--- [ IMPORTANT READS ](https://www.citywatchla.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&id=9) # Could Donald Trump be the Lesser of Two Evils? THE FROG PARABLE INFORMS POLITICS--There's an old adage that says, "If you put a frog in boiling water it will jump out. But if you put the frog in water and slowly raise the temperature around it, it will boil to death." Given that we do not have the luxury of a parliamentary democracy, which most often requires a coalition between different political parties in order to govern, and given that we do not have a "none of the above" option on our ballots, it seems likely that we will be left with a choice between the lesser of two evils. If we decide to vote for Hillary Clinton, can we truly say that she is the lesser of two evils? Or will she just be the latest installment of an exclusively corporate-financed agenda adopted by a homogeneous Democrat and/or Republican controlled government? Ever since one-term President Jimmy Carter was forced out of office 1981, this government has not deviated in the slightest when it comes to big corporate-backed issues. Endless oil-wars-for-profit in the Middle East and a complete *laissez-faire* approach to dealing with the mega-banks and Wall Street have seen the richest get richer more than any other time in history. At the same time, we’ve seen the needs of the lower, blue collar and middle classes systematically ignored by government. Can one really expect the present Democratic Party will institute any different policies under Hillary Clinton than would the Republican Party? After all, the administration of Barak Obama has bombed seven more countries than Bush did; he spied on our allies and went after Edward Snowden and other whistle blowers for exposing grossly illegal government behavior in violation of the Constitution. And of course, Hillary Clinton was intimately involved with all of this as Secretary of State from 2009-2013. Now we are supposed to believe that Hillary Clinton, who has amassed an obscene campaign war chest from Wall Street and the big banks, will somehow be able to objectively deal with the multinational corporations who only pledge allegiance to the country giving them the best deal. The expectation of such neutrality from a Hillary Clinton presidency ignores human nature. If the Democrats and Republicans up until now have not enforced laws dealing with such clear conflicts of interest, why would you believe that Hillary would enforce them now? Let's face it, the corporations own her. Just take a look at her political history starting in college with her support for conservative Barry Goldwater. She has never held a belief that she was not willing to compromise or outright change for a price or perceived political advantage. Is there any reason to think that a third Clinton administration (the first two got rid of protections like [Glass-Stleagal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass%E2%80%93Steagall_Legislation)) will be anything other than the continued completely unconscionable *laissez-faire* approach to Wall Street and mega-banks that are "too big to fail," – institutions that will continue to foster overt corruption with no legal consequences, irrespective of who is in power? And when a candidate like Bernie Sanders dares to question this corporate agenda, Hillary Clinton has attacked him for being an "unrealistic political idealist." She has shown a complete unwillingness to question the entrenched corporate for-profit agenda. If people can momentarily conquer their more than justifiable revulsion at the offensive superficiality of Donald Trump, is it fair to ask what a Trump presidency might be like? For starters, some surprising insight comes from the candidacy of Bernie Sanders and his unprecedented independently financed and truly revolutionary campaign. He has mounted it against our present corporate-homogenized government – even though the Sanders candidacy has been relegated to the "not serious" category by corporate media from its inception. Was it coincidental that the corporate media took the same approach to Trump...and is still using that against him? Might the palpable fear generated by the idea of a Trump presidency finally inspire a motivated and energized democratic electorate across the political spectrum – one that will no longer be apathetic in the face of the extremes that Trump makes possible? People who support Sanders -- and to some extent those Trump supporters of good faith who are not wall-building racists -- do so because they can no longer rationalize doing nothing. The majority of those on the Right and the Left reject corporate-controlled government policies, especially since, taken to their logical and predictable conclusion, they threaten the future existence of our democracy. I recognize the risk of putting a Donald Trump in power, considering what transpired after the initial democratic election of Adolph Hitler in Germany in 1933. I also see what a greater and more certain catastrophe it would be if our country continues down a road that includes the corporate usurpation of our democratic processes, rationalized by people like Hillary Clinton. Witness how she attacks the new “New Deal ideas” of Bernie Sanders as being "no longer realistic." Feel free to send me to hell for my heresy, but I would encourage you to think about why you are so sure that the tepid business-as-usual approach of Hillary Clinton -- given the critical nature of issues like global warming -- would be any less threatening than a Donald Trump presidency. It might just engender opposition that could reinvigorate our comatose democracy. Could that opposition to the limited powers of a President Donald Trump force us into a new era of democratic compromise between the Left and the Right? Could this finally challenge the exclusive short-term profit motive of corporations – entities that, if allowed to continue unchecked, will push this country over the edge? *(Leonard Isenberg is a Los Angeles observer and a contributor to* CityWatch*. He was a second generation teacher at LAUSD and blogs at* [*perdaily.com*](http://perdaily.com/)***.