Over the past year or two I've used this forum for a terrible confession a few times: that following the minutiae of elections and domestic politics no longer holds much appeal for me.
In the past I've devoted considerable time and space to covering Senate races, for example, but this year it felt even more pointless than usual. What is at stake in this $4 billion election in which neither party has advanced any kind of agenda? The Republicans are running purely on fear and lies and the Democratic game plan is…there isn't one. Obama has completely given up and has disengaged from Congress.
buy lexapro online buy lexapro no prescription
Who can blame him, and what reason is there not to follow his example and say "Alright, fuck it"?
There has always been an aspect of voyeurism to politics and elections.
Now it feels like the participatory aspect has gone out the window and we are now simply spectators in a battle (or "battle", if you recognize how slender the differences between some pairs of candidates are) fought between complicated legal fictions turning billions of dollars into terrible TV commercials on behalf of corporate interests. It feels like there is nothing at stake and everyone is just going through the motions. Turnout will be abysmal as usual and 2014-16 will rival 1998-2000 in terms of gridlock, pettiness, and absolute futility regardless of what happens on Tuesday.
A handful of gubernatorial races should, in theory, be interesting but we're all so used to punitive austerity and legislative ineptitude at this point that no one even bothers to pretend that our situation will improve depending on which candidate wins. The Republicans are promising to keep destroying everything and the Democrats are doing their usual "We'll do, uh, something different from that, or probably nothing. And isn't nothing better than something bad?" Hard to imagine why nobody cares about participating in this process with incentives like that.
buy nolvadex online buy nolvadex no prescription
More pointless "showdowns," more pointless Repeal Obamacare votes, more pointless Benghazi investigations, and more nothing happening for months on end while we wait for the odd Supreme Court decision for the rare spectacle of something actually happening. That is what we have to look forward to whether there are 45 or 50 or 55 Republicans in the Senate or whether they add more to their historically awful House majority.
This is the new normal and it stretches endlessly before us. And another election in which most of the people who vote are over 55 offers nothing more interesting than the possibility that things will get even worse.
But I'm being a little ambitious. Getting even worse would mean that the election managed to change something. Let's be serious.
RP says:
Thanks for putting my thoughts into words, I'm leaning toward not even voting for the first time in 30+ years.
I'm in Texas. Why bother? Not to mention that I'll avoid getting pissed at the polling place help when they ask me for my ID.
Bottom line is Americans seem to want a completely dysfunctional government. Who am I to stand in the way?
Mo says:
What I want to know from political scientists is just what kind of action would scare the jammies off the 1% enough that our corporate overlords would order their government lackeys to make some improvements in the lives of us peasants.
Maybe a bullet-pointed PowerPoint presentation:
1) Riot
2) Assassination
3) General Strike
4) Shoving peas up nose and threatening to hold breath until death
Marilyn D says:
Come on, you guys (gals?)!!…that's just what they're counting on!! I've made a considerable number of orbits around the sun, and at 69, I'm not giving up!! I lived thru the dark times of the 60's-early 70's, so I know there is some good to come. Granted I live in the pretty sane state of Oregon, and just newly had my son and DIL extracted out of Texas, back home, but if the good guys give up, it's all over. Things are going to change in TX, and the only reason my DIL felt bad leaving, was that she left behind a fight worth fighting! Given my good genes (my mom is still kicking around at 94, gr grampa til 102), I'm going to be fighting to the bitter end…and YOU better be to!
Jude says:
Spoken like someone with access to a good job, decent healthcare, and who will never need to terminate a pregnancy.
Well mostly says:
Despite trying I can't find fault with the analysis. And that's the best line I've seen in a while: this is the new normal and it stretches endlessly before us. You've put to words what I've felt for weeks now. It's not just sophisticated resignation anymore – it's the only rational conclusion.
We have ever more gruesome events to look forward to even though many try and make useful contributions to others every day. The tilt towards destruction appears to be in full swing.
I take heart in the contented cynics motto: don't worry, things can get worse. Enjoy the ride.
Linda says:
I'm not sure this stretches endlessly before us. Weirdly enough, the best analogy I can make is to the Soviet bloc regimes in the 80s. They looked like world beating monoliths, but they were already dying, and by the 1990s, they would be gone. Increasingly, the Republican Party looks like that.
People can be frustrated, even fooled, for a long time, but not forever. When you can only hold onto power by making it harder to vote, you have nothing, and someday you will disappear or become radically different to survive. And Democrats may find they have nothing to lose by embracing a real agenda.
