Can’t back Clinton; must vote Trump
I am not enamored of Donald Trump but less so of Hillary Clinton. The clincher for me was her statement in the first debate about who she would propose for the Supreme Court. Her statement never mentioned the Constitution and her attitude seems much like Obama’s. That is, if she cannot get Congress to do what she wishes, then just issue executive orders.
Moreover, while Mr. Trump may use every available legal loophole to pay less taxes, Mrs. Clinton used the Clinton Foundation in ways that raise questions in my mind. Other issues, – emails, insensitivity to classification, use of a non-secure server – indicate an attitude that seems to say whatever I do is OK.
So rather than not vote, which would in effect be a vote for her, I will vote for Mr. Trump.
Gene L. Rogers
Trump’s lies disqualify him
The latest Donald Trump blow-up – he’s caught on tape talking about how he sexually assaults women and gets away with it because he’s a ‘star.’ Trump states he never did that. So is he lying now? Or was he lying then?
If he’s lying now, it’s to his wife, his family and the American people. He’s disparaged the women who brought his stories to light. He’s trying to save face and save votes. It means that he has actually assaulted women.
If he was lying then, he wanted men to look up to him and thought ‘bragging’ about how he felt entitled to abuse women would make him seem superior.
Either way, he’s a liar. Now we just need to determine whether he’s a liar who will say anything to win an election, someone who will smear and degrade people who tell the truth about him. Or whether he’s a liar who thought pretending to be someone who forces himself on women made him worthy of admiration.
Both versions demonstrate Trump’s blatant disregard and disrespect for women and make him unfit to be president.
Claire Richard
Which candidate is least harmful?
I am writing about Wednesday’s article, “Candidates warn of dire consequences if rival wins.”
The darkest and most uncertain days of the election are upon us, and the candidates are lambasting each other as totally unfit for office, practically the devil incarnate. They are playing on voters’ emotions and making their last ditch stand in a long, ugly, continuous race between the two most unpopular candidates for president in modern history.
True, a lot does ride on this election; the elected candidate will have a hand in policy that will shape the course of this nation for years to come. Fortunately, despite the candidates’ portrayals, the election of either candidate won’t cause our nation to automatically implode. We have had contentious elections, pitiful presidential candidates and presidents before, but we have worked though it and we will again.
Essentially this election comes down to choosing to vote for the candidate whose long-term influence will be the least harmful to our nation’s course.
Courtney Calvert
EPB client seeks á la carte model
Mr. David Wade, I read with great dismay the article in the Oct. 25 paper about the EPB Fi-TV rate hike. I am bundled with a landline and internet services. I tried to lower my cost by unbundling my landline, which we no longer use, only to be told my rates would go up, not down. I am 76 years old and have been retired on a fixed income for 14 years. No raises for me, let alone a 12 percent one.
Out of the 90 channels we get as a gold TV subscriber, we only watch 20 at the most (about 22 percent). In this day of high technology, it is hard to believe you cannot provide your customers with a package of the channels of their choice and get out of the business of deciding what channels your customers want.
Necessity is the mother of invention, which means someone has a wonderful opportunity to heavily cut into your customer base by providing exactly what the customer wants. We are rethinking what our best decision will be as you are forcing our hand.
Bob Nash
Ooltewah