Danger

    When a political leader talks about anger more than offering solutions, that is a signal that the leader does not understand the problem.

   Either that, or he is more concerned with his own power than about resolving a problem for the benefit of all citizens.

   Or both.

Blame Game

    If Democrat Kamala Harris is elected to the presidency, America will see the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression of 1929. So said Donald Trump in a campaign rally.

    But all the major recessions of the past 100 years occurred when a Republican was in the White House, beginning with Herbert Hoover as president. And that includes the Great Recession of 2008-2009, when George W. Bush, another Republican, was president.

   Others include the downturn of 1956, under Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower, and the economic difficulties of 2017, when Trump himself was in the White House.

Political Gibberish

   Time was, using the term "lie" would get the user punched out. And when TV commentators used it, they would apologize. Moreover, news announcers rarely used it at all, and apologized in advance when they had to play a recording of it.
   Now, however, a certain major politician uses the word regularly, often and emphatically, so any attempt to diminish its effect on listeners is pointless.
   There comes a time in journalism when it is essential to report clearly and accurately what a politician says. This is a sound policy, but we now live in abnormal times.
   Note: That time comes sooner and more often when a politician regularly insults reporters by regularly using the term "stupid," as when saying on live television to a network journalist, "That's a stupid question."
   Comment: There are indeed some questions that can be termed "stupid." But realistically, and in the context of neutral journalism, there are only stupid answers.
   There can be  leading questions, designed to help a speaker focus. Even so, this can work two ways -- to help or to entrap. Journalism's duty is to report accurately and completely what a politician or government official says. There is no need for anger. Just report what the politician says. There is no need to report the question. Journalism's duty is to report the answer.
   Or as the old guideline in the PR industry puts it, "Never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel."
   But when a politician regularly insults reporters, they can respond by quoting clearly and accurately just what the politician says. They don't clean up the grammar or clarify any confusing phrase. They will report exactly what the politician says as well as the way he says it, without cleaning up the grammar or clarifying any unclear phrases.
   The pen is mightier than the sword.
   This can explain why a certain national political figure has few friends in the news media. Either way, reporters should not be friends with politicians. They can and should be friendly. But that's all.

Presumptions

    If you sound like you know what you're talking about, people assume you do. That's not always a valid assumption.

   The American legal system specifies that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
   That is a presumption.
   There is no such legal verdict as "innocent." The key word is "presumed," and a person has that right until his or her status is proven in a court of law.
   "Beyond reasonable doubt" is another popular legal term. And here we must define "reasonable." That's where lawyerly gamesmanship comes in. Or perhaps we should call it "mumbo-jumbo."
   Politicians use that strategy often, as do real estate sales agents and lawyers. And this is based on the assumption that if you sound like you know what you're talking about, people will assume you do. This, however, is not always a valid assumption.
   "Beyond a reasonable doubt" is another popular legal term.
   Define "reasonable." Here's where lawyerly gamesmanship comes in.
   So even if a person faces scores of allegations spread over dozens of legal cases in several state and federal jurisdictions, he or she should be presumed innocent until and unless proven in a court of law.
   Sound familiar?
   The point is, such a person has not (yet) actually be proven guilty on any of the allegations, so he or she should be presumed innocent until and unless proven otherwise.
   That person may not actually be innocent, but the system stipulates that he or she must be treated as such until and unless proven otherwise.
   That's why the term "allegedly" is used as often as it is in journalism and legalistic jargon. Perhaps we can also use the term "allegedly innocent."
   But no. That's based on an assumption of guilt.

Trial by Jawry

   Some people believe that if they talk longer, louder and more emphatically than others, they will always win any discussion/argument.
   That doesn't work in a courtroom.
   A monitor judges when someone talks too much or out of turn or blathers on about something irrelevant.
   A fast talker is not in charge.
   That's the problem Donald Trump faces in New York City these days. Even when he mumbles during jury selection, the court monitor judges what he says and tells him to be quiet.
   One wonders, however, how often and how many times he can disrupt court proceedings with his yammering despite several warnings from the judge that he will be fined and/or sent to jail if he continues.
   He will not pass Go. He will not collect a bonus.
   And unlike other financial penalties -- some of which he has not paid -- this one he must pay or he will not be released from jail.
   But he seems to believe he is exempt from ordinary rules of human behavior because he is an extraordinary man.
   Non-ordinary, yes.
   Exempt from courtesy, no.
   Therefore, he will face judgment.

Political Know-It-All

   If you sound like you know what you're talking about, people will assume you do.

   It's called polysyllabic nomenclature -- a bunch of long words.

   The same concepts or ideas can be said using plain English -- a bunch of short Anglo-Saxon words -- but you don't always sound like you're part of the high ranking, highly intelligent "upper class" supposedly destined to rule the world.

   That tradition goes back to the year 1066, when invaders from Normandy defeated the locals and set up a talking place for their government. In doing so, they used the French term "parliament," rather than the plain English equivalent -- "talking place."

   The tradition has continued, so even today, when you want to sound educated and intelligent, you use a bunch of long words.

   The trick is to use short words that say the same and are more easily understood.

   Political candidates, however, want to sound like they know what they're talking about, even when they don't.

   That's especially true of politicians who really don't know what they're talking about.

'Nice' Neighbors

   Donald Trump complains that not enough people are coming to America from "nice" countries.

   But.

   If life at home is "nice," there is little need to leave.

   If a person has a job with a decent income and is able to support a family where there is little crime or violence and no war or government corruption, there is no need to leave home.