Electoral Threats
On Monday, November 1, classes at UH were cancelled, and I assumed there would be no Ka Leo that day. Few days later, I found an issue of Ka Leo that day.In it, there was an article about ex-UH football player Craig Stutzmann who ran a "say nothing" campaign for State House.
http://www.kaleo.org/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/11/01/4185e74362021?in_archive=1
A telling excerpt was this
Reports say he has been threatened by a high profile supporter of the Democratic Party and told he should not challenge Saiki.Stutzmann told the Hawai'i Reporter on Oct. 15, that he received a phone call from a prominent businessman, who told him that running for the Republican Party would not be "good for his career."
It makes me ashamed that I didn't read the Hawaii Reporter as often as I should.here's the Hawaii Reporter article
http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?f9c485a0-ca4c-41b3-858b-615a0d9fc210
But what is a shame is that Stutzmann didn't stand his ground! This is a guy who isn't scared to be tackled on the football field, so one would assume that he wouldn't let threats stop his campaign for office!
Do I regret voting against Stutzmann? The better question would be - should I vote for someone who said nothing and didn't even stand his ground? That is worse than Kerry's flip-flops!
Stuttzmann should've made the news of the alleged threats public a lot earlier. People would've joined his side, knowing that he once made big plays for UH against big-time rivals BYU and Fresno State!
Wednesday, November 03, 2004
Bush WON
Though I voted for a minor candidate (Badnarik), I do feel a smile on my face when I think of the reactions of folks like Tobin Jones! Hey Tobin, you can't blame me again!
Kerry accepted the loss like a man, unlike Gore who kept demanding recounts in 3 counties of Florida that favored him.
It seems that most blue (Democrat) states remained blue, most red states (Republican) remained red! NY Times already had an article about NY residents dissing the red states. The regional rivalry will get heated all over again!
Hopefully, the draft scares are BS. But only time will tell!
Tuesday, November 02, 2004
I voted today
At 9:45 am I filled out the ballots at Kuhio Elementary School.
This is who I voted for
President : Micheal Badnarik (Libertarian)- this was one of the toughest decisions I had to ever make! Though Bush did some good things as President (something the Radical Left would get mad at me for saying), and it isn't easy to vote against that, I had to do what I had to do. I sincerely hope all the draft scares turn out to be total BS, but I can't be certain at all! For self-protection, i chose Badnarik, even though some of his statements are loony. But only time will tell if the post-election secret draft plans are even true.
As for John Kerry, I cant trust a guy who is inconsistent throughout the campaign on multiple issues. Is he going to flip-flop on the draft too?
US Senate Hawaii: Jeff Mallan (Libertarian) I struggled with this one because in one of the local newspapers, Mallan's profile was missing, while it showcased arrogant pork-king Dan Inouye (D), morality fascist only motivated by same sex marriage and abortion - Cam Cavasso (R) and mega-left liberal Jim Brewer (Independent). Luckily the other local paper had his profile, so I chose Mallan
US House - Hawaii District 1 : Dalton Tanonaka (Republican) Tanonaka ran for Lt. Gov. but lost to current Lt. Gov Duke Aiona in the primary 2 years ago. I liked Tanonaka's economic expertise, and his moderate image. I also liked it when he slammed incumbent Neil Abercombie (D) for even bringing up the draft proposal in Congress (along with NY Dem Charles Rangel)! Abercombie is always friendly when replying to my e-letters to Congress even when I dont agree with his views. So in a way, I do feel a bit bad voting against him, but this is politics so I vote on who I think who will be a better Representative. Tanonaka was on the ballot, so I chose him,
The race also had Libertarian Allysa Young, a former stripper. Of course, that got my attention! But I found out that she declared she was going to leave the US for good after the election, so I decided not to vote for her. Plus, Tanonaka was on the ballot, and it was someone I could be satisfied with for now.
State House -District 22 - Scott Saiki (Democrat) I know, you all heard me criticize Hawaii Democrats. I stand by those criticisms. But Saiki's opponent Craig Stutzman (R) had said ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in this campaign. He refused to answer ANY questions from the media. He sent no fliers. He doesn't seem to take this election seriously! I had him in my Journalism class at UH, and he was SILENT when the topics was politics. However, that silence was non-existent when the topic was sports. (side note: Stutzman was UH football player) Though I do appreciate all the catches Stutzman made in UH games against BYU and Fresno State, this election isn't about football! If Stuttzman even made an effort to say something in this campaign, chances are, I would've voted for him! Meanwhile, I'll keep a close eye on what Saiki is doing as a legislator.
