This post is an announcement of a new category of writings. We’ve started a presidential election cycle. Within that context, I’ve made it a habit to comment on specific candidates based mostly on their policy positions, but also on their history, opposition to their campaigns, or what they signal about their own character. In a new category of writing, I’d like to partition policy or issues away from the individual candidate and tell you, ‘what would Lee do?’
As I read news reports about the first Democrat debate, (part 2 is occurring as I write, but I never watch them directly), the stories repeated over and over that the candidates took mostly limp policy positions if they took any at all, preferring to [connect with the voters] by essentially evading the issue, or maybe they really had no position. One such issue was how to deal with guns. What I’d do wasn’t within a country mile of any of their imaginations (or the Republicans for that matter), so I see a large void here. So here’s to filling a vacuum…
I’ll take campaign propositions as a cue on what to discuss. They may or may not reflect on the candidates strengths or weaknesses for that that issue; in fact, probably half of what I say will be off the radar of any candidate because I can do that.
I am not running for office. I promise to cross ideological and party lines for some points on almost every issue. I’m not here to please or suck up to any faction. Consider the ideas untried rough drafts suitable for kicking off a discussion or occasionally, starting a paradigm. While I don’t take myself too seriously, all positions will represent my disposition at least at that moment and I promise they will all have value. Finally, if any candidates wake up and realize how bankrupt their idea cabinet is, I do consultancy.
Lee Jones