Without disclosing names, here's a recent e-mail response to some dear friends. Ann suggested I share it with you all.
I’ve
been mulling over our short conversation the other night. I know you’re
steadfast in your intentions – you made clear your belief that xxxxxxx jobs
are back (despite yyyyyy’s layoffs in December) and that you share his “values”. It would be disrespectful and condescending to argue your points of
view.
Instead,
let me tell you why I will vote the other way. The Democratic Platform
holds promise of job growth in both numbers and quality through infrastructure
and renewable energy projects, paid for by increasing upper bracket and
corporate tax rates; of re-negotiation of Pacific Partnership trade agreements; of incentives for domestic investment and employment; and of expansion of access to health insurance and early education. The
Economist editors, inherently conservative, endorsed Biden’s economic plans
this week though they wish him to be even more aggressive.
The second reason
for my vote is the Democrat’s recognition that our existential problems are
trans-national and must be addressed with multi-national collaborations; I’m
talking about nuclear arms control, climate change, and
economically/environmentally-driven migration.
The
third reason is your word “values.” As it happens, a few months ago I
reflected on and wrote down what qualities I value. I posted the list above my
desk alongside my mission statement. The values list reads:- Acceptance (when called for)
(And I should go back and add "the wisdom to know the difference")
I
will be voting for the candidate I feel best exemplifies these values. No
disrespect for your intentions, just a different intention for me. Love,
Fletch