You know who I wish was running for President? Mother Theresa, may she rest in peace.
Or maybe Gandhi. Also dead, but you get the idea. Pretty high approval ratings (except maybe with the British at one point). And I’d be okay with Neil DeGrasse Tyson, actually.
Except there have been questions about the financials of Mother Theresa’s charity, and criticisms that she admitted feeling disconnected from God in later years. Was Mother Theresa, perhaps, a hypocrite with questionable financials and/or morals?
And Gandhi. Don’t get me started on Gandhi. That radical pacifist advocated such extreme non-violence in response to the Axis nations of World War II, he went so far as to say sacrifice of self and country was preferable to freedom obtained through violence. And really, how impressed would Hitler have been with principled non-violence? I get that it was your thing, Gandhi, but how different our world would be.
Neil DeGrasse Tyson, now, seems pretty solidly logical. And intellectually amusing. Except… logic is nothing compared to society’s rampant truthiness. Take your science and stuff it, Neil. And he’s a self-described agnostic. We really shouldn’t bring a lack of religion into politics. Imagine the chaos! So, he’s out.
What we need is someone more trustworthy than Mother Theresa, more principled than Gandhi and more affable than DeGrasse Tyson. Also, we’d like to feel like we could have a beer with this person while simultaneously trusting them with our nuclear codes and to know every nuance of every foreign government, those in power and any possible coup. We will feel entitled to every detail of this person’s personal life from here on out, and also from birth til now. And their children’s. We will watch amateur video of things said at barbeques in 1992 and judge accordingly. It would also be helpful if this person could see the future, but just when there is more than one possible course of action and/or resulting reaction. So, every time, I guess. Times a million or so. 20/20 hindsight is one thing. But we will settle for no less than 20/20 foresight, thank you. Why is it that we never have qualified candidates?
Or, on second thought, forget all that. We’ll settle for anyone but these two, but only now that we’ve settled on these two. #nevertrump #neverhillary
And I get it. I do. You hate Hillary Clinton. She’s a liar. She fiddled while Benghazi burned. She’s practically a moderate Republican in a pantsuit who stole the election from Bernie with her insider connections. And Donald Trump. He’s a racist, misogynist, nativist whose isolationist policies are the only ones we’ve heard spelled out with any clarity, while the rest of his platform is built on the hate and anger and fears he’s stoked to a bonfire, and the bombastic phrase, “Believe me.” And like with the Pied Piper, so many do.
Fantastic. We all know where we all stand. Entrenched. Partisan. Angry. Mystified. Righteous. How could this have happened?
31 million Americans voted in the Republican primaries. 29 million Americans voted in the Democratic primaries. There are about 225 million adult Americans. So… by my English major math, using some rounding, approximately 75% of Americans didn’t vote. If you did, good on you. Colorado holds a caucus. I went. So, I figure if I want to complain about the excruciatingly polarized state of the race now, I’m allowed.
What might have happened if another 60 million Americans voted in the primaries? What might have happened if another 120 million Americans had voted? I’ve seen a meme several times lately that reads, “If Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are stranded on a desert island, who survives? America. America survives.”
I get it. It’s not your fault. You hate both of them. You can’t be blamed when it all goes to hell.
Here’s the thing, though. Trump and Clinton didn’t become their parties nominees in some sort of Hunger Games style throw down. They were nominated by a majority of their party’s approximately 30 million primary voters. In other words, about 7% of the population, on both sides. Everyone else, on both sides, received even less than 7% of the country’s vote.
So, throwing around a bunch of curse words and bumper stickers now is kind of pointless. If you voted, great. If you voted, but you know someone who didn’t and didn’t move mountains to convince them to also vote, then that’s only half credit. I’ll stop patting myself on the back for just going to the caucus, I suppose. If Americans were actually terrified of the two choices we have, they shouldn’t have let 25% of the country make the decision for them. If they truly don’t think that these two people represent us as a country, different choices were on the table. All we had to do was vote. Single digit percentages of adult Americans on either side would have changed the outcome. Three out of four Americans didn’t bother. Primaries are tricky. I get that. There are registration rules and deadlines and polling places and sometimes you need a stamp.
I think what our election cycle says about us as a country may well be, We prefer being angry to being engaged.
Anger is easy, after all. Engaged requires a little more. Anger is reposting a meme, writing “bitch” or “orange toad” in a comment thread. Haha. Good one, Bob. Point definitely made. Engaged means having a discussion, questioning our own values. God forbid, listening to the other guy. Our neighbor, our classmate, our nominees. Their nominees.
We don’t have perfect politicians. In fact, we have far from perfect politicians. I’ll concede that point. Some days it’s hard to justify leaving Britain at all. We’re sorry. We obviously weren’t ready. But as a government by and for the people, it’s on us to hold our representatives accountable by holding ourselves accountable. It’s the only way the system works. We’re imperfect and hypocritical, occasionally passionate, but also intellectually lazy and partisan. We want our politicians to be better than we are. And they aren’t. We want them to fight for the things we want. But we don’t vote.
French philosopher Joseph de Maistre said about democracy, Every nation gets the government it deserves.
How potentially terrifying.
Let’s work on it. Maybe even without hashtags and angry comment threads. We might even be able to serve as an example to our politicians. Or, here’s a thought, vote for new ones. We’re only stuck if we choose to be.
I totally agree! For whatever reason, the Republicans who vote in primaries tend to be the very far right of their party – which is why the Tea Party arose and lingers, why the idea of the “moderate Republican” seems to be a thing of the past. So for every moderate Republican who claims that his or her party has been hijacked, I say, why aren’t the moderates voting in the primaries, both for midterm and presidential election years? They are truly in part to blame for this! Dems don’t seem to have the same problem of the far left being the only primary voters – lots of moderate Dems win primaries.
Yes, somehow the primary system needs to be revamped, and moderate and independent voices also heard. The deadlock and obstruction is so disheartening, though, I can understand why people opt out altogether. ?