Election 2020!: My response to "Why it has to be Biden"

 A relative recently sent a link to an article in The Economist titled "Why it has to be Biden" (see https://www.economist.com/leaders/2020/10/29/why-it-has-to-be-biden). 

Some readers who haven't been following events carefully may wonder how solid the support is for the statements made in the article. It's not standard practice for articles of this sort to be peppered with footnotes--but if it had been, my view is that the support would be solid and abundant. I've been following events intently and observing and listening to the major actors, and I share the article's assertions and conclusions.

Here's how I responded to the relative's e-mail:

Thank you! I've just read the article you sent. It's impressive--carefully thought out and persuasive. 

Though I lean toward the Democratic Party out of family tradition and a desire to keep a two-party system alive in Utah, I've never felt my overriding loyalty was to party. There are things I like and don't like in both major parties. Though I didn't vote for John McCain or Mitt Romney, I deeply admire them and would have felt fine about having either of them serve as the nation's president. 

As for political ideology, I agree with a statement Dallin Oaks made many years ago: "I find some wisdom in liberalism, some wisdom in conservatism, and much truth in intellectualism—but I find no salvation in any of them" (“Criticism,” Ensign, Feb 1987, 68ff.). Besides being very slippery terms, "conservatism" and "liberalism" are human inventions. I don't see them really as opposites but as contrasting and complementary, each with elements of truth and value. That's one reason I'm not inclined to extremes in ideology and respect people with different ideologies and from different parties. 

But this presidential election feels different from any other I've experienced. It does feel as if the soul of our nation is at stake. Many of the most persuasive arguments in favor of a change of presidents have come from conservatives--by which I mean genuine conservatives, which Pres. Trump is definitely not. Among others I'm thinking of Jeff Flake, a former Arizona Senator who made a powerful statement of support for Biden (https://twitter.com/i/broadcasts/1djxXoLbYXEJZ). Frank Fox, who helped create BYU's American Heritage course, has made a detailed argument similar to the one in the Economist article (see https://saveourelection.org/letter-to-arizona-mormons/). And many former members of the current administration have revealed their concerns--for instance, Gen. Mattis, Gen. Kelly, and others less well known (such as Elizabeth Neumann, who was an Assistant Secretary in the Dept. of Homeland Security: see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EF4KcunfvCg). 

I have reasons of my own in addition to my central concern about the soul of the nation: for instance, the need for more competent and well-informed approaches to the pandemic and to climate change and more humane policies related to refugees, immigration, and racial justice and harmony. On many issues, I'm open to whatever reasonable and practical solutions can be found--ideally through bipartisan cooperation. Let's hope! 

But mainly I'm hoping we can be liberated from the daily stream of anger, name-calling, mockery, and disregard for truth that we've been subjected to for the last few years.  

Again, thanks for sharing.

Bruce

Of course, there's much more I could have said. For instance, how do I feel about the Supreme Court and various moral issues not mentioned here? 

Well, I'm happy to share my thoughts on those topics--but I'll do that, and try to respond to any questions readers have for me, in a separate post.

Friendship across political divides

 A good friend of mine, Jim Lucas, did an online Sunday School class today focusing on the last part of 3 Nephi and on 4 Nephi. A good chunk of the lesson applied insights from the Book of Mormon to our current political divide. Jim acknowledged that the divide is a serious problem--and has grown more serious in recent years. (He showed evidence from the Pew Research Center that Democrats and Republicans have come to have increasingly negative--or as the study puts it, "cold"--feelings toward each other and have few friends of the "opposing" party.)

But Jim argued not only that it's possible to bridge the divide but that it's crucial we figure out how to do it, lest we suffer something like the fate of those in 4 Nephi who returned to old divisions and eventually to complete social breakdown. Jim used the friendship of Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia as an example of such a bridging of the divide and showed video clips that revealed how warm and deep that friendship was. 

I'm going to offer a couple of clips of my own, one from Lindsey Graham and one from Joe Biden. That friendship has been challenged over the past couple of years, but there's some hope, I think, it can be restored. (As Biden says, he's not good at holding grudges.)

Here are the clips:

Lindsey Graham on Biden: https://youtu.be/kLMYW8jFPHg

Biden on Graham: https://youtu.be/5Qf40Mc3V6Q

I should explain why Biden starts by saying he's disappointed: Starting 10 months ago or so, Graham started criticizing Biden in ways that seemed hostile, that rose to the level of personal attacks rather than just disagreements. As noted, that has damaged the friendship. But as also noted, I hope the friendship can be healed.

One key is suggested by a recent letter from the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I'll just quote the end of that letter, which was also referred to in Jim's Sunday School class:

While the Church affirms its institutional neutrality regarding political parties and candidates, individual members should participate in the political process. Please strive to live the gospel in your own life by demonstrating Christlike love and civility in political discourse.

"Regeneron" is NOT a cure for COVID 19

In fact, "Regeneron" is an experimental treatment, an antibody "cocktail" that may help the immune system. Its safety and effectiveness are still under consideration. It is not generally available, but apparently someone with enough clout may be able to try it out. Even if it is proven safe and if it becomes widely available, it would not be fair to call it a "cure." It might but a useful treatment--but we're still waiting for confirmation on that.

"Regeneron" was recently used as part of a spoof--a Youtube video that makes a couple of points: that there is currently no "cure" for COVID 19 and that Pres. Trump's history giving celebrity endorsements would come in handy if there were one, with the further implication that his boasts about his treatment and recovery should be taken with a grain of salt. 

Here's a link to the Youtube in question (the spoof itself starts at 1:31)

https://youtu.be/p58I3Xs0v-c

(starting point for the spoof: https://youtu.be/p58I3Xs0v-c?t=91 )