To the editor: With the entire questions over indicators of former President Trump’s declining psychological and bodily talents, I discover myself questioning whether or not a vote for Trump is definitely a vote for JD Vance for president. (“I’m additionally sick of discussing Trump’s insanity. However now we have to,” column, Oct. 16)
It isn’t troublesome to see Trump turning into clearly unfit to imagine workplace between election day subsequent month and inauguration day on Jan. 20. Would that lead to Vance turning into president?
What’s the likelihood that Trump would be capable of serve a 12 months, a lot much less one other full time period with out it turning into apparent to all that he’s unable to deal with the presidency?
Charles Brown, Los Angeles
..
To the editor: Lorraine Ali’s column was spot on. However tucked away on Web page A2 within the print version? With probably the most passive, low-stakes headline?
Given the now-dozens of movie clips of the previous president’s full breakdown, The Instances and all different platforms needs to be screaming on the entrance web page, “Trump is mentally unfit.” In any case, who do you assume might be actually working the federal government (or tearing one another to items attempting to run the federal government) if he will get elected?
Gwen Freeman, Los Angeles
..
To the editor: In studying about Trump’s conduct, I’m reminded of a meme posted on Fb lately.
It confirmed two images: One with 5 girls from the Kardashian household’s actuality TV present, all standing in titillating apparel, and the opposite with the late astronomer Carl Sagan, sitting amongst fashions of planets and wearing his professorial go well with and tie.
The phrases on the meme stated this: “The truth that there are 20 seasons of Kardashians and solely 3 seasons of Cosmos tells you all you’ll want to learn about humanity.”
So, even when Trump’s violence-abiding torrent of lies fails to safe his reelection, our democracy’s viability will stay in danger.
Kendra Strozyk, Cameron Park, Calif.
..
To the editor: In Friday’s paper, one letter author expressed dissatisfaction together with your protection of Vice President Kamala Harris, stating you don’t point out her proposals or accomplishments sufficient.
Am I studying the identical newspaper as he’s? In all of the years I’ve subscribed to The Instances, I’ve by no means seen such one-sided assist for one presidential candidate over one other. It doesn’t take a psychological large to determine which candidate you favor.
In case your reader thinks Trump will get extra protection, it’s as a result of that protection is sort of all unfavorable (and usually rightfully so). So far as Harris’ proposals, she has to provide you with one thing significant earlier than you possibly can print them.
This could present the true state of the union, and what a real mess we face going ahead.
Richard Whorton, Studio Metropolis
