Of all the places a person could look for happiness and fulfillment, I can't think of one more likely to produce constant disappointment than the American electoral process.
Studying elections for a living has taken most of the shine off of them for me. As a kid they seemed like the most important thing in the world, and the process of voting was an almost mystical expression of rights inextricable from lofty concepts like freedom and justice. Maybe political science has reduced the moving parts involved to numbers, formal models, and abstract data points, but over time I've developed an outlook toward voting that is no different than paying the electric bill. It's a thing we do for practical reasons. You don't have to pour your heart and soul into it. It's not a goddamn spiritual quest; it's an election.
This presidential election appears to be bringing out the worst in the electorate in so many ways. One is the habit we have as Americans of thinking that our feelings are important in a process that is a practical and means-to-end oriented. My view is that the primary process is the time for big ideas, for hopes and dreams and attempting to steer the ship, so to speak. Once the primary process is over, voting becomes no different than picking a cable company.
buy Overnight Drugs online buynoprescriptionrxxonline.net no prescription
You pick the one that gives you the most of what you want at the lowest cost. And, like with cable and internet service, you usually have a very narrow range of choices. And you usually don't like any of them.
Now that I think about it, picking a cable and internet provider is more like American presidential elections than anyone realizes.
I didn't vote for Hillary Clinton in the primaries, where she was my second preference in a field of two. Now that process is over, and I have two choices. There are about four things about Hillary Clinton that I like and the rest crap. Trump is not merely 100% crap, he is the actual diametric opposite of everything I like. So, being a rational person who understands how elections work and that the rules of our process virtually ensure that only one of the major party candidates can win, I pick the one who gives me more of what I like. I could punish myself by writing in someone who isn't going to win (to extend the analogy, that would be choosing HughesNet satellite internet, which, for the record, is the most expensive and ludicrously bad internet service since the obsolescence of the 26k modem) but what would that accomplish. In the din of 100 million-plus people voting this year, the "message" of staying home or throwing away a vote on a joke candidate isn't going to be heard.
"But I don't like either candidate" is the background refrain of this entire election, and my reaction (at least internally) is always the same: Who cares? How often in life are you really making choices among great options? The mechanical process of choosing who will represent us in the various elected positions of power in the United States is important, but it's hardly a place to look for fulfillment and self-expression. You don't have to go down into the Fuhrerbunker because you don't like either the Americans or the Russians. You pick one to surrender to (probably the one that isn't going to shoot you on sight or ship you off to the Gulag) and go from there. In the end, too many people are simply too invested in a process that is not designed – not in the slightest – to fluff your self esteem and sense of self worth.
If you can't make a choice in a practical decision-making process without invoking your integrity, pride, and self esteem, that says more about you than it does about the process.
Pete Sloterdijk says:
The proles view politics as a sport and identify with winning and demonizing the other side. Social media has made this unbearable. Be unsocial, block and unfollow.
Victor says:
Hello Ed,
I wanted to tell you that me and my brother produced a cartoon based on one of your blog entries.
It was the one where you compared the average american salary to the net worth of the Koch brothers but used time instead of dollars.
Please check it out and let me know what you think.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnIoNKK00bg
If you think it's good maybe you could consider linking it on your site? We worked really hard on it. Thank you.
Emerson Dameron says:
I have spent my entire life in deep Red or Blue states wherein my Presidential ballot is at best entirely symbolic.
The pleasure this time will be sticking it to Trump and the Republicans in some small way by voting for the last candidate they would want me to. He's not going to win California, and I will be happy to help him lose it by a little bit more.
It also helps that I genuinely think Clinton would be a *much* better Chief Executive than Stein. Jibing with the ins and outs of my own ideology is not a prereq for competence.
c u n d gulag says:
Victor,
GREAT!
As for elections, I always vote.
For good, or for ill, I vote.
And yes, I know, it's all futile.
I just choose the lesser of two evils most years.
But this year, the choice is easy!
Victor says:
Thank you! c u n d gulag!
