party. Luckily, she has a friend in the outgoing Democratic Administration and front row seat with a former Democratic President in her potential undertakings.

In addition, a probable Hillary Clinton's Administration, will likely be one of many firsts; a first female president, first spouse president and one that welcomes inputs from two former Democratic Presidents in recent memories; which may further ensure a successful White House in the coming four years, if she ends up winning the general election. For her, America has moved closer to keeping her promise ninety-six years ago, when she accepted the nineteenth amendment to the US Constitution; and her presidency will be a consummation of various efforts and actualization of many American women's dreams to change the political landscape. Just as she beamed and relished in the ovations  of the Democratic Party Convention speech, she recognizes that her ascendancy would only be for the reason of actions of multitudes of actors, who have gone to bat for her, and the inkling of Bernie Sander's campaign efforts to make her own campaign tougher, resilient and probably exceptional in the coming contest. As one experienced the diversity of speakers represented at the Democratic National Committee Philadelphia convention on behalf of Hillary Clinton, one can only imagine the probable inclusiveness of her coming administration. To many of her supporters and speakers at the convention, Hillary Clinton’s candidacy is the promise of coming together of greater ideas and commitments to build better capacity and support for addressing whatever challenges may be ahead for America.

Contrarily or unfortunately, her rival's narcissistic and somewhat nationalistic campaign efforts, which open gates to an unknown or uncharted waters, probably stands a chance at success of winning the US Presidency, if Democrats do not do a good job at letting the American voters know the differences. With less than four months to the November general election, the political future of the nation may depend more on how Democrats are able to redirect their campaign messaging, such that it appeals to a greater diverse population, who will in turn show up to vote for Hillary Clinton in November 2016 general election day. The anxiety and fears now peddled by Mr. Trump’s campaign messaging, which are resonating with multiples and multitudes of Republican base, may just qualify him for the needed number of electoral college, if Democrats are unable to properly define his brand of bias and nationalism. Finally, maybe it is just good enough to believe or romanticize in the luck of Clinton's Vice Presidential choice, Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia, who's never lost a political campaign contest in his life time. A November victory for the Democrats may just be resonating out of this kind of luck and the promise and success of the Clinton-Kaine ticket, guaranteed.

 Members of the National Woman's Party picket the White House,
 Library of Congress, LC-USZ62-31799 DLC