Anubis Bard says:
Ed, as a political scientist I'm sure you have some inkling of what can happen when a system of government loses legitimacy. It's amazing that a political culture as deeply rooted as the US's could squander its legitimacy in only a few decades, but it's pretty clear that it has.
verbal says:
It's hard to tell the difference between realistic political analysis and being dangerously depressed sometimes.
But for god's sake man. See your doctor.
Mike R says:
The people that are opposing running a government by and for the people, Republicans if anyone needed that spelled out, must be opposed with whatever legitimate means are at hand. Unfortunately for us that is the current Democratic party. So the question is do we run the car into the ditch with the democrats or do we crash into a concrete abutment at 100 mph with the Republicans. The choice seems clear.
GunstarGreen says:
Give a man a "choice" of which two outcomes are less shitty for long enough, and eventually he will realize that it's all shit in the end, and stop bothering.
This is, of course, exactly what "they" want. But the stark reality is that "they" always get what they want, unless and until the masses become willing (read: desperate enough) to do what is necessary to truly fight for their own interests. History has borne this out time and time again.
What is necessary is never, ever pretty.
geoff says:
My 18 yo daughter (early) voted for the first time last Thursday. Being as we live in a deep red state she voted for some green party candidates as she (I think) agrees with me that the Dems are largely corporate sellouts. Frankly I think both my kids (the other (surprise!!) had her voting application denied on some technicality) are to the left of me. They and I are under no illusion that their peers are anything like as "progressive" or whatever as they are, but I don't doubt they're to the left of their parents. I don't think it's going to be soon, but something's got to change. IF the kids get out and vote. That said, I really feel like the damage Obama has done to young people's interest in and enthusiasm for politics is among his worst failings.
geoff says:
PS, things may be changing in KS, where Thomas Frank writes Brownback is in trouble: http://www.salon.com/2014/11/02/righteous_rage_impotent_fury_thomas_frank_returns_to_kansas_to_hunt_the_last_days_of_sam_brownback_and_pat_roberts/
Mo says:
Whenever I hear someone whining about how their vote is meaningless, useless, why bother, two things come to mind:
1) Shove your excuses up your lazy ass, then, thus stimulated, drag said miserable ass in and vote. you feckless s.o.b.
2) Always remember, and beware of, Learned Helplessness.
Our Shadow Oligarchy is counting on your forgetting about this mental bad habit.
Fight to the death. It's your only chance.
Mo says:
And hey, Jude, right on.
Tim H. says:
I plan on voting, likely more voting against than for, but one takes what one can get. Not much to say about the Democrats, except they seem to have one foot in the real world, the pragmatic Republicans have mostly been purged. Just remember, if there's nothing positive to vote for, there's guaranteed to be something worth voting against.
Sock or Muffin? says:
I'm in your former state of GA. Sure Michelle Nunn may be a bit of a turd sandwich but if you think I'm going to let that GIANT douche David Perdue gain any small chance of winning a senate seat from me not voting… you're out of your mind.
Robert says:
My older son turns eighteen next year. My husband was giving him a pep talk/chewing his ass off over his declaration that he wouldn't be registering to vote. Granted, we're in California and Barbara Lee's district, but enough African Americans worked hard for this young man to be able to vote that his dad would not let him get away with that.
'Niques says:
I you don't vote, you are essentially saying "you guys choose, it's all the same to me".
This isn't lunch. If you don't vote, you have no right to bitch.
jestbill says:
"What is necessary is never, ever pretty."
Oughta be a bumper sticker.
I see this election as a win. Now the Republicans can see their "Dog in the Manger" politics from the other side.
If mainstream politics fails, there's always a Mussolini ready and willing to lead us to greatness.
Mo says:
I slogged through the Frank article, thank you Geoff.
'Twas another nice example of media bias in the coverage of the the candidates, too.
And the blackened cherry on top:
The Pat Roberts I saw last week looked like a hollow, defeated man . . . who may yet prevail on Tuesday. The logic of the rotten borough may well assert itself one more time, as Kansans march to the polls and dutifully pull the lever the same way they always have. In fact, in what will no doubt be hailed a great Republican wave election, it is possible to discern a whole host of rotten boroughs all across America, places where the media doesn’t really care about a candidate’s proposals or the glaring contradictions in their highly moral views—where billionaire TV commercials and sheer terror carry all before them. We will elect a whole platoon of empty, defeated men to the Senate on Tuesday, and then, two years from now, we will search out another company of hollow heroes to champion our righteous rage—and do it again and again, slowly sinking into our impotent fury.