Honolulu Mayor : Mufi Hanneman This was a non-partisan race between two long time Democrats, Hanneman and Duke Bainum. I voted for Mufi ( as everyone calls him) because of his opposition to the idiotic BRT system, the endorsements by state senator Sam Slom (king of pro-capitalist advocates) and the interesting idea to have a ferry for workers to commute from Waianae to Honolulu. Anyone who can get the endorsement of Sam Slom and still get a lot of support from low income communities (including my former home in Kalihi) is definitely someone I will support.
Board of Ed. (at large- can vote up to 3)Lei Ahu Isa, Darwin Ching, Guy Kaulukukui - Isa once repped my former district as a Democrat, but later defected to the Republican Party and support more local control of schools. Guy Kaulukukui and Darwin Cing said that "one size cant fit all" meaning what schools might work for one person, another person might benefit more from a different school. That should but hasn't been acknowledged by many people! Kaulukukui even wants to do away with district requirements to attend certain schools, AMEN for that!
Board of Ed. (Honolulu) Keith Sakata - not a far-right case like his opponent Denise Matsumoto who once proposed teaching of creationism in PUBLIC schools.
State Constitutional Amendments
I voted for 1,2 and 3 because 1 allowed convictions for each separate case of sexual assault of repeated assaults by the same person. 2 allows the public to be informed of sex offenders living nearby, and 3 protects confidentiality of rape victims.I voted against 4 because I dont want to be in a situation where I am accused of something and not know what the accuser looks like before the trial begins. It could be just someone you passed by at the mall that's made an accusation, and you wouldn't know who that was before the trial begins.
I'll talk about OHA and city charter amendments some other time.
At 9:45 am I filled out the ballots at Kuhio Elementary School.
This is who I voted for
President : Micheal Badnarik (Libertarian)- this was one of the toughest decisions I had to ever make! Though Bush did some good things as President (something the Radical Left would get mad at me for saying), and it isn't easy to vote against that, I had to do what I had to do. I sincerely hope all the draft scares turn out to be total BS, but I can't be certain at all! For self-protection, i chose Badnarik, even though some of his statements are loony. But only time will tell if the post-election secret draft plans are even true.
As for John Kerry, I cant trust a guy who is inconsistent throughout the campaign on multiple issues. Is he going to flip-flop on the draft too?
US Senate Hawaii: Jeff Mallan (Libertarian) I struggled with this one because in one of the local newspapers, Mallan's profile was missing, while it showcased arrogant pork-king Dan Inouye (D), morality fascist only motivated by same sex marriage and abortion - Cam Cavasso (R) and mega-left liberal Jim Brewer (Independent). Luckily the other local paper had his profile, so I chose Mallan
US House - Hawaii District 1 : Dalton Tanonaka (Republican) Tanonaka ran for Lt. Gov. but lost to current Lt. Gov Duke Aiona in the primary 2 years ago. I liked Tanonaka's economic expertise, and his moderate image. I also liked it when he slammed incumbent Neil Abercombie (D) for even bringing up the draft proposal in Congress (along with NY Dem Charles Rangel)! Abercombie is always friendly when replying to my e-letters to Congress even when I dont agree with his views. So in a way, I do feel a bit bad voting against him, but this is politics so I vote on who I think who will be a better Representative. Tanonaka was on the ballot, so I chose him,
The race also had Libertarian Allysa Young, a former stripper. Of course, that got my attention! But I found out that she declared she was going to leave the US for good after the election, so I decided not to vote for her. Plus, Tanonaka was on the ballot, and it was someone I could be satisfied with for now.
State House -District 22 - Scott Saiki (Democrat) I know, you all heard me criticize Hawaii Democrats. I stand by those criticisms. But Saiki's opponent Craig Stutzman (R) had said ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in this campaign. He refused to answer ANY questions from the media. He sent no fliers. He doesn't seem to take this election seriously! I had him in my Journalism class at UH, and he was SILENT when the topics was politics. However, that silence was non-existent when the topic was sports. (side note: Stutzman was UH football player) Though I do appreciate all the catches Stutzman made in UH games against BYU and Fresno State, this election isn't about football! If Stuttzman even made an effort to say something in this campaign, chances are, I would've voted for him! Meanwhile, I'll keep a close eye on what Saiki is doing as a legislator.
