American Presidential Election 2016 and the Voters Dilemma

The Presidential primaries and the conventions are over. Unlike in the past, this year two major political parties, especially the Republican Party failed to present a clear choice. The nominees of both parties do not have the leadership that the country is looking for at this critical juncture. The voters are left in a dilemma and compelled to choose between the best out of the worst. Let us analyze some of their distinct personalities, why Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton are the worst Presidential nominees, American voters were presented with in the recent past.

Donald Trump: The Republican Party voters were presented with 17 Presidential hopefuls. The voters choose Donald Trump rejecting the other 16 seasoned professional politicians. Donald Trump secured this victory despite a series of effort by the party establishment to block him. Trump did not offer a manifesto except picking up some sensitive topic like religion based ban on immigration and the often repeated illegal immigrant issue.  Trump did not have a solid economic agenda and a credible foreign policy. His speeches weren't polished, nor were close to diplomatic norms. Trump kept on making crude statements. Trump was ridiculed by the neighboring countries, the national & international press, political pundits all over the world and some of the stalwarts within his own party establishment. Trump continued his rhetoric unmindful of all the ridicule and scoff. Trump gave enough postures which made good caricature of him. The press and TV had a good harvest of titillating news material every day.

The Republican Party did all in its power to block Trump from becoming the nominee of the party. The party engaged the media, fielded a host of seniors, leaders of faith and others to dissuade the voters from choosing Trump. The GOP establishment worried about the candidature of Donald Trump. The party could not make out what Donald Trump stands for. The party could not make out whether Donald Trump is conservative, liberal, both or nothing. If at all Trump stands for something, the party did not know whether his position on those issues will be stable at least until the election in November.

The voters knew that Trump can't deliver what he is promising, be it the ban on religion based immigration, deportation of illegal immigrants or building the replica of Berlin type wall on the border with Mexico. Despite all these, the primary voters continued to rally behind Donald Trump and placed him the front runner of the Republican Party presidential hopeful.  The voters credited him for speaking without political correctness. Donald Trump finally secured the Republican nomination against all the odds.

The GOP worry was genuine and continues to be so. It is the worry of all ordinary Americans. Americans do not see Donald Trump as a credible and reliable person to be entrusted with the World’s most powerful political position, the Presidency of the United States of America. Some even suspect Trump’s understanding of the American Constitution and his ability to make the right decisions when confronted with critical national and international issues.

The Republican Party, however, failed to introspect why and how the party brought itself into this pathetic situation. The party failed to own the responsibility for the situation, instead continued to offer choices which the people already had, but rejected. The party failed to accept that the voters did not vote for Donald Trump for his manifesto or political agenda. The voters did not vote Donald Trump for his personality or leadership style. The voters did not vote Trump for his record as a successful business man. The voters did not vote Trump for his national security stand. The voters did not vote Trump for his family values. The voters did not vote Trump for any conservative values. On the other hand, the voters preferred Donald Trump over the rest of the 16 Republican hopeful as Trump was the only person in that lot who was not a practicing professional politician, the lot they think betrayed their trust over the years.

Why do the people choose someone who has no record of Public Service, never been part of the administration, never served in the military nor was a law maker? The answer is simple. The American people are fed up with the politicking and logjam in Washington. The American people are frustrated with the partisan politics in the Congress and between the Congress and the White House.  The American people are fed up with the repeated threat of Government shutdown every now and then. The American people are fed up with the Gun violence targeting innocent school children and law abiding ordinary citizens and the Congress and President doing nothing to stop it. The American people are fed up with the increasing divide on race and religion and the crimes associated with it. The American people are fed up with young boys and girls crowd prisons when they should be in schools. The American people are fed up with the excesses by law enforcing agencies and the retaliation thereof. The American people are fed up wasting its tax-payer money fighting insensible wars abroad, destruction of humanity and then spending their money for the reconstruction of the devastation caused by the war in which they see no improvement to their life. The American people are not willing to accept that America follow the world, instead want it to lead from the front. The American middle class is concerned about the lowering wages. The American people therefore are frustrated, if not hate, with professional politicians. The voter sees all politicians insensitive, unmindful and incapable of addressing their concerns and live up to their hope and aspirations. The voters see the politicians as a bunch of self-serving individuals, no matter which party they belong to. 

