Keeping Campaign Promises is usually a good thing, even a rare thing.

But what if the winner was elected by a minority, not a majority? And what if many of those that voted for the winner were angry, fearful and unknowledgeable?
What if in fact, the majority voted for someone and something else?
Would keeping campaign promises to the angry, frightened ignorant minority be best for the majority?

As the current President of the United States and his minions go about their work, they often justify the pain and disruption they’re causing by saying they’re keeping their campaign promises. Those that support democracy but didn’t vote for this Administration are supposed to be respectful of that and even supportive.

Normally, that would be correct. But the way this Administration was elected and what it is doing is not normal, nor even in the best interests of the majority of voters in the United States of America.

The other candidate won the election by nearly 3,000,000 votes. 49% of those eligible to vote, didn’t. That means that the Administration now keeping its campaign promises is keeping its promises to approximately 25% of the electorate, many of whom voted from fear, anger and ignorance.

Do we want these campaign promises to be kept? Are they good for the Nation and the world? This is still a democracy. Make your voice heard. Tell your Congress person. Get organized and vote for a change in the mid-term election.

Share