I'm glad you liked the video. Sharing it really helps me out if you can. I'm voting for Jill Stein, I just can't vote Dem anymore after they cheated Bernie.
Tim says:
"In the din of 100 million-plus people voting this year, the "message" of staying home or throwing away a vote on a joke candidate isn't going to be heard."
This doesn't strike me as a particularly good argument. Not that it isn't true, exactly, but that voting for the "responsible" choice isn't going to be heard, either. Casting one more vote out of a million might be more meaningful than casting one more vote out of 50 or 60 million.
But overall, I have to agree with your post. I guess. I'm fairly likely to vote in November for She Who Must Be Elected. I've never felt less like participating, though. I first started to feel really disgusted and dirty about it in the 2010 midterms and things have gone downhill since. At least it's only every couple of years.
Skepticalist says:
I always vote. It's a long walk to the church where my friends' wives all volunteer as election monitors. I'd never live it down if I didn't pull a lever or two. I don't want to have a blank space in the book. See?
And that's just the way it is.
democommie says:
I always vote; primarily because of what I hear from morons like the one who was explaining, at the bus stop this morning how we need Trump, because he aND teh grand putain are homies and Vlad would NEVER nuke a homie!
Ten Bears says:
You do know, Vic, that some people pay attention?
I have for quite some time been resigned to a Clinton redux, to The First Woman President in the History of the USA (Foke Yeah!)©™, and out of fatigue and disgust have pretty much turned it all off. I do admit, though, a degree of enjoyment watching the rubes dance the kombutki theater thoroughly convinced they are participant in a decision long standing.
It does have its appeal, I'll give it that. Not unlike Jesus floating down out of the sky on a flying rainbow unicorn with thousands of angelic men on flying rainbow unicorns to carry the faithful off to paradise.
democommie says:
But, but, but…that would mean that JESUS and paradise are teh GAAAAAY!
Emerson Dameron says:
@Victor –
@Victor –
Hey, cool video!
I was strongly considering Stein. Then Bernie himself decided to endorse HRC in an attempt at healing the wounds of the primary. Then I began to *like* the idea of a boring president.
And THEN Stein struggled to stand up to some internet anti-vaxxers. SCREECH.
I live in Southern California, and those people are quite literally toxic here. I do wish the Greens were a viable third party – I voted for Nader in 2000 and still don't quite regret it – but one of the few things I *like* about the Democrats is that they don't feel any need to embrace the wackjob fringes of the left.
Hillary is almost definitely going to win and will probably be a mediocre but basically competent president with some experience and wherewithal to stand up to idiots and assholes. Trump is historically terrible and his party needs to be soundly punished for letting itself crash and burn the way it has.
Tl;dr – I feel you, man. But the more I think about it, the more I agree with our host here.
schmitt trigger says:
Victor, good video!
I also like your 'notebook sketch" approach to cartoons.
There is another good way to visualize money:
a $1 bill is about 0.0043" thick.
So $55,000 would be 236.5" or 21.96' or 6.69 meters. A two-story building, minus he attic.
The Koch brother's 55 billion would be 236,500" or 19,708' or 6,007 meters.
Dubai's Burj Khalifa building is 829.8 meters tall including its spire, therefore you could fit 7 and a quarter Burj Khalifas one on top of each other.
c u n d gulag says:
Victor,
Voting for Jill Stein is like jacking-off in your hand, pretending it's a super-model.
Please, get a fucking grip!
No!
Not on your man thing!
On reality…..
Ten Bears says:
I put it up at my place, Vic, so maybe seventeen people will see it ;)
Victor says:
Ten Bears,
Thank you! According to my analytics an additional 110 people have viewed it. You might be more popular than you think :)
Victor says:
Thank you schmitt trigger. Wow that's difference in height is just as striking as using time. It's definitely another good way of illustrating income inequality.