Hilary Clinton: Hilary Clinton comes with her own baggage. The Democratic Party voters had already rejected Hillary’s ideas in 2008. In 2008, Hillary's ideas were considered second to that of Obama. The party choose Obama over Hillary in 2008 because Obama had a much more progressive agenda and enthused a large number of young and independent voters. Hillary Clinton continues to stand for the same what she stood for in 2008 and offers the same ideas. This means two things for the voters:

1.    The Democratic Party has nothing better or new to offer than the second choice which they had eight years ago.

2.    Obama failed to deliver what he promised and Democratic party did not choose the right candidate in 2008.

It will be suicidal for the Democratic Party to accept either position. Instead, the party is painstakingly explaining that Hillary will be a continuation of Obama’s eight years in power. The voters are aware that both the above are true. Neither Obama delivered what he promised nor the Democratic party has anything new to offer. Hillary’s refurbished image is not able to enthuse the voters. This was clearly evident from the support that her primary opponent, Bernie Sanders was receiving. Hillary is unlikely to draw large number independent and young voters towards her despite the effort by Bernie Sanders to project a united Democratic Party. Moreover, it is a conversation in every American household that Hillary is very low on trust factor, which was one of the major reason she was rejected in 2008 by the people. On top of all this, the e-mail controversy and the Clinton foundation is definitely going to be used against her by the Republicans. People do feel that the verdict on this would have been different if it was not the Clintons.

With all the negatives, there are two major items helping Hillary Clinton:

1.    The History that she may make by being the first Women President

2.    The extreme unpredictability of her opponent Donald Trump

Let us examine each of these one-by-one and see whether it will make any positive impact in the American People’s life:

Women President: Hillary Clinton is not one of the most respected women among American Women. A significant section of American women, especially the conservative women, considers Hillary as an opportunist, a power hungry, self-serving politician. Hillary, they think can compromise on any values when she finds it disadvantageous for her personal agenda. With all this, Hillary may get a few additional women votes more because some voters may not want to lose an opportunity for a Women President, which America was waiting for long. The voters like creating history. America made history in 2008 by electing a black President. But will creating history alone enough for a country as important as America in the world. The question also remains, did it the History created in 2008 anyway change the life of ordinary Americans? Similarly, will a Women President make any significant changes in the life of Women? There is no record of a Women President or Prime Minister improved the conditions of Women in the countries where women had the opportunity to lead for decades, India, Sri Lanka, Great Britain to name a few. But it is definitely an emotional issue with some Women and will work in Hillary’s favor.

Donald Trump the opponent: The significant item favoring Hillary as of today is her opponent. Trump is doing more damage to himself than to his opponent and indirectly benefitting Hillary Clinton. The GOP is further aiding in this mess by working against their own chosen Presidential Candidate.

When comes to the Interest of America, both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are far below the stature of the American President that the people of USA would like to see in their leader. The Democratic camp is euphoric on the recent surge in poll numbers. These poll numbers suspicious and appears to be tactically driven by vested interests to be able to bargain with Trump and bring him to sing the conventional tune of the party line. Trump on the other hand knows very well that the moment he starts speaking the party line, his core support base will erode further. Trump is therefore trying his level best to be the original himself, speaking the voice of the sections who have been betrayed by professional politicians over the years and the one speaking without political correctness. After all, why should Donald Trump change his style? To benefit those party politicians who worked closed doors to deny him the nomination? His trusted advisers must be telling him that he should not change and stay the real Donald Trump. The establishment Republicans ultimately will have no option but to come in line with Donald Trump and support him. The alternative of supporting or voting for Hillary will be suicidal for the Republicans as this may even lead to a loss of majority in House and Senate at the same time. Many republicans seeking reelection is fearing that the continued standoff between the party and the top ticket (Presidential Nominee), will be counterproductive. Republicans therefore has no option but support Donald Trump at the end. This realization is likely to close the gap in polls between Trump and Hillary over the months to come.

So the common question everyone ask is whether Donald Trump is the answer. Will Trump be different from the professional self-serving politicians? The voters are still unclear of that answer. What the voters know and decided is that they want to punish the professional politicians for the years of breach of trust. A vote in the primary therefore was a punitive vote, neither in favor of Trump nor a vote for change. The voters clearly know that Trump is incapable of leading the change they want. Trump is strengthening the voters point of view with all his ill-advised choices and sound bites. Trumps family members are further providing fodder to that belief by their over enthusiastic interference. The entire convention was a family drama with no policy statement nor any statesman like speech. The subsequent Trump events also added fuel to the fire. Though, a large number of people will still vote for Donald Trump, a good number of them are still evaluating the risk of a Trump Presidency.  It appears to be advantage Hillary Clinton at this time. The dilemma of the voter continues at the moment. 

