On July 9, Edward Nowak joined the growing horde of critics of mine. Because of my past opinions, the horde takes great exception to whatever I may care to write. In this case it was ‘How could any voter select Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton?’ Nowak’s decision was terribly flawed in that he justified his selection of president, and unreasonably so, on the one he considered “less bad.”
How in heavens name he could select Trump as “less bad” is way beyond my ability to understand. Clinton was probably the most qualified person to seek the office of president since the time of our Founding Fathers. She had closely observed the operation of government for eight years as First Lady. She had also served with distinction as senator from New York and therefore learned the rules of the legislative process. Additionally she had been Secretary of State for President Barack Obama and was therefore personally knowledgeable of the world’s leaders.
Now to compare Clinton’s outstanding record of service to our nation with that of Trump’s exposes us to a glaring difference. Trump’s record as developer is flawed with four bankruptcies that cost jobs and money to investors, employees, and vendors. He can also take credit for two flawed marriages but as to prior government service, there were none. Trump’s dismal performance since his inauguration glaringly illustrates that a lack of any prior government experience results in a heavy burden on our nation.
Lee R. Pitzer, O’Fallon