The Presidential Election
I'm very conflicted, but it will be okay.
As I write this, the Democrats’ National Convention is still going on, with a lot of, uh, shall we say, um, “overenthusiastic support” for Kamala Harris.
It’s probably more enthusiasm than she’s endured in her entire political career, where she was either a useful shill (“We can use her!,” as shown in her Senate career, or even her time as Vice President) or ignored altogether (“Oh, look, there’s a Harris on this ballot. I’m picking someone else. Anyone else,” as we saw in the 2020 election primaries.)
She keeps promising her audience that when she is President, she’s going to fix things! It’s time to experience joy!
Well, that’s all fine and good, and I’m all for joy, but let’s be real: this is cynicism. She’s exploiting her audiences the same way she’s always exploited her constituencies. She’s effectively the President right now. If she really wanted to, she could invoke the 25th amendment and become the President formally and legally, not just effectively, although that would require her to negotiate with the Republicans in the Senate - which would itself require skills of locution and persuasion she’s yet to demonstrate in real life.
I can see that effort in my mind: she shrieks at the Senate that it’s her time, it’s time to be unburdened by time and time be time, mon, and she really really really wants it and why wouldn’t they please, with a lot of uncomfortable laughter on her part … … itself followed by guffaws, because none of that’s convincing. And honestly, I’m not sure there’s a real reason to invoke the 25th amendment to remove Biden. And yes, there’s a reason I feel that way.
The key phrase in that earlier paragraph, buried in the middle because I’m writing this in a hurry:
She’s effectively the President right now.
All her promises about what she’s going to do on Day One of her Presidency, should it come to pass, have already been broken. She’s been the President - not inaugurated, nor elected as such, but she’s held the reins of power already. A few years ago, when Biden had his colonoscopy, Kamala Harris was President of the United States - our first female President.
And now that Biden’s more or less permanently off gnawing grass in the field like a sheep, Harris is again effectively the head of state, while not being formally vested in that role on a day-to-day basis. But that doesn’t change that if there’s a hand on the wheel, it’s hers.
So … that Day One she keeps mentioning? I don’t know exactly which day it was - maybe in November 2021, or maybe more recently since Biden’s handlers finally acknowledged that his lights are, well, flickering at best - but that day has passed. She’s only saying that she’s holding off doing something the people want her to do (if they actually want her to do it, because some of her promises are stupid) so people will vote for her.
So yes, it’s very cynical, manipulative. It’s almost like she’s being who she always was.
Harris Is Not The Problem. Well, Not The Only Problem.
But… this isn’t meant to be a complaint about Kamala Harris.
The thing is: Trump’s no better. Point for point, we can look at most of Trump’s attributes and see an analog in Harris, and vice versa. The only real difference is that Trump was inaugurated and was elected, and his Presidency turned out to have a lot of the attributes we want a Presidency to have, even if not for the reasons he might have wanted.
Trump’s Presidency was marked by war, I think we can all agree… although it’s an uncomfortable observation for our blue tribe friends, as the “marking by war” is notable by war’s absence. The problem is that, while a lack of war is quite positive, it’s largely because our national enemies couldn’t figure out how to predict how Trump would respond.
In game theory terms, Trump is an “insane player,” someone you don’t want to play chicken with, because Trump’s the guy who will drive over you and through you if he can… maybe. His “next move” is uncertain. If a terrorist attack had happened on his watch, Trump might shrug and say “we had it coming…” or he might convert the source of the terror into a shining nuclear landscape. If Al Qaeda had destroyed Chicago, there’s no telling if Trump would say “Hey, you took Chicago, I’ll take… Mecca.”
This created a lack of war - a good thing - but was due to Trump being a weathervane, who appeared driven by vanity and emotion.
That sort of “good things happening because nobody knew what the rules were with Trump” was pretty normative for his Presidency. It’s pretty normal for Trump, period, from the looks of it. I’ve never met the man, and hope not to, but I’ve known of him for a long time through his exploitation of television and movie appearances, and while he, like anyone else, can be a generous, kind person, he can also be capricious and vain, and his record of exploiting weakness for his own gain is well known, or so I think.
If it’s not well-known: doing business with Trump is apparently an exercise in figuring out a way to make his organization hold to its commitments. There are a lot of contractors who would do work for Trump, only to have him pay pennies on the dollar because… well… what were they going to do about it? Pennies on the dollar is better than nothing on the dollar, and fighting Trump on it would cost more than they’d win. This is not a reputation I’d be willing to allow.
Trump’s personal life is no better. It’s … something to point to Harris’ personal history with ex-boyfriends and whatnot, trying to shame her for her past relationships; it’s actually kind of gross. But Trump… Harris might have been the “other woman” in various senses (which is still worse than the actuality, according to what people who should know have said), but Trump isn’t an accidental participant. He’s a philanderer, plain and simple. And he’s stupid about it.
It Will Be Okay.
The thing is, I described this entry with “I’m very conflicted, but it will be okay.” And I meant that.
Here’s why: The President isn’t everything. The President isn’t even the entire governmental apparatus. The President is certainly not something that directly affects my day-to-day living. If anything, the President is a butterfly’s wings, occasionally stirring up a storm that can and does affect me - so it’s not that the President is irrelevant.
The President is definitely relevant, more relevant than, say, a random barista in Spokane, but… to what degree? Again, it’s not to no degree - the President can affect the economy and thus affect me far downstream, whereas the barista has much less likelihood of doing so.
But really, whether Trump, a deranged man-baby, is in office, or Harris, a deranged woman-baby, is in office, makes little difference to me in my day-to-day life, as long as I have some power to control my own circumstances.
I’ll never vote for anyone who advocates for my inability to control my own life - thus I’m never likely to vote for a Democrat as long as the current set’s around, and given that they’re younger than I am, that’s it for the Democrats - but that doesn’t mean I’m a Republican, either. (I’m not. And I will vote Republican only if I actually want the Republican in question to be in office. They don’t get my vote just because they’re not Democrats.)
Does that mean, though, that I’m supporting Trump, simply because I refuse to support Harris? I don’t have an answer to that question - I mean, I do, but you wouldn’t like it, if you’re asking it. Asking that question is trying to hold a guillotine over my head. And I just wrote that I’ll never vote for anyone who advocates for my inability to control my own life - and asking that question is, indeed, trying to control my life for me.
No, thank you. Less politely: screw you.
Could Trump be the harbinger of The End? Sure. So could Harris. And honestly, I’d rather have someone insane - who looks like they could be the harbinger of The End, so I can prepare and counter - in office, than someone who shrieks “Joy!” at me at painful decibels trying to convince me they mean it when they’ve never demonstrated that feeling before in their lives, where I can see.