Honolulu Mayor : Mufi Hanneman This was a non-partisan race between two long time Democrats, Hanneman and Duke Bainum. I voted for Mufi ( as everyone calls him) because of his opposition to the idiotic BRT system, the endorsements by state senator Sam Slom (king of pro-capitalist advocates) and the interesting idea to have a ferry for workers to commute from Waianae to Honolulu. Anyone who can get the endorsement of Sam Slom and still get a lot of support from low income communities (including my former home in Kalihi) is definitely someone I will support.
Board of Ed. (at large- can vote up to 3)Lei Ahu Isa, Darwin Ching, Guy Kaulukukui - Isa once repped my former district as a Democrat, but later defected to the Republican Party and support more local control of schools. Guy Kaulukukui and Darwin Cing said that "one size cant fit all" meaning what schools might work for one person, another person might benefit more from a different school. That should but hasn't been acknowledged by many people! Kaulukukui even wants to do away with district requirements to attend certain schools, AMEN for that!
Board of Ed. (Honolulu) Keith Sakata - not a far-right case like his opponent Denise Matsumoto who once proposed teaching of creationism in PUBLIC schools.
State Constitutional Amendments
I voted for 1,2 and 3 because 1 allowed convictions for each separate case of sexual assault of repeated assaults by the same person. 2 allows the public to be informed of sex offenders living nearby, and 3 protects confidentiality of rape victims.I voted against 4 because I dont want to be in a situation where I am accused of something and not know what the accuser looks like before the trial begins. It could be just someone you passed by at the mall that's made an accusation, and you wouldn't know who that was before the trial begins.
I'll talk about OHA and city charter amendments some other time.
Monday, November 01, 2004
Election Update
When I wrote that Ka Leo editorial (10/27/04),
http://www.kaleo.org/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/10/27/417f50257bbbd?in_archive=1
I wrote that the 3rd party candidates inclued Micheal Badnarik (Libertarian) David Cobb (Green), RalphNader (independent) and Micehal Peroutka (Constitutional)
But in Hawaii, only Badnarik, Cobb as well as Bush and Kerry would be on the ballot!
And I also wrote that Ventura said he wouldn't vote for either Kerry or Bush! He did say that! However, weeks later, Ventura said he prefers Kerry!
I'll vote Badnarik (Libertarian) tommorrow for President, even though I dont agree with his agenda 100%. But check out his webpage http://badnarik.org/
Though I did agree with Bush in getting rid of Saddam, and criticized the Left for their loony comments on this issue, I want to protect myself from a possible draft! Both Bush and Kerry promised not to have a draft! But one guy's dad said "read my lips", the other guy is even more well-known as a flip-flopper!
Plus on domestic issues, I tend to agree more with Badnarik than with Bush or Kerry!As I 've mentioned in my editorial
http://www.kaleo.org/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/10/27/417f50257bbbd?in_archive=1
The Libertarian Party has Michael Badnarik. He is antiwar, wants to privatize many government services, wants to legalize marijuana, and wants a bigger tax reduction than Bush. He believes the federal government should stay out of the abortion and gay marriage issues.Republicans fear that the Libertarians take away potential voters worried about taxes, gun control and government bureaucracies. But the libertarians also out-liberalize the Democrats on the military draft, drug legalization and opposition to the Patriot Act.
AND
In my opinion, the best minor candidate is the already-mentioned Michael Badnarik of the Libertarian Party. I agree with him on medical marijuana, abortion, same-sex marriage, guns and the draft. I hope he takes a gradual approach to privatizing certain government services. Going too fast on that can be a disaster;
The "privatize everything now" approach, will only lead to a mega-strong anti-privatization backlash! If privatization is done slowly, the anti-privatization opposition wouldn't be as strong! But MORE IMPORTANTLY, it gives the people time to adjust to privatization of services.