*** *Leonard can be reached at* [***Lenny@perdaily.com***](mailto:Lenny@perdaily.com)*) Edited for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.* Written by Leonard Isenberg. ![](https://www.citywatchla.com/images/stories/May-2016/040r.png) May 16 2016 [](https://www.addtoany.com/share) [Comments](#disqus_thread) THE FROG PARABLE INFORMS POLITICS--There's an old adage that says, "If you put a frog in boiling water it will jump out. But if you put the frog in water and slowly raise the temperature around it, it will boil to death." Given that we do not have the luxury of a parliamentary democracy, which most often requires a coalition between different political parties in order to govern, and given that we do not have a "none of the above" option on our ballots, it seems likely that we will be left with a choice between the lesser of two evils. If we decide to vote for Hillary Clinton, can we truly say that she is the lesser of two evils? Or will she just be the latest installment of an exclusively corporate-financed agenda adopted by a homogeneous Democrat and/or Republican controlled government? Ever since one-term President Jimmy Carter was forced out of office 1981, this government has not deviated in the slightest when it comes to big corporate-backed issues. Endless oil-wars-for-profit in the Middle East and a complete *laissez-faire* approach to dealing with the mega-banks and Wall Street have seen the richest get richer more than any other time in history. At the same time, we’ve seen the needs of the lower, blue collar and middle classes systematically ignored by government. Can one really expect the present Democratic Party will institute any different policies under Hillary Clinton than would the Republican Party? After all, the administration of Barak Obama has bombed seven more countries than Bush did; he spied on our allies and went after Edward Snowden and other whistle blowers for exposing grossly illegal government behavior in violation of the Constitution. And of course, Hillary Clinton was intimately involved with all of this as Secretary of State from 2009-2013. Now we are supposed to believe that Hillary Clinton, who has amassed an obscene campaign war chest from Wall Street and the big banks, will somehow be able to objectively deal with the multinational corporations who only pledge allegiance to the country giving them the best deal. The expectation of such neutrality from a Hillary Clinton presidency ignores human nature. If the Democrats and Republicans up until now have not enforced laws dealing with such clear conflicts of interest, why would you believe that Hillary would enforce them now? Let's face it, the corporations own her. Just take a look at her political history starting in college with her support for conservative Barry Goldwater. She has never held a belief that she was not willing to compromise or outright change for a price or perceived political advantage. Is there any reason to think that a third Clinton administration (the first two got rid of protections like [Glass-Stleagal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass%E2%80%93Steagall_Legislation)) will be anything other than the continued completely unconscionable *laissez-faire* approach to Wall Street and mega-banks that are "too big to fail," – institutions that will continue to foster overt corruption with no legal consequences, irrespective of who is in power? And when a candidate like Bernie Sanders dares to question this corporate agenda, Hillary Clinton has attacked him for being an "unrealistic political idealist." She has shown a complete unwillingness to question the entrenched corporate for-profit agenda. If people can momentarily conquer their more than justifiable revulsion at the offensive superficiality of Donald Trump, is it fair to ask what a Trump presidency might be like? For starters, some surprising insight comes from the candidacy of Bernie Sanders and his unprecedented independently financed and truly revolutionary campaign. He has mounted it against our present corporate-homogenized government – even though the Sanders candidacy has been relegated to the "not serious" category by corporate media from its inception. Was it coincidental that the corporate media took the same approach to Trump...and is still using that against him? Might the palpable fear generated by the idea of a Trump presidency finally inspire a motivated and energized democratic electorate across the political spectrum – one that will no longer be apathetic in the face of the extremes that Trump makes possible? People who support Sanders -- and to some extent those Trump supporters of good faith who are not wall-building racists -- do so because they can no longer rationalize doing nothing. The majority of those on the Right and the Left reject corporate-controlled government policies, especially since, taken to their logical and predictable conclusion, they threaten the future existence of our democracy. I recognize the risk of putting a Donald Trump in power, considering what transpired after the initial democratic election of Adolph Hitler in Germany in 1933. I also see what a greater and more certain catastrophe it would be if our country continues down a road that includes the corporate usurpation of our democratic processes, rationalized by people like Hillary Clinton. Witness how she attacks the new “New Deal ideas” of Bernie Sanders as being "no longer realistic." Feel free to send me to hell for my heresy, but I would encourage you to think about why you are so sure that the tepid business-as-usual approach of Hillary Clinton -- given the critical nature of issues like global warming -- would be any less threatening than a Donald Trump presidency. It might just engender opposition that could reinvigorate our comatose democracy. Could that opposition to the limited powers of a President Donald Trump force us into a new era of democratic compromise between the Left and the Right? Could this finally challenge the exclusive short-term profit motive of corporations – entities that, if allowed to continue unchecked, will push this country over the edge? *(Leonard Isenberg is a Los Angeles observer and a contributor to* CityWatch*. He was a second generation teacher at LAUSD and blogs at* [*perdaily.com*](http://perdaily.com/)***.