Second term for Modi

UPA II win was completely because of the BJP overstatement of the "weak PM" reference to Dr Manmohan Singh. The more than required repetition of this phrase by LKA forced Sonia Gandhi to openly endorse Dr. Manmohan Singh's continuance as PM if UPA wins. This scuttled Sonia's strategy to insert RG post election.  Had LKA focussed on the misgovernance of UPA and achievements of NDA rather than the weakness of Dr Manmohan Singh, the results would have been in BJPs favor. Whatever said and done Dr. Manmohan Singh's image of an honest and well read individual still resonated with some voters. The other factor went against LKA was his own manipulative politics within BJP when Atalji was in power. LKAs shift from a hardcore Sang Parivar flag bearer to a Secular image through his comment on Jinnah also demotivated the grassroot workers.

Modi's task in 2019 will be tougher than 2014. If in 2014, Modi had the baggage of 2002 and a lack of national experience, 2019 will be completely on his promised delivery of 60 years worth development in 60 months. I was talking to a friend recently returned from a vacation to India. Though there is talk about so many things, things haven't started touching the ordinary people's life. Corruption at local level is still the same,  price of essential commodities is a matter of concern. Employment generation to the youth is still to be happening. The Go Slow approach on black money and action against corrupt politicians and officials of previous regime is being seen as a suspect of Modi Governments intentions in these areas. Legislation on black money and benami laws are significantly diluted with too many exemptions. On top of this, the survival instinct will unite the opposition parties. The only way Modi can win 2019 is going rural and substantially increasing the BJP vote share. Ignore the netas, get close to the people, touch the ordinary people's life then people will remember in the polling booth

Cooking Sambaar

Sambaar

Ingredients

Set1 Daal

Set2 - white melon (Kumbalangha), pumpkin (Mathangha), Green Beans, carrot, Green Plantain with skin (Nendhrkaya), Green chilli. Drumstick(Murinjhakaya - optional).

Set3 - Tomato

Set4 - Okra (Vendaka), Onion (Savala).

Spices1 - Red Chillies (Chuvanna mulaku), Corriander seeds (Malli), Fenugreek (Uluva), 

Spices2 - Asafoetida cake  (Kayam).

Others1 - Coconut flakes

Others2 -Turmeric Powder (Manjal podi), Salt.

Others3 - Tamrind juice

Preparation - 

Take a pan and fry spices2 until it becomes crispy. Add spices1 and roast it until golden brown. Grind spices1 and spices2 in a mixer to a fine paste.

Take Others1 and roast golden brown. Grind in a mixer and keep separate.

Cook Set1 ingredient to medium level. The water and daal should stay separate, should not become a paste. Cut Set2 ingredients in even sized pieces and add to the half cooked Set1. Add Others2.  Cook but ensure the vegetable pieces do not become a paste. 

In a pan, add a little of your favorite cooking oil and saute the set4 ingredients. Add Set3 and Set4 to the cooked set 1 and Set2 and continue to cook. When all the above are well coked, add Others3 and allow to boil well.

Add Spices1 and Spices2 paste and allow to boil again. Then add Others1 and allow foam to generate, do not boil.

Fry mustard seeds, curry leaves and red Chillies in one spoon oil and garnish. Your Sambaar is ready to serve with Idly, Dosa, Vada or boiled rice.

Sabarimala and Menstruating Women Pilgrims

The controversy over religious beliefs and traditions is not new in the modern society and India and Sabarimala temple is not an exception. The proponents of the tradition will contend that faith is unquestionable and may even go to the extent of questioning the locus standi of those challenging the tradition. The opponents of the tradition on the other hand will rely on the fundamental rights guaranteed by the constitution. The strategy adopted by the Courts in crucial matters like faith and religion is to either prolong the cases and give it a natural death or take a status quoits approach mostly driven by the perceived desire to maintain law and order and social harmony. A glaring example of this is the Ram Janmabhoomi case. If it is a legal, civil or criminal matter, there is no justification for the case to be pending over half a century. Therefore, somewhere there is an inherent dilemma for the presiding judges when an issue relating to faith and tradition is brought before his/her bench for adjudication.

Coming to the subject, should Women in the menstruating age group be allowed entry in the Sabarimala temple, broadly there are six questions that needs to be addressed.

1. Will permitting women pilgrims in their menstruating age go against the basic tenets of the prathishta of the presiding deity Lord Ayyappa in Sabarimala, which is Bramacharya?

2.  Will female pilgrims breach the "Bramacharya" of the accompanying male pilgrims?

3. Will allowing pilgrims of both sexes in all ages lose the sanctity of pilgrimage to Sabarimala as a pious religious tradition of which the foundation is Bramacharya or will it get converted into a hiking or picnic trip?

