If there are people running for office who have been pro-war, who have not taken stands against the military-industrial complex funding, or otherwise furthering the war in Ukraine (or, for that matter, conflicts in Syria, Yemen, Iraq, Afghanistan and many others, back to Vietnam and further) I would be voting against them. This would include members of “the squad”, who all ran on anti-war platforms and have all supported current U.S. policies related to Ukraine, rubber-stamping every funding request. I know of no politicians on my ballot who has taken stands against the military-industrial complex, or those who support such, so I don’t know exactly where to turn for this one.
I will be voting against anti-union policies, policies that have undermined U.S. manufacturing capacity by shipping it overseas and undermined the establishment of a living wage as a minimum wage. This has also been a failing of the squad in congress, who could not come up with enough votes to force the vote on these issues when they had the power to do so. In general, democrats have failed in this area as much, or almost as much, as Republicans, which is a shame because, back in the day, the Democratic party was the main institution that could be counted on to support unions. That is no longer true, and has not been for a long time. It is necessary, as best one can, to look at the records of individual politicians, their actual conduct, not just their rhetoric.
With respect to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) issues, I will not vote for any judge or official who is standing by DEI and the language of “equity” as a kind of policy position. Equity is not equal under the law or equal opportunity, and has nothing whatsoever to do with the traditional civil rights movement as put forth by Martin Luther King, or even Malcolm X. The whole notion of intersectionality, and the type of thinking that has led to defunding the police and not prosecuting criminal behavior has been disastrous in those cities where that ideology has taken hold (Chicago, Portland, Seattle, many others), and is of no benefit to anyone, least of all the minorities whom such policies are pretending to protect.
To the extent that environmental concerns come into play, I would be opposing some of the perverted paths that the environmental movement has taken, as encouraged by the World Economic Forum and such like. Any Malthusian view that thinks population reduction is the solution to anything, weird policies like the undermining of agriculture in the Netherlands based on twisted logics – this is just a recipe for mass starvation. We’ll find out more about that this winter. Shutting down natural gas or even oil as energy sources at this point will just lead to the burning of more coal. The cleanest and safest fuel over recent decades has been nuclear – there is no way to a cleaner future without nuclear playing a key role. Limiting nuclear at this point, in the name of environmental concerns, is just nuts. Wind, solar, and other alternatives need to be pursued, but with respect to the world’s current needs, they are a long way away from providing real assistance.