A Republican’s Thanksgiving perspective on US presidential hopefuls

The intense interest in the thrill-a-minute, through-the-looking-glass 2016 US presidential race, fuelled by anger at maladjusted Washington and anxiety after the Paris attacks, spawned predictions that Thanksgiving political debates would be noisier and nastier than ever. Plenty of turkeys with a bone to pick and plenty of dressing down to go with the dressing. The Democratic National Committee actually issued talking points for the "lively" conversations with Republican uncles, aunts and brothers.

Clearly, the people at the Democratic National Committee do not have any Republican relatives. It’s never a parley. It’s a lecture. So I decided to let my Republican brother offer his red-state soliloquy now, hoping he’d let me eat my white meat in peace. He-e-e-ere’s Kevin:

While liberals and the mainstream media may regard the myriad Republican presidential candidates as a “house of crazies”, I see an embarrassment of riches. It is the ultimate irony that the Republican field blows the Democrats away on one of their favourite topics: diversity.

Bombast and incivility

Here's how I see the Republican contest and the Democratic coronation. First, Donald Trump. With all his bombast and incivility, Trump has joyfully debunked political correctness for the complete fraud that it is. With his talent for making debate ratings soar, he has allowed all the other candidates to be seen and heard at celestial levels unreachable without him.

He has touched a nerve because people are fed up with liberal groups being offended at every slight, real or imagined. Three Ivy League schools are currently under siege, with students at Princeton demanding the removal of Woodrow Wilson’s name from a building. Washington and Jefferson are up next as former slave owners, leaving Al Sharpton as the default “father of our country.” We are tired of apologies for America’s exceptionalism.

Ben Carson. Not since Eisenhower has a complete novice politician been so legitimate a contender. Can he avoid the traps set for him by the media? He presents intriguing possibilities as part of the ticket, forcing African- Americans to choose between him and the wife of the man Toni Morrison called our "first black president".

Marco Rubio. Young, whip- smart and self-assured, he has an encyclopedic knowledge of foreign affairs and is a stunning contrast to Hillary Clinton both in generation and vision. Wait until he starts delivering his speeches in Spanish.

Ted Cruz. The Hispanic heir apparent to Barry Goldwater had the best moment in the third debate, calling out an obscure cable TV host looking for his 10 minutes of fame.

Jeb Bush. I like the Bushes, all of them. Jeb would have been the perfect Republican candidate from 1988 to 2000. In this age of instant gratification, his wonkish grasp of policy does not move the needle. Too bad.

Chris Christie: Trump with better manners. A certain pick for attorney general if this gig does not work out.

Democratic lineup

Contrast our informed candidates with the Democratic lineup of Queen Cersei, the socialist Doc Brown from Back to the Future and the lead singer of O'Malley's March. I keep waiting for Martin O'Malley during debates to whip out his guitar for a few Irish songs. It would be more entertaining.

Clinton: she’s seeking the highest office in the land even though 60 per cent of the country does not trust her and her emails are currently under FBI review for potential national security breaches.

Bernie Sanders: his proposals for free healthcare, free college and expanded social security have a price tag of $18 trillion with no way to pay for it. Not even a candidate for budget director.

O’Malley: does anyone know his reason for running? The next president will have to deal with a severely weakened hand, at home and abroad. The bill for “leading from behind” has come due. After the Paris attacks, the president who called Islamic State “contained” was left to issue his familiar disclaimer that Islam is a religion of peace. In dealing with foes, Clinton, at Georgetown University in 2014, called for “trying to understand, and insofar as is psychologically possible, empathise with their perspective”. Note to Hillary: any enemy with beheading as a menu item does not deserve empathy.

A peeved President Barack Obama lashed out at Republicans for daring to pass a Bill asking for a more robust screening process for the Syrian refugees. His adviser Ben Rhodes assured us that our screening was airtight even as 47 Democrats voted for the Bill. The president has been forced to face the inconvenient truth that others will lead the world in this battle while he continues his lonely quest against the world's "greatest threat": climate change.

Our enemies do not fear us, and authority at home is being questioned by a disgraceful campaign since Ferguson to undermine the police.

So, ask yourself three questions. Do you want a president who refuses to name the enemy? Who do you want to appoint the next three Supreme Court justices? And who will protect the homeland and honour the constitution? Then pray that you got it right.

Happy Thanksgiving, Kevin.

– (New York Times)