4.  Is it the notion that the trekking through the difficult mountains and terrains to reach Sabarimala is difficult to women the reason for the restriction?

5.  Is safety and security of Women the reason why women were not traditionally venturing in the Sabarimala pilgrimage?

6. Is the notion that women during menstruation are impure and cannot complete the mandatory vratham (fast) as the menstruation cycle is shorter than the 41 days Mandala Vratham prescribed and observing fast and conducting rituals are not practiced during menstruation period?

Let us examine all of them one by one:

1.      The Prathishta of Lord Ayyappa is of a Bhramachari. Ayyappan wants to remain a Bhramachari that is why Ayyappan is said to have set a difficult condition on the proposal of marriage with Malikappuram, the lady Deity (bride in waiting) in Sabarimala. The condition believed to have set is that Ayyappan will stop the observance of Bramacharya the day a new pilgrim (Kanniswamy) stop coming to Sabarimala and marry Malikappuram. The pilgrims offer darshan and pooja to Malikappuram on their trip. The presence of Malikappuram is therefore not a distraction to the Bhramachari status of the Lord. Nor does Lord Ayyappan restrain his devotees paying darshan to Malikappuram. Therefore, there appears to be no restrictions to the presence of women at Sabarimala in concept.

2.       This if true is not the problem of women pilgrims. If the fear is of that men breaching their Bhramacharya because of the mere presence of women pilgrims around, I would say that those men are unfit to pass the Bhramachari test and are the candidates qualifying the ban. It is unfair to ban the women pilgrims because of the men who cannot control themselves. 

3.       Yes, this is a potential consequence. We have seen this happening in many other places of worship as well. But this is not a men and women issue. It is degeneration of societal norms. The answer to this is the true belief and strict observance of Bhramacharya. Bhramacharya need not be a male specific phenomenon. The women pilgrims must also observe Bhramacharya in line with the tradition of Sabarimala pilgrimage. You can call them Bhramachari or Bhramacharini, whatever way you like. Moreover, it is a known fact that women observes the norms of the fast stricter than men.

4.       This could be argued as a reason in the past. The trekking from Erumeli through Karimala, Neelimala all the way to Ponnambalam is indeed hard. Is it still the same way? The Erumeli route is much improved. There are several other routes to reach Sabarimala now. Transportation has improved. The threat of wild animals is substantially low in these days. Above all, women have conquered more difficult terrains and is no more considered less competent and courageous as compared to men.

5.       Safety of women pilgrims is an issue. It is currently an issue for the child, women over 50 ages and the older pilgrims as well. I and my son was caught in a stampede in the Marakkootam area in 2007 Mandalavilakku time, which was life threatening. My brother-in-law lost his “Irumudi kettu” and several of our group members got separated. The sea of humanity that flow to Sabarimala during the Mandala Vilakku and Makara Vilakku is difficult to manage with the available infrastructure. The policemen managing the crowd are not adequately trained to manage huge crowds like this. Women pilgrims in the contentious age group can be highly vulnerable in this atmosphere. With all the crimes that is committed against women, the criminals in the garb of pilgrims can exploit the situation and can cause a major law and order problem. The question, however is whether ban on women pilgrims of a particular age group is the answer? I think the right answer to this is to build infrastructure to support the needs of the pilgrims.

6.       There are two aspects in this, the length of the fasting period and the auspiciousness of doing rituals when menstruating. Let us discuss each of them separately.

·         The Mandala Vratham is prescribed to be of 41 days or more. The pilgrims used to follow this in the past. Does all pilgrims observe 41 days of fast now? The answer is that there were aberration to the duration of fasting period recently. There are pilgrims I know who do not observe the mandatory 41 day fast and still get to go to Sabarimala. If some pilgrims can go with less days of fast, it is not a big deal if the fast observance period is adjusted to fit the menstruation cycle. 

·         The purity is an issue of faith and I will leave it to those who are authority on religious rituals and tradition to make the call. When I talk about the authority, it is not men alone but include religious scholars, repeat "religious scholars" of the affected group, in this case the women.  It is a tradition followed by the women not to participate in religious rituals during the menstruation period. I have seen this practiced by my mother and sisters in my house, the women in the villages, towns, Cities across India and Indians abroad. Some say it a prohibition but it is in reality a practice observed voluntarily by the women. I can say this as voluntary practice for all the women I came into contact. I have not seen any male members putting any kind of pressure in this regard. 

In conclusion, the society should discontinue on imposing ban in the name of tradition. Nor should we allow forces who have no direct interest or intention in the observance of the faith and tradition to create divisions in the community. We will be better served if we leave such matters to the affected segment of the society and allow them to reform their practices as required by the time.