Michigan is an open primary state. Anyone registered to vote may vote in a political party’s primaries.
How many Republicans, do you think, crossed over to vote for Abdul El-Sayed to help the Republican nominee Mike Rogers?
To describe El-Sayed’s victory as the start of a Democratic progressive movement might be mischaracterizing what happened that Tuesday.
— Ann Therese Palmer, Lake Forest
Candidate’s healthcare stance
I was pleased to see that Abdul El-Sayed won his Democratic primary in Michigan. If elected, he would be one doctor in the U.S. Senate who does not ignore his Hippocratic oath. Others in that body have shown time and again that they would rather seek favor with the administration than work to improve our lives.
The United States ranks 33rd for healthcare, according to U.S. News & World Report. Our nation has done well with medical research, but healthcare is not distributed to the populace. Think of the hospitals in Chicago’s poorer neighborhoods that are closing. Or consider towns in Tennessee, whose women must drive dozens of miles to Memphis to find a birthing center.
El-Sayed wants to extend Medicare, perhaps making it universal. This would save money and give everyone the security of knowing they can have the healthcare they need. Or do we really want to spend all our tax money on buying bombs to make nations in the Middle East look like Gaza?
— Al Munneke, Crest Hill
Polls didn’t influence victory
The Aug. 6 editorial bemoans the fact that this time, the pollsters were wrong about the Michigan Democratic primary and that may have swayed voters not to vote (“Pollsters blew it in lead-up to Michigan”). The editorial admits, as well, that there was a large Democratic turnout. The large turnout seems to indicate that Democratic voters likely paid no attention to the polls.
Perhaps the polls provide fodder for something for the media to talk about on all-day cable networks and in newspapers that need to have something to print. We have been hearing that voters are most focused on kitchen table issues, not polling or ideology, and it appears Abdul El-Sayed’s win, however slim, was not influenced, one way or the other, by polls.
— Mary Wilson, Chicago
Editorial board’s focus
Regarding the editorial “Wisconsin’s Hong cancels Thanksgiving, then jumps into her own oven” (Aug. 5): Here’s another editorial expressing concern over a democratic socialist position that is on the fringe, has zero chance of being enacted and, if it was, would have minimal impact on anyone’s life.
Meanwhile, we have an administration working diligently, and largely succeeding, in moving our country toward authoritarian one-party rule to the benefit of a few billionaire oligarchs. The president openly engages in corrupt acts using the power of the government to enrich himself, family and friends. His new scam is to offer a $100,000 subscription providing advance notice of his Truth Social posts that will move markets. This is clearly illegal insider trading, an action that would send any corporate executive to prison.
The Tribune Editorial Board would better serve readers by covering the impact of the authoritarian kleptocracy that is on the cusp of being imposed on our society. That is the existential risk to society, not the fringe pipe dreams of a few on the extreme left that have no chance of success — but who also have policies with broad appeal such as universal healthcare.
— Douglas Nyhus, Frankfort
What democratic socialism is
Thank you very much for the insights of columnist Elizabeth Shackleford regarding communism (“The only communist threat is coming from inside the White House,” Aug. 7). This column is well written and informative about the differences between communism and democratic socialism.
I only hope that it will be read by Tribune readership, especially readers who believe whatever our leader says must be true.
— Janet Durkee, Streamwood
Some lefties are worth a try
It certainly is heartening to see the right in a panic over a few lefties winning primaries.
More Top Picks Best White Noise Machines For Babies
We have had over 50 years of right-wing tropes telling us that tax cuts spread the wealth, as our national debt approaches $40 trillion; that immigrants are poisoning the immigrant-based blood of America; and that climate change is a hoax.
I suspect the right is starting to understand what Bertrand Russell meant when he said, “All movements go too far.”
The right has gone too far. Their nonsense that demands we don’t believe what we see, hear and experience in our lives has exhausted itself.
It is time for a change. It is time to end the exhausting litany of lies, exaggerations and outright corruption we have been subjected to from those whose greed has exceeded all human boundaries.
I don’t think a few lefties could be any worse than what we currently have. They might bring a bit a thoughtfulness, commonsense and, most especially, some dignity to our government.
They’re worth a try.
— Harry Hofherr, North Barrington
We can’t ignore national debt
For those who missed it, our country now spends over $1 trillion a year to pay for our $39 trillion debt. That is either criminal negligence or gross incompetence.
If this was anybody outside of government, they would have been fired, bankruptcy would have been declared and all their assets would have been sold to pay for the debt.
But since it is the government, we give it a free pass, because nobody holds anybody accountable for such reckless behavior. Anybody who has a voice isn’t speaking up about it. I blame the media here a lot. They have a voice, but they don’t use it. They may make note of the debt from time to time, but they need to broadcast this over and over until the public wakes up and the people in power pay attention.
There are two major reasons for this mad rush to insolvency.
Congress no longer makes a budget. It breaks up the financing into pieces, so nobody keeps track of the whole thing. Votes on spending are divorced from the total package, so members of Congress don’t see directly how the debt is affected. They wait until the last minute to vote on spending, so there is no time to debate anything. Then they just continue as they have.
Regarding the second reason, I fault the media. The government has to cut spending. When it tries to do that, there are vast differences in opinion on how to do that. This will cause the threat of a government shutdown. And the media then flood audiences with heartbreaking stories of people who won’t get paid or who won’t get the government check they rely on, so Congress feels pressured to just spend the money. That’s no way to run a country.
This reckless debt will not end well for our country. Those of us astute enough not to ignore this need to demand that Congress get its act together and do the right thing. Congress cannot spend money on everything it wants to.
The Constitution defines the role of Congress. People have conflated public welfare and the general welfare, and that is wrong. We can’t debate that here, but making a spending plan before the last minute is necessary, and our federal government has to limit its expenses to less than its expected revenues. Period.
— Larry Craig, Wilmette
Foul language the new norm
What is wrong with our elected officials? Is there no decorum? Why do they think it is appropriate to use foul language? This is the class of people we are voting to send to Congress.
What kind of example are we sending to our youths?
— Roberta Block, Northbrook
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email [email protected].