Leading Edge Boomer says:
I always vote, in every election, no matter how trivial or how my vote might not count. Mostly because I like to complain, and the old saying is … However, in the largest but small city in a low-population county in a pretty empty state, it often turns out to count after all because others do not vote.
This presidential election is like no other in US history. So I am fascinated by it, but not uncertain of the outcome, nor are any of the statistical aggregators. The Republican nominee has disappointed me for a few days by not saying something unutterably stupid, just boringly repeating Republican falsehoods. Where's the fun in that? C'mon Donnie, you can do better!
Skipper says:
@Leading edge — you've fallen for a commonly quoted, but woefully incorrect, bromide. Actually, those who vote are the ones who can't complain. Voting is a process in which there is no a priori right answer. Voting provides the answer and, in taking part, you tacitly agree that the outcome is the "right answer." Remember the other saying, "May the best man win." So, by taking part in this process, you are agreeing that the outcome is the right answer and the winner is the best "man." Therefore, you can't complain. It's like playing in a card game you know to be rigged. You can't complain about the outcome.
I'm not saying don't vote, but be aware of what you're doing. The saying that you alluded to is common, but wrong. It's like the old saw tha "Driving isn't a right; it's a privilege." That's wrong too, despite being repeated ad nauseum.
quixote says:
Nice video, Victor. Fun *and* professional-looking.
It would, of course, be wrong of me to tell you how to vote, so I wouldn't dream of saying, Jeeeebus, don't vote for Stein!
No, seriously. She's a Harvard-trained doctor who can't find it in her to stand up to the anti-vaxxers. That's some Repub-level pandering right there.
I don't know what state you live in, but there's probably a few more parties in there somewhere. Who's Peace and Freedom running? Or write somebody in. (Remember the old bumperstickers? Vote Goat.) But Stein has put herself beyond the pale.
rustonite says:
Now if only we could get Ed to apply this attitude to dating, he'd be a much happier person.
Coises says:
“Now that I think about it, picking a cable and internet provider is more like American presidential elections than anyone realizes.”
When you pick a cable and internet provider, you live with the costs and benefits that follow from your choice. No matter how you vote (or even if you don’t vote), the result is the same: you live with the costs and benefits of the majority’s choice. With the possible exception of some very small, local elections, every vote is a symbolic vote. Unless you are affected with a severe case of magical thinking, you don’t vote for practical reasons.
It’s a fundamental flaw in the democratic process.
Imagine giving a class of one hundred students a subject for an essay. You direct them to appropriate resources for study and suggest some lines of thought they should pursue. You also explain that no matter what any particular student turns in—even no essay at all—all students will get the same grade, which will be the average of the grades you would have given to each of the papers you received.
How much effort do think most students would expend on this assignment?
A few students will work hard at it, because that’s just what they do. Depending on prevailing social norms, many of the remaining students might turn in something, so they don’t look like freeloaders to their peers… but by and large, most students are going to reserve their serious time and effort for other classes, where applying themselves is likely to have some discernible effect on the outcome.
Talisker says:
Here's another way of looking at it. The USA is a country of 300 million people. It's the height of narcissism to expect all of them, or even a majority, to align closely with your own political views.
Imagine the USA has to vote on what everyone eats tonight.
Hillary Clinton is like a Big Mac: Not the healthiest or most delicious choice, but acceptable to a large number of people, and adequate if you're hungry. In this analogy, Donald Trump is a burger laced with deadly poison. I'm sure your organic kale salad is highly nutritious, but getting 150 million people to choose it is not a realistic option. So vote for the Big Mac already, to make sure we aren't all poisoned.
@Skipper:
In point of fact, everyone has the right to complain. The First Amendment says so.
However, you have greater moral authority to complain if you cast an effective vote against whatever you are complaining about. If you vote for Hillary Clinton, you did what you could to stop Trump, in a small but tangible way. If you vote for Stein or Johnson or write in Mickey Mouse, that might give you a nice warm feeling; but for the purpose of stopping Trump, you might as well have stayed home.
