Will a single issue be the deciding factor in the 2020 presidential election?
That is an interesting question. Depending on your point of view now and depending on the final election outcome and the 20/20 hindsight that will be applied to that election, we could well be treated to any number of analyses of the results.
I have a strong feeling that the right-to-life supporters may tip the scales in President Trump’s favor. On the other hand, the expected confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett may further energize the broad range of abortion-on-demand supporters to vote in larger numbers against the current president.
So, this single issue is a double-edged sword, to say the least. Add to this that the Democrats have strongly hinted they will pass laws to restructure the court in their favor - while both Democrat candidates refuse to state their position.
The Roman Catholic Church and some other Christian denominations strongly oppose abortion for any reason and are also opposed to assisted suicide and other misguided mercy measures that would terminate life by other than natural means. Besides the religious opposition, others argue that abortion is an unconstitutional violation of the 14th Amendment that states that no state shall "deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
The religious contention that human life begins at conception is receiving stronger support from the scientific community as technology provides more and more insight into the development of children in the womb. And some legal scholars also believe that unborn children are citizens who are due recognition as such and constitutional protection.
Hopefully we will someday totally ban the heinous practice of abortion. Is it lost on us that if you don’t have sexual intercourse, you can’t become pregnant? A bit of self-control could prevent countless abortions.
Another candidate for the single issue is the COVID-19 pandemic and the “governments’” responses to it. I have many things running through my mind as to what could have been done, should have been done or might have been done. As with everything else, 20/20 hindsight again rules the day long before the final chapter is yet to be written.
In my opinion, the president attempted to achieve some balance between actions that would minimize health risks and measures that could destroy the entire economy.
Blaming the president for every virus-related or caused death is as specious as claiming that the Democrat candidate could have stopped it dead in its tracks - no pun intended. I believe that from the beginning, the statistics were misreported and manipulated to make things appear worse or better than they actually were, depending on whose reputation and what companies’ potential profits were at stake.
I’m not going to belabor this subject because the last chapter has yet to be written. However, this is another area where self-discipline in wearing an effective nose and mouth covering when in close proximity to other individuals plus frequent handwashing and sanitizing would certainly reduce the recent spike in infections - perhaps significantly.
The economy as a single factor is certainly a candidate. The current fight over the size of the next stimulus and who will get the financial relief will probably be resolved before the election. It is in neither party’s interest to prolong this. I will say that if the media would publish an accurate comparison of both plans, the Democrats' deplorable giveaway of taxpayer dollars to questionable and undeserving recipients would become evident.
Actually, if the media would accurately report the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, the voting citizens could make far more educated choices in the voting booth than perhaps having to rely on single issues.
Yes, I still believe in Santa Claus.
Well, that’s the way I see it.