*** *Leonard can be reached at* [***Lenny@perdaily.com***](mailto:Lenny@perdaily.com)*) Edited for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.* [ ![LA DWP #2 (Pay Your Bill Help)](https://www.citywatchla.com/images/LADWP/dwp%20level%20pay%205-7-25.jpg) ](https://www.citywatchla.com/component/banners/click/82 "LA DWP #2 (Pay Your Bill Help)") ![](https://www.citywatchla.com/images/banners/signup-for-cw.png) ## Get The News In Your Email Inbox Mondays & Thursdays Phone [ ![Home - HHR Rent is too High - SB-2](https://www.citywatchla.com/images/HHR/AHF-rent-too-high.jpg) ](https://www.citywatchla.com/component/banners/click/104 "Home - HHR Rent is too High - SB-2") --- ## Featured CityWatch Stories [ ![](https://www.citywatchla.com/media/yootheme/cache/34/065h-34e1b43b.jpg) ](https://www.citywatchla.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=33212:reminder-to-the-red-states-turnabout-is-fair-play&catid=395) ### [Reminder to the Red States, Turnabout is Fair Play](https://www.citywatchla.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=33212:reminder-to-the-red-states-turnabout-is-fair-play&catid=395) GELFAND’S WORLD - Indiana has been pounded by rains that resulted in widespread flooding. While the rain was still comi… [ ![](https://www.citywatchla.com/media/yootheme/cache/d8/066m-d8f0fac6.jpg) ](https://www.citywatchla.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=33229:democrats-finally-tell-iowa-and-new-hampshire-you-dont-go-first-anymore&catid=395) ### [Democrats Finally Tell Iowa and New Hampshire: You Don’t Go First Anymore](https://www.citywatchla.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=33229:democrats-finally-tell-iowa-and-new-hampshire-you-dont-go-first-anymore&catid=395) GELFAND’S WORLD - Earlier in the week, the Democratic National Committee did something good. Mind you it wasn’t great… [ ![](https://www.citywatchla.com/media/yootheme/cache/d0/065o-d02f23ac.jpg) ](https://www.citywatchla.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=33213:californias-empty-classrooms-are-a-warning-sacramento-cant-ignore&catid=378) ### [California’s Empty Classrooms Are a Warning Sacramento Can’t Ignore](https://www.citywatchla.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=33213:californias-empty-classrooms-are-a-warning-sacramento-cant-ignore&catid=378) A STUDENT'S VIEW - California is spending more on public education, yet classrooms are emptying, campuses are closing… [ ![](https://www.citywatchla.com/media/yootheme/cache/da/066j-daf22e28.jpg) ](https://www.citywatchla.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=33231:a-prisoner-a-peacemaker-and-israels-defining-choice&catid=375) ### [A Prisoner, A Peacemaker, and Israel’s Defining Choice](https://www.citywatchla.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=33231:a-prisoner-a-peacemaker-and-israels-defining-choice&catid=375) P.O.V - Marwan Barghouti remains one of the most consequential—and controversial—figures in the Israeli-Palestinian con… [ ![](https://www.citywatchla.com/media/yootheme/cache/df/065q-dfb89383.jpg) ](https://www.citywatchla.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=33224:john-mckinney-on-what-separates-the-city-attorney-candidates&catid=401) ### [John McKinney on What Separates the City Attorney Candidates](https://www.citywatchla.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=33224:john-mckinney-on-what-separates-the-city-attorney-candidates&catid=401) INTERVIEW - Voters will have a clear and defining contrast in the goals and objectives of the remaining general electio… --- ## [ IMPORTANT READS ](https://www.citywatchla.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&id=9) [ ![](https://www.citywatchla.com/images/stories/Aug-2026/065i.jpg) ](https://www.citywatchla.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=33221:netanyahu-needed-an-enemy-mamdani-volunteered&catid=9)### [Netanyahu Needed an Enemy - Mamdani Volunteered](https://www.citywatchla.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=33221:netanyahu-needed-an-enemy-mamdani-volunteered&catid=9) [ ![](https://www.citywatchla.com/images/stories/Aug-2026/064m3.jpeg) ](https://www.citywatchla.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=33192:should-unsafe-property-conditions-lead-to-injury-claims&catid=9)### [Should Unsafe Property Conditions Lead to Injury Claims?](https://www.citywatchla.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=33192:should-unsafe-property-conditions-lead-to-injury-claims&catid=9) [ ![](https://www.citywatchla.com/images/stories/Aug-2026/061q.jpg) ](https://www.citywatchla.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=33155:how-electrical-hazards-put-workers-at-risk&catid=9)### [How Electrical Hazards Put Workers at Risk](https://www.citywatchla.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=33155:how-electrical-hazards-put-workers-at-risk&catid=9) [ ![](https://www.citywatchla.com/images/stories/July-2026/058i.jpg) ](https://www.citywatchla.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=33091:metro-doesnt-have-a-transit-problem-it-has-a-leadership-problem&catid=9)### [Metro Doesn't Have a Transit Problem—It Has a Leadership Problem](https://www.citywatchla.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=33091:metro-doesnt-have-a-transit-problem-it-has-a-leadership-problem&catid=9) [ ![](https://www.citywatchla.com/images/stories/July-2026/060o.jpg) ](https://www.citywatchla.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=33139:wrongful-death-claims-after-a-serious-accident-and-what-families-need-to-know&catid=9)### [Wrongful Death Claims After a Serious Accident and What Families Need to Know](https://www.citywatchla.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=33139:wrongful-death-claims-after-a-serious-accident-and-what-families-need-to-know&catid=9)