Is a sea-change coming in public perceptions of Republicans? Will they no longer be viewed as rock-ribbed, more as rock-headed? When it becomes unfashionable to be GOP, they're doomed.
Of course, then we have to deal with the libertardians.
Anubis Bard says:
Can we build democracy in the US – on the American model of "by the people, of the people, for the people"? Right now it is not by the people – but by professionalized politicians, hacks and grifters – the rest of us are too busy and demoralized; it's not of the people – but made up of millionaire lawyers and businesspeople – and the rest of us can't pay the price of admission; it's not for the people – but for the moneyed people and companies who fund the campaigns – and corruption has been legalized and normalized. We know the recipe for doing it right, so how do we get there? Voting for another millionaire Democrat who's beholden to industry doesn't get us there.
Major Kong says:
I'm not giving up, even as the GOP tries to turn Ohio into North Mississippi.
mothra says:
Ed, you must have been reading my mind this morning (and apparently a lot of other posters' minds, too). I was listening to Steve Inskeep interview this racist man in Colorado and I just lost all hope right there. Don't know why one racist did it for me, but there it is. In my traditionally blue state we will be re-electing the Latina Sarah Palin and I just. don't. get. it. The system is just broken.
Scott Peterson says:
I agree with Linda at 7:22. Things are grim right now and likely about to get even grimmer…for a while. But the demographics are on our side and, moreover, the tide is turning. Gay rights have advanced further in six years than anyone would have dreamt at the turn of the century. Solar power is now more than viable. Even if we don't win both races–or either–in Kansas, the fact that both aren't blowouts is enormous.
And Robert at 10:30's right: too many people gave up too much for you to sit out any elections, no matter how bleak things seem.
jehrler says:
My wife and I voted (absentee) because there are two more years where Obama and a Democratic Senate can advance reasonable judicial nominees. Not just at the Supremes, but to District and Appellate courts where decisions from access to the ballot, access to abortion, etc are decided in most cases.
Andrew says:
@Robert: Howdy, neighbor! We just got redistricted into Barbara Lee's district in 2012 (used to be Pete Stark), but I've always admired her. I voted weeks ago, and I'm encouraging my wife, who is less political than I am, to fill out her absentee ballot and drop it off in person tomorrow. There are plenty of worthwhile things to vote on.
nate says:
Oh boy, Scott Lemuix is going to be able to perform for his wife tonight after he reads this. Nothing gets his fires stoked like someone on the left mentioning a lack of enthusiasm for Democratic candidates, especially– gasp!– comparing them to Republicans.
Yeah, sure, you should vote and not give up, and the alternative is truly awful, but how can you have any enthusiasm for these turd sandwiches the Democrats are serving up in most of the country? This is how we're supposed to inspire young people? "Vote for the corporate fellating asshole instead of the gibbering mad religious fanatic?"
Before anybody says "Vote for the local school board and build a grassroots, blah, blah, blah," I would like to note that national interests are getting involved in, yes, local school board elections, and pouring hundreds of thousands of dollars to get their candidates elected. Grassroots is done except as a cover for billionaires.
On the national front, DCC money is pouring into corporate friendly races and leaving actual progressives to twist in the wind. Can anyone believe, at this point, that they wouldn't rather see a Republican elected than a Democrat who might be unfriendly to Wall Street?
I'll vote for the Democrat. I always have, and I always will, but I'm tired.
grumpygradstudent says:
There are two things that might help the Federal system become functional again.
1. Old conservatives need to die (i'm not saying that I WANT them to die, or that we should kill them, but hey, it would have the convenient side effect of making us less politically stupid).
2. There needs to be a constitutional amendment to allow regulation of money in politics. Which would, of course, be fought tooth and nail by the moneyed interests currently enjoying the fruits of the Roberts court.
Polarization is not self-correcting. As Ed says, the processes behind it have no foreseeable end. The result is gridlock as far as the eye can see.
Skepticalist says:
I was really hoping Fox would turn loose their Benghazi gasbags or something just as meaningful. It worked so well for their heroes the last time. The latest fear to fear is too easy and it seems to work.
It's a depressing time but it's not unheard of. My area of New York State is more conservative than Mississippi. However, I'm getting two calls day making sure I'm voting for the first serious Democratic Congressional candidate in decades. She probably won't make it but it's fun!
I've been voting for exactly 50 years and every now and then it actually gets interesting.
