Letter to the editor: A plan for Democrats | TribLIVE.com
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: A plan for Democrats

President Trump’s planning isn’t all wrong, and if Hillary won the 2016 big roll of the dice, maybe Dems would be cheering her on for doing some of the same things. The plan to increase border security, beef up the nuke arsenal and reduce the scale of a standing army could be the best hope for greater world peace.

It’s also about less globalized intercession, which is great for setting up the next military invasion or internal insurrection. Isolationism is the better way to less boots on the ground. Too, it is to focus on the U.S. economy and to better serve those, here, who are distressed and in need.

Suppose Dems ‘fess up this is a viable, maybe beneficial, strategy, and adopt it, with their grudging thanks. The Dems haven’t come forward with any long-term strategy, only the short-term one of keeping up allegations, e.g racism, gender bias, fascism and sex crimes.

Just me warbling at home, but I think the U.S. morphed into an oppressive corporate oligarchy long before 2016. The Dems can continue with their humanitarian agendas. It’s not mutually exclusive.

Globalism isn’t working so great, and the Dems haven’t offered much to correct it. Maybe they can win in 2020 by fessing up and making some changes. They want a Democrat in the White House. This might be the ticket.

Bruce Reisner

Perry South


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.