By a similar argument, Green voters will have greater moral authority to complain about President Hillary Clinton, if we get that far. To vote Green is to decide righteous criticism of Clinton is more important than taking action to stop Trump.
In the immortal words of Jim McAllister: "We're not electing the fucking Pope here." A vote for US President is not a declaration of unconditional lifetime support. It's a provisional, "you'll do". That's why there is another election four years later.
Nonsense. You aren't born with a "right" to drive. In order to drive, you must obtain a valid legal document known as a "driving license", which the government can withdraw for sufficient cause. If you are caught driving after drinking a bottle of vodka, you won't be allowed to drive any more.
If you speak after drinking a bottle of vodka… well, you probably won't make a great deal of sense. People are free to ignore you or argue back. The cops might move you on if you're creating a public nuisance. But there's no such thing as a "speaking licence"; you have a First Amendment right to speak, no matter what. See the difference?
geoff says:
"Now that I think about it, picking a cable and internet provider is more like American presidential elections than anyone realizes."
Yeah, I dumped cable years ago. Internet's next!!
(I am reminded of Bill Hicks' joke about watching CNN: "AIDS! WAR! DEATH!" Looks outside– birds are chirping, the sun's shining.)
bobbyp says:
Does Jill Stein advocate the abolition of the system of private property? The dictatorship of the proletariat?
Not a dimes worth of difference.
Jim-Bob says:
Regarding the whole kerfluffle about voting for the lesser of two evils, etc., my (perhaps selfish) sense is that, essentially, my vote matters only to me. That is, unless I am in a swing state that winds up deciding the whole election by a single vote,,,mine.
So I will vote for the candidate who offers ME the most…comfort, the best sense that I am voting for best candidate. I will vote for Jill and for the Green platform. In this case, my vote will actually matter a bit, because it will be part of the tally that pushes 3rd Party candidacies closer to becoming a reality in our local and national elections.
GunstarGreen says:
When attempting to convince people of the need to vote for a candidate, you might want to refrain from using "Come on, your vote is worthless and amounts to nothing anyway" as an argument.
Not that it matters. A huge chunk of the electorate still votes on Diebold machines, so it's not like the button you push has anything to do with who you end up voting for in the first place.
SeaTea says:
Fucking love this.
Ten Bears says:
The Hillary-bots, not Hillary, are the reason I won't vote for her.
Well mostly says:
Any time a post prompts a Bill Hicks quote…that's a fine fine thing.
The cable choice is apt: I've traveled a lot lately and find there are some notable differences between providers. But it's still just TV: there's no nirvana channel.
My Verizon iPhone works perfectly and it still can't make my kids call.
We're really not a practical people at all as it turns out.
And the cosmos does not breathlessly await out next decision.
Ed nailed this one.
anotherbozo says:
The 1950 Academy Awards—now that was an election to care about! "All about Eve" was up against "Sunset Boulevard" and "Born Yesterday." Three terrific options.
Of course you didn't get to vote.
Tim H. says:
Have a look at:
http://www.rollingstone.com/tv/news/watch-the-simpsons-scathe-donald-trump-in-the-campaign-ad-w431846
For cartoon characters, they make a good point.
JReed says:
@Ten Bears – what's a Hillary-bot? Are you meaning an unthinking supporter? If so, how is that unlike a BernieBro or a Trumpeter?
And if so, vote based on your own criteria, not someone else's. I agree thoroughly with Talisker: this isn't unconditional lifetime support, which is why we keep doing it every four years.
Your right to a voice, an opinion, a complaint, remains with you regardless of whether you do vote or not, though. That's what makes it a right. But you should exercise it so it doesn't get all flabby from disuse.