When I wrote that Ka Leo editorial (10/27/04),
http://www.kaleo.org/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/10/27/417f50257bbbd?in_archive=1
I wrote that the 3rd party candidates inclued Micheal Badnarik (Libertarian) David Cobb (Green), RalphNader (independent) and Micehal Peroutka (Constitutional)
But in Hawaii, only Badnarik, Cobb as well as Bush and Kerry would be on the ballot!
And I also wrote that Ventura said he wouldn't vote for either Kerry or Bush! He did say that! However, weeks later, Ventura said he prefers Kerry!
I'll vote Badnarik (Libertarian) tommorrow for President, even though I dont agree with his agenda 100%. But check out his webpage http://badnarik.org/
Though I did agree with Bush in getting rid of Saddam, and criticized the Left for their loony comments on this issue, I want to protect myself from a possible draft! Both Bush and Kerry promised not to have a draft! But one guy's dad said "read my lips", the other guy is even more well-known as a flip-flopper!
Plus on domestic issues, I tend to agree more with Badnarik than with Bush or Kerry!As I 've mentioned in my editorial
http://www.kaleo.org/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/10/27/417f50257bbbd?in_archive=1
The Libertarian Party has Michael Badnarik. He is antiwar, wants to privatize many government services, wants to legalize marijuana, and wants a bigger tax reduction than Bush. He believes the federal government should stay out of the abortion and gay marriage issues.Republicans fear that the Libertarians take away potential voters worried about taxes, gun control and government bureaucracies. But the libertarians also out-liberalize the Democrats on the military draft, drug legalization and opposition to the Patriot Act.
AND
In my opinion, the best minor candidate is the already-mentioned Michael Badnarik of the Libertarian Party. I agree with him on medical marijuana, abortion, same-sex marriage, guns and the draft. I hope he takes a gradual approach to privatizing certain government services. Going too fast on that can be a disaster;
The "privatize everything now" approach, will only lead to a mega-strong anti-privatization backlash! If privatization is done slowly, the anti-privatization opposition wouldn't be as strong! But MORE IMPORTANTLY, it gives the people time to adjust to privatization of services.
UH Classes Cancelled
The last 24 hours have been mind boggling.
I decided to visit Centerfolds in my Halloween make-up (as Vili The Warrior), then I left because I thought school would be in session the next day.
Then this morning I woke up later than usual (6:30 instead of 5:45) then i got a phone call from a friend saying classes are cancelled. I was only up 10 minutes when that call came, so I turned on the radio. UH classes are cancelled.
And though I didn't yet read the newspapers, I saw a picture of Hamilton being damaged! BAD!
The last 24 hours have been mind boggling.
I decided to visit Centerfolds in my Halloween make-up (as Vili The Warrior), then I left because I thought school would be in session the next day.
Then this morning I woke up later than usual (6:30 instead of 5:45) then i got a phone call from a friend saying classes are cancelled. I was only up 10 minutes when that call came, so I turned on the radio. UH classes are cancelled.
And though I didn't yet read the newspapers, I saw a picture of Hamilton being damaged! BAD!
Wednesday, October 27, 2004
Third party candidates
Back on Ka Leo
After so long, my stuff is finally printed on Ka Leo.
My latest editorial discusses the alternatives to voting Bush or Kerry.
http://www.kaleo.org/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/10/27/417f50257bbbd
Third party candidates offer choices
Polarized voting between Kerry and Bush sideline alternative candidates, with help from mass media
Pablo WegesendOctober 27, 2004
By the time you are reading this editorial, all three of the presidential debates for the 2004 election will have finished. Of course, those debates involved only Democratic nominee Sen. John Kerry and Republican incumbent President Bush. Because of this, many people get the wrong impression these two are the only two candidates running for president.
There are others running for president.
There is Ralph Nader, who is running as an independent. His claim to fame is his battle with big corporations. He ran for president in 2000 with the Green Party. Nader made many democrats angry because he supposedly took votes away from then Democratic nominee Al Gore.
The current Green Party nominee is David Cobb, another anti-corporate lawyer. Like Nader, Cobb also has a far-left agenda. Cobb and Nader think the Democrats aren't liberal enough on foreign policy, environment, civil liberties and economics.
The Libertarian Party has Michael Badnarik. He is antiwar, wants to privatize many government services, wants to legalize marijuana, and wants a bigger tax reduction than Bush. He believes the federal government should stay out of the abortion and gay marriage issues.