Damn. I wish Obama knew how to keep it fun too.
geoff says:
@Mo, whenever I hear someone complain about the uselessness of voting I wonder why then the GOP is working so hard to make it more difficult for people (esp. poor and/or black people) to vote. It's not about non-existent "voter fraud".
mk says:
-Affordable Care Act
-Gay Rights
-Decriminalization of Marijuana
-Getting out of Iraq
While not perfect, none of this would have happened if enough people were swayed by the childish notions laid out by Ed above.
There is much to be cynical about, sure. But elections can and do change things. But only if you vote.
Fuck. What a horribly moronic post this is.
Skipper says:
I got to vote in the dictatorial state of California. For each position on my ballot, there were two candidates — one Republican and one Democrat. No Green. No Socialist, No Liberty Party. No nothing. In one race, there were only two Republicans.
"Well, write someone in," you say. Can't. There was no space to write in candidates. Write-in candidates have to be pre-approved by the state.
This is all thanks to two ballot propositions that voters were suckered into voting for. Only the top two vote getters in the primary get on the final ballot. This means that third-party candidates will never be on the final ballot. Were enough progressives to vote Green and not Democrat, this would ensure that the final ballot would have two Republicans.
I believe that a system like this is what the people in Hong Kong were protesting against.
And can we please lay to rest the old canard that "if you don't vote, you can't complain." That's just horse shit. It's the other way around. By participating in a system like voting, you're endorsing the outcome as the best outcome. You can't complain. You can be disappointed that your candidate didn't win, but you can't complain.
It's like like playing in a card game you know to be rigged. If you lose, you can't complain. Our elections are all rigged.
I'll end with the famous words of Emma Goldman: If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal.
Captain Blicero says:
Whenever someone I know complains about something the government is doing, I ask them if I vote. If they have no good reason for not voting (like disenfranchisement) I tune out their opinion.
mk says:
@Skipper.
What then is the solution?
mk says:
@Skipper…
Yes, democracy is hard work. Sometimes unfairly difficult. But that's the way it is. You want more candidates, do something about it. Stop whining. If you think voters can be "suckered" into voting for things, maybe you can sucker them into voting for your cause.
The 'woe is me I live in "dictatorial CA"' whine is childish and gets you no where. Though I suspect you feel good complaining about it, right?
Options exist and they all revolve around voting.
witless chum says:
This is all pretty goddamn stupid.
The senate matters. Let's say one of the five votes usually for legal abortion on the supreme court gets hit by a bus tomorrow. And let's say, then, that Rand Paul wins the 2016 election. Maybe we should have gotten out and voted for the lesser of two evils when we had the chance and been able to confirm a replacement who'll keep abortion legal?
Just in general, I don't really disagree with arguing that Dems suck, but who exactly told you to get a morally and philosophically-satisfying politician to vote for? I'm proud to be a leftist radical and I figure the lesson of history is more or less that I'm not gonna win very often and when I do, they'll be half victories at best and it will require compromising with the scum of the earth to get even them. That's the way of the world and wishing it was otherwise is about as good as praying. It doesn't hurt to do it, but it's not a plan.
I don't think I've ever voted for someone I thought of as good enough for the task at hand, but I don't miss elections because voting for the less evil one is literally the least I can do.
rustonite says:
I'll vote Tuesday, because I always vote, but it's irrelevant. I live in a deep blue city, and there's only one candidate for each office. I voted in the primary (which is the actual election) but even there, the winning candidates each got about 80%. There's not much point. I will be voting down some horrible state amendments, but I'm sure our deep red state will overwhelmingly approve them.
What would solve this is a complete government reform, switching to a parliamentary system with multi candidate districts or proportional representation. Or unicorn blood. Whichever is easier to find.
Scout says:
Right. Because Obama is as bad as Bush. So we should never have bothered to vote for him either.
This whole rant is stupid. I usually agree with you, Ed, but not on this. If everyone felt this way, I still wouldn't be able to marry my partner, my grandsons would be headed to McCain's Iran war, and I would be flapping in the wind without health care.
So I call bullshit. Every non Fox News zombified person owes it to the rest of us to vote against the floundering conservative agenda and put it out of our collective misery. Because if you don't, YOU are the problem more than they are. They at least show up to vote for their pathetically lame and corrupt ideas.
Templar says:
Ed, check out Tony Benn in Big Ideas That Changed The World – Democracy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KbDNSkSovQ&list=PLjvxAjXnV4wwmm4vwadNvO4Ao-xv9aGg_. It will make you feel a little better. I mean, this guy saw the rise of the welfare state, the assault on the common good by Thatcher, and the Third Way management of Blair and still was ready to fight at the polls until his death a few months ago.
