when we elected Ronald Reagan? George W. Bush? Bill fucking Clinton?
We lost the respect of much of the world a long time ago. The election of Trump would simply confirm the world's impression of the U.S.. I have never been a patriot, and have grown increasingly humiliated by the "uniqueness" of the United States over the years, until, at 56, I don't feel at all a part of this country, despite the fact that I was born here, have lived here all my life, will die here, and have rarely ever stepped across the border into Mexico, let alone anywhere else in the world.
Nixon...it's funny, I grew up with Watergate. My 8th grade Social Studies teacher threw out the rest of the curriculum and we spent the entire year on Watergate, which was unfolding before us. I cut my political teeth on Nixon, among others. I remember him so clearly, and I remember how happy we were when the "crook" resigned. Yet, in all his corrupt glory, he was not as bad as some Democrats during my later years, and I count both Clintons among that number.
I can't really speak to whether or not Trump is a radical departure from major party politics. While I'm a Democrat, partisan politics has not been a focus nor a priority for me. I'm about issues, and the more corrupt the major parties have shown themselves to be, the less supportive overall I've been.
I agree that Trump's nomination is a radical departure. It's a sign; people are sick of the major party corruption to be found on both sides of the aisle. Republicans embraced it. Democrats rejected that radical departure. The assumption that everyone is going to get behind their savior, the Democratic Party, is dangerous. Taking angry, disenfranchised people for granted, dismissing them, is dangerous. The best way to benefit from the current climate, imo, would have been to offer voters a good alternative to Trump rather than another establishment neo-liberal Democrat. But the party has spoken, and now has to live with its choices.
For those of us on the left who've been disenfranchised since the neo-liberal takeover in the 90s, the standard campaign strategies to get us in line are counter-productive. Using fear of the "other," no matter who that "other" is, backfires. We've been desensitized to fear tactics, and we've seen those tactics used on every Republican opponent, every presidential election, over and over and over and over, until the person doesn't really matter. It's ALWAYS "So, you want ______________to be president????Don't you know he is a monster???" Just fill in the blank. Trump is hateful, to be sure. So were the rest of the long list of Rs he beat. So are neo-liberals. There will be nothing on the ballot this November but a symbolic 3rd party vote or a lesser evil vote. Using fear to galvanize the lesser evil vote simply no longer works for many voters. Some, sure. That's why it's still trotted out. For the weak, fearful voter.
I haven't decided which non-choice I'll be making in November. As I said months ago, I won't make that choice until sometime after the convention. I know I won't be supporting any of them with time, energy, words, or $$. I won't be campaigning. Whatever resources I've got will go down ticket, towards races that can still be won for those who will actually work for us.
You and I can agree on many things; we're sure to be closer on issues than we'd be with any Republican. That's why I spent so many years on lesser evil votes. We have a different perspective on politics, the political process, and where we are going. That's okay, too. I can respect someone else's perspective without agreeing with it. I just wish others would return that gesture.
= new reply since forum marked as read