Republicans fear that the Libertarians take away potential voters worried about taxes, gun control and government bureaucracies. But the libertarians also out-liberalize the Democrats on the military draft, drug legalization and opposition to the Patriot Act.
The Constitution Party has Michael Peroutka. Peroutka is the far-right alternative to the Republicans. He thinks that Bush is too liberal on the federal deficit and immigration. He also dislikes the Patriot Act and thinks that Bush isn't vocal enough against abortion, homosexuality and secularization of public schools.
We have all these other choices and more; however, the media is next to silent on the so-called "third parties." They pretend they don't exist. They pretend that all of America is totally aligned with either Kerry or Bush. That is impossible in a nation of 280 million.
Yet, there are political pundits who consider undecided voters as "stupid," never mind that many people are conflicted between voting for a lesser-known candidate or voting for the "lesser of two evils." Many, like me, may agree with Bush on certain subjects but agree with Kerry on others. We came to that conclusion through an enormous amount of time spent reading newspapers, searching the Internet and watching the news. Yet these pundits call millions of us "stupid" just because we refuse to totally align ourselves with the two over-publicized candidates? These mega-partisan pundits are acting stupid by implying that one must totally agree with Bush or Kerry.
Those of us who have the nerve to vote for a lesser-known candidate are demonized for wasting our votes. The partisan pundits blame third parties for taking away votes their parties are supposedly entitled to.
In 2000, the Democrats demonized Nader for taking away potential Gore votes. Notice that the pro-democrat pundits didn't even bother to encourage Gore to explain why his ideas are better than Nader's. It's as if they're not even confident in Gore being a better candidate issue-wise. It is ironic that the Democratic Party claims to be for the little man, yet they demonize smaller parties for taking away votes.
The Republicans are also guilty of the same thing. It is ironic that the Republican Party claims to be against the entitlement mentality, yet they criticize the Reform, Libertarian and Constitution parties for "taking away votes" from Republicans. As if Republicans are entitled to power. The republicans claim to be for personal responsibility, but in reality blame others for their loses. The Republicans claim to be for the free market, but they aren't willing to effectively market their ideas.
It is this arrogance of the two big parties plus the media's refusal to cover minor parties that is reducing voter turnout. In 2000, in the United States, only half of those eligible to vote actually voted.
Yet, in 1998, in Minnesota, 70 percent of those eligible actually voted. Why? Because in that year, Jesse Ventura was running for governor of Minnesota. Ventura was neither a Democrat nor a Republican. He was less for government bureaucracy, pro-privatization, pro-choice, and pro-gun. He even took the risky positions of being for legalizing prostitution, marijuana and same-sex marriage. With all that, he was able to defeat the two major parties. Plus, being a former pro-wrestler didn't hurt.
Imagine someone like that running for president. I think someone like that can win the presidency.
As for Ventura, he recently stated he wouldn't vote for Kerry or Bush.
As for me, I like Bush for being tough on Islamic terrorists and being pro-immigration; however, Bush is wrong when using the federal government to restrict abortion, same-sex marriage and medical marijuana.
As for Kerry, I agree with him on abortion, civil unions and being tough on al Qaeda; however, Kerry was too inconsistent on too many issues throughout his campaign.
In my opinion, the best minor candidate is the already-mentioned Michael Badnarik of the Libertarian Party. I agree with him on medical marijuana, abortion, same-sex marriage, guns and the draft. I hope he takes a gradual approach to privatizing certain government services. Going too fast on that can be a disaster; however, he doesn't seem tough enough to take on Islamic terrorists.
Hopefully, someone can reason with me on which candidate to vote for on Nov.2
After so long, my stuff is finally printed on Ka Leo.
My latest editorial discusses the alternatives to voting Bush or Kerry.
http://www.kaleo.org/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/10/27/417f50257bbbd
Third party candidates offer choices
Polarized voting between Kerry and Bush sideline alternative candidates, with help from mass media
Pablo WegesendOctober 27, 2004
By the time you are reading this editorial, all three of the presidential debates for the 2004 election will have finished. Of course, those debates involved only Democratic nominee Sen. John Kerry and Republican incumbent President Bush. Because of this, many people get the wrong impression these two are the only two candidates running for president.
There are others running for president.
