To the editor: With the entire questions over indicators of former President Trump’s declining psychological and bodily skills, I discover myself questioning whether or not a vote for Trump is definitely a vote for JD Vance for president. (“I’m also sick of discussing Trump’s madness. But 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 to serve a yr, 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 Occasions and all different platforms needs to be screaming on the entrance web page, “Trump is mentally unfit.” In spite of everything, who do you suppose will probably be actually operating the federal government (or tearing one another to items making an attempt 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 photographs: One with 5 ladies 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 swimsuit and tie.
The phrases on the meme mentioned this: “The truth that there are 20 seasons of Kardashians and solely 3 seasons of Cosmos tells you all you must 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 along 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 Occasions, I’ve by no means seen such one-sided assist for one presidential candidate over one other. It doesn’t take a psychological big to determine which candidate you like.
In case your reader thinks Trump will get extra protection, it’s as a result of that protection is sort of all unfavorable (and typically 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