JohnR says:
Yeah, I see all these "but my vote doesn't matter" posts. Like the saying goes, no single raindrop thinks it's responsible for the flood. So, yeah, your vote in and of itself, doesn't matter. But your vote, as one of a whole bunch of votes, matters a great deal. My state has a Republican governor again, even though it's regarded as a "deep blue" state. How did that happen? A whole lot of Democratic voters decided that their votes didn't matter, and anyway, the candidate just wasn't exciting enough and didn't make them feel enthusiastic about voting. So, the areas where they live are once again getting Republican payback for being so Democratic. Gosh, it's so unfair! Suck it up, snowflake. Life is a series of unappetizing choices, and choosing not to choose is almost always the worst choice. Most of the time, I have to vote the same way as a bunch of fools, nuts and assholes – my neighbors. In a perfect world, I wouldn't have to associate with such riff-raff, but in this world, they're stuck with me and my vote regardless of what I think of them. We all benefit that way. As for the rigged machines, the best way to beat them is for a whole lot of people to vote – most of the things I've seen about how rigging works indicate that rigging is most effective when the numbers aren't great and are pretty evenly matched so a little tweak tilts the machine your way. Make the pool large enough and it makes the cheating harder (and conversely, more obvious when it happens). You want to feel morally pure? Help in your local soup kitchen. Voting is different.
Talisker says:
@Jim-Bob: If you vote Clinton, you make a definite contribution to stopping Trump on Election Day.
If you vote Stein, you might sort of help bring "third-party candidacies closer to becoming a reality", in some unspecified way, at some unknown point in the future. We all have our priorities, I guess.
Here's a radical idea: If you want the Greens to win seats in Congress, vote Green for Congress. Or state legislature, or city sanitation commissioner. Run for something on the Green ticket yourself. I don't mind. But in this particular Presidential election, maybe consider voting for Clinton instead?
@Ten Bears
That's got to be the weirdest one yet. She's not a sports team.
If you don't like the Oakland Raiders because their fans annoy you, fine. But I'm guessing the "Hillary-bots" are some random people on the Internet. They make no meaningful difference to what Clinton would do in the White House. So why should it affect your vote one way or the other?
For the record, I don't like Hillary any more than Ed does. But given that either Hillary or Trump will be the next President, some of the "logic" used to justify not voting for Hillary is beyond belief.
Davis X. Machina says:
You don't have to go down into the Fuhrerbunker because you don't like either the Americans or the Russians.
But all the cool kids are down there….
Coises says:
@JohnR: “Like the saying goes, no single raindrop thinks it's responsible for the flood.”
That’s an ethical argument, not a practical one. Recognizing how people as a whole must behave if our democracy is to function well, one can work backwards to assert that all citizens have a duty to behave in that way, even if any one citizen’s individual action to the contrary would not have discernible adverse effects.
To one extent or another, most people probably agree with that sort of reasoning—at least, in public. It’s the same logic that says you shouldn’t download that album from BitTorrent, even though you still won’t buy it if you don’t. Concurring with that idea in public is usually wise; but there is no effective mechanism that can reinforce the corresponding private behavior. Notice how that works out.
I’m not saying people shouldn’t vote. I’m not arguing against a sense of civic duty. What I am saying is that our system (and, as far as I know, every known democratic system) has the incentives lined up all wrong. There’s no practical value for the individual in making the “best choice” at the polls. There are social incentives regarding expression of opinions; since those opinions will almost never be put to a practical test, the rewards accrue from popularity, not accuracy… and that’s popularity with other people who also have no incentive to form opinions based on anything but popularity. It’s a closed-loop system almost entirely independent of the real effects to which decisions based on those opinions would lead.
Then people go to the polls out of some combination of shame, magical thinking and a sense of duty, after having been immersed for an election season in opinions shaped by peer approval with little or no reality testing.
That’s the context in which most citizens encounter politics. We should not be surprised at the quality of the resultant group decisions.
Give someone the task of buying a new refrigerator—or even selecting a cable company—and he or she will have much stronger incentives to get it right.
Desargues says:
"…which, for the record, is the most expensive and ludicrously bad internet service…"
You speak as it there is any cheap and/or reliable internet service in America. Where do you live? I'd like to move where you are. Expensive and ludicrously bad is all we have, on the East Coast.