There is Ralph Nader, who is running as an independent. His claim to fame is his battle with big corporations. He ran for president in 2000 with the Green Party. Nader made many democrats angry because he supposedly took votes away from then Democratic nominee Al Gore.
The current Green Party nominee is David Cobb, another anti-corporate lawyer. Like Nader, Cobb also has a far-left agenda. Cobb and Nader think the Democrats aren't liberal enough on foreign policy, environment, civil liberties and economics.
The Libertarian Party has Michael Badnarik. He is antiwar, wants to privatize many government services, wants to legalize marijuana, and wants a bigger tax reduction than Bush. He believes the federal government should stay out of the abortion and gay marriage issues.
Republicans fear that the Libertarians take away potential voters worried about taxes, gun control and government bureaucracies. But the libertarians also out-liberalize the Democrats on the military draft, drug legalization and opposition to the Patriot Act.
The Constitution Party has Michael Peroutka. Peroutka is the far-right alternative to the Republicans. He thinks that Bush is too liberal on the federal deficit and immigration. He also dislikes the Patriot Act and thinks that Bush isn't vocal enough against abortion, homosexuality and secularization of public schools.
We have all these other choices and more; however, the media is next to silent on the so-called "third parties." They pretend they don't exist. They pretend that all of America is totally aligned with either Kerry or Bush. That is impossible in a nation of 280 million.
Yet, there are political pundits who consider undecided voters as "stupid," never mind that many people are conflicted between voting for a lesser-known candidate or voting for the "lesser of two evils." Many, like me, may agree with Bush on certain subjects but agree with Kerry on others. We came to that conclusion through an enormous amount of time spent reading newspapers, searching the Internet and watching the news. Yet these pundits call millions of us "stupid" just because we refuse to totally align ourselves with the two over-publicized candidates? These mega-partisan pundits are acting stupid by implying that one must totally agree with Bush or Kerry.
Those of us who have the nerve to vote for a lesser-known candidate are demonized for wasting our votes. The partisan pundits blame third parties for taking away votes their parties are supposedly entitled to.
In 2000, the Democrats demonized Nader for taking away potential Gore votes. Notice that the pro-democrat pundits didn't even bother to encourage Gore to explain why his ideas are better than Nader's. It's as if they're not even confident in Gore being a better candidate issue-wise. It is ironic that the Democratic Party claims to be for the little man, yet they demonize smaller parties for taking away votes.
The Republicans are also guilty of the same thing. It is ironic that the Republican Party claims to be against the entitlement mentality, yet they criticize the Reform, Libertarian and Constitution parties for "taking away votes" from Republicans. As if Republicans are entitled to power. The republicans claim to be for personal responsibility, but in reality blame others for their loses. The Republicans claim to be for the free market, but they aren't willing to effectively market their ideas.
It is this arrogance of the two big parties plus the media's refusal to cover minor parties that is reducing voter turnout. In 2000, in the United States, only half of those eligible to vote actually voted.
Yet, in 1998, in Minnesota, 70 percent of those eligible actually voted. Why? Because in that year, Jesse Ventura was running for governor of Minnesota. Ventura was neither a Democrat nor a Republican. He was less for government bureaucracy, pro-privatization, pro-choice, and pro-gun. He even took the risky positions of being for legalizing prostitution, marijuana and same-sex marriage. With all that, he was able to defeat the two major parties. Plus, being a former pro-wrestler didn't hurt.
Imagine someone like that running for president. I think someone like that can win the presidency.
As for Ventura, he recently stated he wouldn't vote for Kerry or Bush.
As for me, I like Bush for being tough on Islamic terrorists and being pro-immigration; however, Bush is wrong when using the federal government to restrict abortion, same-sex marriage and medical marijuana.
As for Kerry, I agree with him on abortion, civil unions and being tough on al Qaeda; however, Kerry was too inconsistent on too many issues throughout his campaign.
In my opinion, the best minor candidate is the already-mentioned Michael Badnarik of the Libertarian Party. I agree with him on medical marijuana, abortion, same-sex marriage, guns and the draft. I hope he takes a gradual approach to privatizing certain government services. Going too fast on that can be a disaster; however, he doesn't seem tough enough to take on Islamic terrorists.
Hopefully, someone can reason with me on which candidate to vote for on Nov.2
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)