The favorability issue gripping the US
biparty system in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election originates from selection of the candidates by inside groups that are detached from the real people, an analyst suggests.
Sweden-based writer and investigative journalist Christopher Bollyn made the comment in the wake of polls showing the major candidates in both Parties, Donald Trump
and Hillary Clinton, might be least favorite candidates in the history of the US elections.
Lesser of two evils
According to the latest NBC News
/SurveyMonkey tracking poll which was published on Tuesday, 37 percent of the participants said they “dislike” Clinton while 39 percent had the same feeling about Trump.
In terms of support among voters, the democratic hopeful led the GOP’s presumptive nominee by a small 4-point margin, 47 percent to 43 percent.
According to Bollyn, like many other elections, this one is also about “choosing between the lesser of two evils.”
“And the real problem is the two-party system of the United States
, where the candidates are… selected by an unseen group in the party and the people really don’t have any connection to these candidates,” said the investigative journalist, suggesting the recent poll figures were not surprising.
Change in direction
Therefore, Trump will “not rise up from the grasslands” of the Republican party while Clinton will fail to “represent” the nation, he said, further concluding that if one of these two is really going to enter the White House, there is not much “hope.”
“If these are the two candidates, there’s not a lot of hope. Actually there is some hope with the other Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders because he represents a change in direction,” Bollyn said.
US Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders speaks during a rally at Santa Monica High School Football Field in Santa Monica, California, on May 23, 2016. (AFP)
He added that former First Lady and the real estate mogul do not differ much in two major issues; support for the Israeli regime and the so-called war on terror in the Middle East, both of which have cost the American taxpayers a whole lot among other negative consequences.
“Both candidates are staunchly pro-Israel and they are both dedicated to continuing… this incredibly disastrous and costly war on terror.”
“Our political crisis is that none of these candidates that are running really give us a way out of the war on terror,” which, the American commentator said “will destroy our republic.”