Name Withheld says:
"Hillary is almost definitely going to win and will probably be a mediocre but basically competent president with some experience and wherewithal to stand up to idiots and assholes."
Under normal circumstances, that wouldn't sound very encouraging. But given the alternative, it's a relief.
Katydid says:
In my experience, the people whining about "Hillary bots" are the ones that thought Bernie farted rainbows and are all butt-hurt that most of the country didn't agree with them.
@JohnR; my blue state also inexplicably elected a Republican, who immediately cut out all the environmental, public transportation, and education plans that were in midstream. Currently he's posting stupid things and attacking others on Facebook. It frustrates me when people whine about it–what did you EXPECT to happen when you voted R?!?
Robert says:
Every time I see some disappointed Berner criticizing the DNC for rigging the primaries (so that a Democrat would be the nominee), I imagine the RNC wishing desperately that they'd done the same.
Yeah, this is shaping up to be Eisenhower v McCarthy, a race that we never had to endure.
Katydid says:
@Robert; the baser part of the Republican base are masters of projection. Want to know what they're up to? Listen to what they accuse others of doing. Sadly, the Berniebros also embrace this tactic. They crashed the DNC without being registered trying to rig the election and promptly had a toddlerific meltdown when they weren't allowed in.
Skepticalist says:
I'm pretty damned old and I never thought I'd see a black president. Incredible. While I realize it's second nature to many here, I couldn't imagine seeing a woman running and very likely to be elected. It really is quite a thing and nobody talks about this part of it much.
Hilary will be more fun than having to spend many months watching impeachment proceedings for Donald Trump even though he might be convicted.
Waiting for perfection is no reason to withhold your vote.
Kathy from Indiana says:
As a woman of a certain age, I say the same thing to all my family and friends. I've lived thru the sixties, sex/drugs/rocknroll, civil rights, women's rights, the assassinations, all the really important fights. Younger people today do take certain things for granted because you have always had them. You didn't fight for them. It's just the way life goes on. Each generation's reality is different than the previous. You are never going to have a perfect election with fabulous candidates who are intelligent and articulate and offer you a thoughtful choice. Look who helped select them. I have never felt the kind of fear I feel today. So much violence and animosity
Kathy from Indiana says:
sorry, hit wrong key.
I fear for how this election will turn out. The violence that will be unleashed by the ignorant. You ahve to keep your eye on the prize – the Supreme Court. If you vote for nothing else, vote for the supreme court.
schmitt trigger says:
Skepticalist;
well said.
geoff says:
@Skepticalist, assuming that the makeup of the House elected in November will be pretty close to that of today's (and given the gerrymandering/ redistricting of 2010 I bet it will be), it seems much more likely to me that it will be Mrs. Clinton facing impeachment rather than the Giant Evil Baby, even in the unlikely event he were to win the election. The GOP House would I think play ball with Trump. HRC will be under attack from Day One.
Katydid says:
@Kathy from Indiana: something I've read a number of places online today (and watched the video, too) but hasn't been covered *at all* by the so-called librul news stations is Trump calling for Clinton to be assassinated during his rally in Wilmington. "Second Amendment Solutions". When the Wasilla Wendigo put crosshairs on Gabby Gifford, one of her deranged ilk nearly succeeded in killing Gifford, and did take her right out of her political career. How this man is not being questioned by the Secret Service is a mystery to me.
I saw Free to Be You and Me in elementary school and sang "The Ink is Black, the Page is White" and "This Land is Your Land" in elementary school, and I never thought I would see an African-American POTUS, much less a woman POTUS. These things have certainly brought the crazies out of the woodwork.
