Recently your paper contained an article deploring the current choices for the forthcoming election of the our nation’s next president, to which I would like to pose a few questions, since both candidates seem to offer very clear, definite and contrasting paths for our future. To illustrate some of these choices let’s ask a few questions:

Does one agree to having the value of one’s vote diluted, and ones family’s safety compromised, by a continuation of open borders?

Did one agree with having children miss physically going to schools in the last pandemic, even though they were not particularly at risk and their parent/s not at home?

Does one agree that it is ok for biological males, who claim to be females, to use girls restrooms?

Does one agree that fighting “Climate Change” to “Save our way of life” is necessary and justified, even if it means starving the poor of the world?”

Does one agree that paying $4 a gallon for gas is better than paying $2?

Does one agree that our leaders should bow to the desires and wishes of other nations ahead of our own nation’s (people’s) best interests?

Assuming the “powers that be” are not successful in keeping “We the People” from having the currently obvious choices, the answer to these questions should determine whether one is willing, when casting one’s ballot, to cut off one’s nose to spite one’s face.

Jack Pope

Thomasville