To the editor:
This past week, Kamala Harris, the presumptive Democratic Party nominee for president of the United States, chose Tim Walz as her running mate. Walz is a highly respected and well-loved governor from the state of Minnesota. A former schoolteacher who was respected and loved by his students and fellow faculty, he's also a veteran who served our country with distinction and valor.
Harris made this choice from several strong options. Among them, Josh Shapiro, a popular governor of Pennsylvania, a swing state which could've helped lock up that state's 19 electoral votes. Another option was Mark Kelly, a former test pilot and astronaut who serves as senator from Arizona, a border state where he has a strong record on immigration.
The point is, the Democrats gave her choice overload, an embarrassment of riches. She had so many good options to choose from and any of them could've been argued as the best choice. Meanwhile the best Trump could do was J.D. Vance. Vance? A guy with all the charisma of a gray couch.
Yet we still have undecided voters pretending this election represents a Buridan's dilemma. This paradox, also known as the hungry ass paradox, is illustrated by supposing a donkey that's dying of thirst and hunger who comes across a water source and a pile of food, each an equal distance away, but the animal dies of thirst and hunger, unable to decide which to go to first.
The difference is that for these voters, rather than feeling they've been offered two great options, they seem to feel saddled with two manure piles. I'm here to help those voters realize that one option is far superior, and you should really go start drinking the water because the hay is rat infested.
Did you know that in February, the annual poll of historians was released, and Donald Trump was once again selected as the worst president in history? It's true. Not only that, but Joe Biden was ranked 14th out of 46 presidents, just a few places under his mentor, Barack Obama. The 154 presidential specialists of the American Political Science Association, experts who've dedicated their lives to examining the records of past presidents, experts in the zeitgeist of their administrations, the issues that mattered at the time and the effects of their actions as POTUS, looked at all the data and chose Trump as the worst ever.
For context, Trump was chosen last from a field which includes Andrew Johnson, Herbert Hoover, and James Buchanan. One guy on the list, William Henry Harrison, died a month into his term because he marched in the rain to celebrate his win and caught pneumonia. That guy was rated better than Trump. Even Nixon, who resigned in disgrace, outperformed Trump. It was a low bar and Trump couldn't step over, so he limboed under.
Republicans, given a choice between rat-filled hay or polluted water, once again chose the hungry ass. You don't have to make the same choice. Vote for Harris/Walz in November.
J. David Core
Toronto