Kathy from Indiana says:
I hope I'm wrong but at this point the crazies seem to have license to do what ever they think is a reasonable response to being threatened. My worst fear is the violence that will follow. There are too many empowered people out there who think it's time to roll back decades of tolerance. My brother is gay, my boss/friend is black. I have a sister who thinks the sun rises and sets on Donald Trump and my very sickly father wonders if there is anything to "cure" my sister. And I live in Indiana. The only good thing to happen recently is Mike Pence isn't here much to fuck up the state now that he's a Trumpet. A coworker recently said she couldn't attend an art fair because her husband needed to buy an AK47 because one was finally available and they are hard to get. My mother was running the ER when Vernon Jordan was shot here and I thought that was surely the biggest calamity to effect my every day existence. (BTW, Jimmy Carter waved at me when he came to check on Vernon. ) What seemed so horrible then pales in comparison to today.
Nate says:
@Kathy it's unfortunate, but the crazies are that way because we have allowed practically anyone who wants a gun to get one too easily. This also includes homegrown sleeper ISIS members. I read part of an interview with a German who had went to their camps and then realized it wasn't for him and escaped. He said that ISIS wasn't worried as much about the US because our gun laws (or lack thereof) makes it so easy for anyone to get high powered weapons. In most of the other countries, ISIS has to take an extra step to find people to provide weapons for their crazies. Not here.
Talisker says:
@Katydid:
To be fair, Trump's "Second Amendment" remarks are now a lead story on CNN, NYTimes.com, and Reuters. Also CBC, BBC, and Le Monde, which aren't even American. Even by Trump's standards, this is so crazy the world has taken notice.
Katydid says:
@Talisker; that's a relief! I spent the day reading the story on various online sites, but saw nothing on the mainstream media about it.
mothra says:
To be fair, Trump's "Second Amendment" remarks are now a lead story on CNN, NYTimes.com, and Reuters. Also CBC, BBC, and Le Monde, which aren't even American. Even by Trump's standards, this is so crazy the world has taken notice.
Which is just what Trump wants: to dominate the news cycle and avert any real analysis of his "economic plan." He plays us all like cheap pianos.
Emerson Dameron says:
@mothra –
Most potential Trump voters know precisely scratch about economics. No one who didn't dig Trump as a Reality TV asshole is going to dig him as a homicidal maniac.
I know the left has some residual pessimism and masochism from 2000 and 2004, but by any objective analysis, Things Are Not Going Well for Annoying Orange right now.
Aughties Fox News and the W Admin knew how to drum up a sense of urgency around their boy. I'm not sure what Trump is even doing now besides praying for a major domestic terrorist attack.
Coises says:
“I'm not sure what Trump is even doing now besides praying for a major domestic terrorist attack.”
I hope our national security forces are considering that he might try to create one.
Think for a second before you say, “That’s just nuts!” He’s already suggested that Russia could help out by hacking our email system, and then there’s that second amendment remark. This is a guy with a lot of self-righteous arrogance, a lot of money, and no discernible moral compass at all.
TakomaMark says:
One of the nice things about being a GenXer is that we had it drubbed into us from birth by the Baby Boomers who preceded us that we sucked, our culture wasn't as good as theirs, our music was crap, and basically we were totally sub optimal as a generation. So, choosing between sub optimal options is something we were raised to do and don't complain much about.
Katydid says:
@TakomaMark; you nailed it.
Talisker says:
@Emerson Dameron:
I sincerely doubt that would help him.
Look at what happened after Orlando: Atrocity happens, Trump makes crass and stupid remarks, anyone in possession of half a brain questions whether Trump is fit to be President. Meanwhile Clinton stays calm, says responsible things, looks like a grown-up. This dynamic does not work to Trump's advantage, except among the minority of headbanging idiots who will vote for him anyway.
Short of Hillary Clinton getting indicted (not happening now) I'm not sure what would help Trump. If a crisis happens, she's been out of the Obama administration for 3 years, so it can't really be blamed on her; and she will look like the only competent candidate to clean up the mess.
The Democrats should not be complacent by any means, but a quiet feeling of confidence would be appropriate.
Todd Ernst says:
you cant fight corruption by voting for it.
you certainly can surrender to it though
Lowell Haeck says:
Let's hear it for a close-knit group that put heart into its work and created an Olympic-sized effort.