Safety Man! says:
I think it's worth noting that the current state of unsustainable gridlock is actually a sign that we did, in fact, accomplish something. I would like to cite the gridlock and name calling the last time a political outsider-ish was elected, Carter. Today we see it with Obama. Similar situation, similar outcomes. If the electorate continues to vote for outsider candidates, yes, things will get worse, but if we keep it up we can eventually do serious damage to the established political power blocs.
I live in Md, and I voted early for Hogan. I dislike everything about him, but the O'Malley bloc was way too comfortable being in power. My gamble is that the legislature will keep him in check. Sometimes you just gotta roll the dice.
Ms. Ann Thrope says:
What Scout said.
And, Ed, whose fault is it that "most people who vote are over 55"? Everyone who is under 55, get off your asses and VOTE, DAMMIT.
Rev Mr Browne says:
I'm really looking forward to the coming circus over which GOP House clown will offer articles of impeachment first.
ConcernedCitizen says:
I agree with everyone who is unimpressed with Ed's pessimism. Voting in a deeply flawed, first-past-the-finish-line, two party system is incredibly lame. But it's better than nothing. Elections do matter, even if they're purely negative. If your only goal is to keep the religious lunatic out of office, so be it.
But I think y'all are forgetting about a viable strategy for political change: what I call the "darkest before the dawn" gambit. Let the Republicans win. Let them take their supply-side insanity and socially retrograde policies to the extreme. Sam Brownback's about to be finished in Kansas; let's elect him president! The modern GOP will die only if it kills itself. Let us hasten their suicide.
Sure, it'll be painful, but will it be more painful than limping along as we're currently doing? Maybe not.
Of course, this strategy hinges on the American public's ability to correctly identify the causes of their diminished state and the players who brought them low. So… I guess we're fucked either way.
Captain Blicero says:
Heighten the contradictions? You're an idiot, CC.
MK says:
Today's the day. Stop feeling sorry for yourself, stop whining, do something worthy of the women and minorities who took a beating so that future generations would be able to vote… Go vote!
Mayya says:
What Jude said.
Not to mention there are other races on the ballot in addition to senate. In my state there are several state Supreme Court and district court seats open. Does anyone really believe they don't matter?
Chicagojon says:
Great post Ed. Between us I guess Illinois lost out on 2 votes.
Chicagojon says:
Oh – these would be my ballot choices / likely "winners". It's apparently the year of the septuagenarian in Illinois
US Senate: 70 year old / 17 year incumbent (31 years in Washington)
US House: 70 year old / 15 year incumbent
IL Supreme court: unopposed (10 year incumbent)
Attorney General: 48 year old / 11 year incumbent
Comptroller: Don't really care frankly. Incumbent is 70 year old with 20 years of elected office in IL
Governor: 68 year old / 1st reelection.
Arguably this is worth a vote as IL will almost always have "checks and balances" in statewide governance meaning that the governor and state congress won't get along, but in this case it could easily swing to a Wisconsin-type situation with an all Red legislature running amok. Having said that, IL had a run of Republican governors from 1977-2003 and will likely have another run soon for the sake of variety. The world won't end, Chicago will still isolate itself from the rural majority in the state and the state will still be mostly broken either way.
Secretary of state: 71 year old / 15 year incumbent
Treasurer: Don't care
State Senate / State House: Running unopposed
Ballot measures:
"IL Right to Vote" amendment: Has absolutely no teeth, is frankly insulting to the concept of an amendment and what a state constitution should cover
"Crime Victims Bill of Rights Amendment": Was 170-2 in the assemblies. Isn't going to stop black youths from getting shot by white cops. Shrug — sure, let's fix typos in the already existing Crime victims rights section.
Advisory questions: Increase minimum wage, health care covering birth control, & tax millionaires for school.
These are all bullshit measures by a democratically controlled legislature to try to get out the vote. If advisory questions were the intended way to govern then set up a voting system with a series of advisory questions and allow for a ranking system beyond a yes/no question. As it is thinking that these yes/no questions are "democratic" is bullshit and insulting.
Robert says:
ConcernedCitizen – that approach was suggested back during Gore v Bush. The argument was 'elect this bozo and everyone will see how stupid the Republicans are! Gore would be almost as bad, anyway.' There were even bumper stickers 'Gush/Bore'.
Yeah, that certainly worked.
ConcernedCitizen says:
@Captain Blicero
I figured there was already a phrase to describe this idea. But I didn't know it off the top of my head and I was too lazy to look it up. Oh well…