ANY Democratic Contender's Better Than A Republican

5 Reasons Any Democratic Contender Would Make A Better President Than Anyone From The GOP

Think there’s no difference between a Democrat and a Republican? Think again.

As the Democratic primaries draw closer, here’s a reminder: While there are some differences between the two main Democratic candidates, there’s a huge difference between a Democrat and a Republican. And if you support even part of the Democratic platform, you’ll make danged sure a Republican doesn’t land in the White House.

Yes, I’m talking to you, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders supporters. And if you’re one of those self-proclaimed Independents who claim there’s no difference between a Democrat and a Republican, think again.

Let’s try an experiment. Think of all the presidential candidates for the 2016 contest, and try to strip away (if you can) any political affiliations attached to them. Look strictly at their proposed policies, ideas, and agendas for the future of the United States. If you are honest with yourself, it is very easy to come to this conclusion: Any of the Democratic contenders in the 2016 presidential race would make a far better Commander-in-Chief than what anyone in the GOP currently has to offer.

Yes, a large part of that problem is that the Republican candidates are personally repulsive and blatant shysters. But there’s also the fact that the transparent agendas they are trying to force on our country — disguised as Christianity, jingoism, and manufactured fear — are in conflict with our very founding documents. They are also often propped up by a corporate agenda. Remember, corporations are people now! When push comes to shove there’s a huge difference between a Democrat and a Republican.

5 reasons why we’ll be better off with either Democratic contender than with a Republican in the White House.

1. The Supreme Court The winner of 2016’s presidential election is likely to play an unusually large role in shaping the membership of the Supreme Court. None other than former Texas Governor Rick Perry made this point painfully clear in May, 2015. Perry explained why the winner of the 2016 presidential election is likely to leave a legacy that will continue for decades after that future president leaves office. Quoted in an article on Think Progress:

“Something I want you all to think about is that the next president of the United States, whoever that individual may be, could choose up to three, maybe even four members of the Supreme Court. So the 2016 election “isn’t about who’s going to be the president of the United States for just the next four years. This could be about individuals who have an impact on you, your children, and even our grandchildren. That’s the weight of what this election is really about.”

Let’s assume that no justice leaves the Supreme Court before the next inauguration. Three justices will be over 80 years-old, and Justice Stephen Breyer will be 78 when the next president takes office. If our next president decides to replace all four of these justices, that will give their hand-picked appointees control over nearly half of the Supreme Court. Not since Richard Nixon has a president had this kind of influence over the Court’s membership. Imagine the destruction one of the lunatic GOP candidates could cause if they had that kind of power.

The difference between a Democrat and a Republican in the White House? Before rejecting one Democratic contender or the other, think about the Supreme Court, Obamacare, Social Security, civil rights, and climate change.

2.  Obamacare:  The Republican have tried to repeal the Affordable Care Act 60 times, according to the Democrats on the House Ways and Means Committee. And to what end? Wasting taxpayer time and money. A text-book example of Einstein’s definition of insanity. As it stands now, every one of the candidates on the right vow to repeal and/or replace the Affordable Care Act. Replace it with more “market-based” systems. Some of the GOP candidates even want to end Medicare, according to this article from BallotPedia.org.

Hillary Clinton, the top Democratic contender, has expressed concerns about insurance company mergers creating monopolies. She also has expressed a desire for more accountability from drug companies regarding exhorbitant pricing. Clinton is on the record as a supporter of Obamacare but not a Single Payer system.  Bernie Sanders, currently sitting at #2 in the polls, on the other hand, champions the Single Payer Healthcare System.  During the Dec. 19 Democratic debate, Sanders spoke on healthcare in the U.S.:

“Why is it that we are — why is it that we spend almost three times per capita as to what they spend in the U.K., 50 percent more than what they pay in France, countries that guarantee health care to all of their people and in many cases, have better health care outcomes. Bottom line. This ties into campaign finance reform. The insurance companies, the drug companies are bribing the United States Congress. We need to pass a Medicare for all single payer system. It will lower the cost of health care for a middle-class family by thousands of dollars a year.”

The big difference between a Democrat and a Republican is that either Democratic contender would ensure that people have access to healthcare.

Three more reasons why we’d be better off with either Democratic contender than with a Republican (continues on next page).

Not your average suburban mom.