Bipartisanship: a Rare Site in 2017

A lot of stuff happened this week. In my weekly sweeping of articles as I searched for what to write about I came across a multitude of headlines. These headlines included, �Joel Osteen responds to accusations over closing church doors to Harvey evacuees,� �Ted Cruz Defends Vote Against Superstorm Sandy Aid Amid Harvey Destruction,� and �Trump campaign adviser tried to set up Russia meetings, Washington Post reports.�

            As I started looking through these stories to see which one would be my champion and would earn my attention (this is of course assuming that the authors of these columns wrote them with me in mind and I doubt that is the case), I became disillusioned. The whole Joel Osteen controversy is something I would easily jump on but there are some fishy circumstances surrounding the situation. The media seemed to be looking to find a fault in Osteen and was just searching for an opportunity to criticize. On the other hand, it�s not unlikely that Osteen didn�t want commoners inside of his megachurch because he is Joel Osteen and he only wants you around if you are going to give him money. The pictures that his church posted on social media that depicted flooding inside of the church are rumored to be false and just an excuse for not opening the doors. It�s a fishy situation.

            The second headline is a classic Republican move: hypocrisy. It�s simple. Cruz didn�t want to send aid to New York after Hurricane Sandy but is all for it when disaster strikes his own state. That�s all there is to that.

            Unfortunately, no matter how explosive and damaging the third headline is, I cannot talk about it. This is because it pertains to one man: Donald Trump. Longtime readers of the blog know that I do not talk about our President unless he does something absolutely insane. This is because I feel that everybody else talks about him and it�s not original to add to that conversation.

            Well, now I have nothing to talk about�

            It�s been about 15 minutes since I wrote that last sentence. Luckily, I found something viable to write about. The headline reads, �John Kasich denies reports of joint 2020 ticket with John Hickenlooper.� Recently, Republican governor John Kasich of Ohio and Democratic Governor John Hickenlooper of Colorado joined together to propose a plan to stabilize the health insurance market. This cooperation came in response to the failure of Congress to take action on healthcare in July which caused instability to grip the health insurance market. This partnership is also a push to create a bipartisan coalition to reform healthcare since Congress has been unable to do so.

The two have appeared multiple times on a series of political talk shows to talk about their plan and pressure more governors to jump on board. In response, people started speculating about a possible presidential ticket between the two; a unity bid to challenge President Trump. Kasich and Hickenlooper were quick to strike down those rumors. On Meet the Press, Kasich stated, �Look, Kasich/Hickenlooper. You couldn't, first of all, you couldn't pronounce it. And secondly, you couldn't fit it on a bumper sticker.�

He added, �You know, sometimes people actually do things because they're trying to help somebody.�

I agree with him on the whole pronunciation issue.  I can already picture myself stuttering trying to say, �Kasich-Hickenlooper.� I also agree with him on his second point. It�s a sign of the times when a bipartisan agreement is so unordinary that we immediately hypothesize that any kind of united effort equals a presidential ticket.

Not to mention that it would never work. American politics has moved further and further away from the center in recent years. A bipartisan campaign would be rejected by the people because they want an extremist like our President in charge. The results of the 2016 election should have killed any dreams of a unity ticket in 2020. The voters of this country made a clear statement that they are tired of establishment politics. Kasich is an establishment Republican and Hickenlooper is a moderate Democrat. The Republicans nominated a very anti-establishment figure for the presidency last year. While Hillary Clinton won the Democratic nomination, a large faction of Democrats supported Bernie Sanders, a far left and revolutionary candidate. Kasich and Hickenlooper are the opposite of that.

It�s also important to include that Kasich got DESTROYED in the primaries last year. The only state he was able to win was his own. Why would it be any different in 2020?

Now would I vote for a Kasich-Hickenlooper bid? Personally, I would definitely consider it because I like Kasich since he�s blunt and down-to-earth and I agree with Hickenlooper�s stance on the criminal justice system and civil rights. Twenty years ago, this would have been a viable candidacy, but we are now too polarized as a nation for this bid to even have a chance. It�s the world we live in. That�s all for this week.