I don't generally comment in public on politics, because it's a futile exercise. I realize that hasn't changed today and have no illusions of changing anyone's mind about anything, but I'm making an exception because I'll feel better saying some things instead of remaining silent, and so a few years from now, we can all compare the actual reality we live in against my present assessment. I will cheerfully admit my mistakes if I prove to be wrong about anything, but at the moment, I don't feel like anything I'm about to say should be especially controversial.
So where am I this morning? During my life as a voting-age person, the pendulum has swung back and forth between hopeful, inspiring victories, and crossing a series of increasingly awful red lines that should not be crossed. I think nearly every person in the country feels this way, but perhaps disagrees about which elections fall into each category. As we head toward another potential disaster, and the outcome seems to rest on little more than a coin-flip, I'd just like to make some observations.
First of all, I want to state my core values: there are many different virtues a person could aim for, but my top two are truth and kindness. These are sometimes at odds with one another, but I think we need the right combination of the two to succeed (and, for that matter, to avoid destroying ourselves). Without going into any more detail, you can probably already see why American politics have been very upsetting for me to live through for, well, my entire adult life... but I'll go into more detail anyway.
Let's start with truth, because truth is complicated. I've already rambled about this in another essay, but the important thing is that I'm talking here about the scientific version of truth, where we try to understand and reach consensus about a complex topic while needing to remain open to revisions and corrections based on new data. This isn't very satisfying for the human brain, which prefers to settle on One Absolute Truth and then never waver from it, but that's a harmful negative impulse that needs to be actively resisted. Toxicity in our politics is fueled in part by the fact that no politician is comfortable with publicly acknowledging complexity, and everyone is trying to sell One Absolute Truth that will get them elected. Still, you can adjust for this when listening to political talk -- there's a difference between "simplifying for your audience" and "making up crazy stuff." I have zero tolerance for making up crazy stuff.
Next, kindness: I believe that people generally respond to kindness with kindness, and hostility with hostility. This doesn't always hold true -- some people are just jerks, and others are simply having a bad day today -- but even with mixed results, leading with hostility is a self-destructive strategy. I also wish that people could get out of competitive mindsets more frequently and instead find out ways to collaborate productively. Even where adversarial relationships are unavoidable, I think the world is better off if people prioritize spending their energy on helping their friends rather than destroying their enemies. Conflicts will still occur, but we don't need to actively seek them out without measuring the stakes first. Idealistic nonsense, perhaps, but this explains why I also have zero tolerance for candidates who build their platforms on the demonization of marginalized people and who favor the tactics of the playground bully.
Yet here we are, with nearly half the country backing a candidate whose entire political career has been built upon a foundation of verifiable lies (remember birtherism?) and who abandons anything resembling coherent policy in favor of spewing venom towards convenient scapegoats. I recognize the economic difficulties and cultural conflicts that have driven people to become receptive to this strategy, but it's doubly tragic because the majority of people buying into it will find themselves even worse off if they get what they're asking for.
I should also note that, while my personal political views tend a lot more toward the liberal than the conservative, I don't believe there is a single political ideology capable of solving all problems. In an ideal world, liberalism and conservatism should be viewed as approaches or perspectives rather than diametrically-opposed philosophies. We need liberalism (or progressivism, if you prefer) to point us in new directions and ensure that all members of society are treated fairly; we need conservatism to keep ourselves grounded in reality and to avoid throwing away valuable heritage in the face of shiny novelty. To find the best solutions, we should consider multiple perspectives, evaluate the verifiable facts on the ground, and select pragmatic policy that does more help than harm. Party-specific purity tests only hold us back from reaching workable solutions.
Please don't misread my "both sides are capable of having valid ideas" argument as any kind of justification or tolerance for the behavior of today's predominant brand of American "conservatives," though. In my view, the Trumpists can hardly be called conservative; the only consistent value I see demonstrated by Trump himself is an uncompromising demand for loyalty and praise, and his psychological needs are being exploited by others to consolidate power and control. Everyone, regardless of personal beliefs, should view that situation with considerable suspicion.
In any case, getting back to the situation on the ground, the yard signs and bumper stickers are beyond belief.
"Trump 2024: No More Bullshit." What can that even mean? I thought people liked Trump because of his incredible capacity for generating bullshit. I thought that's what "the weave" was all about. I absolutely cannot imagine a Trump presidency reducing the amount of bullshit directed at the American people.
"Trump: Safety. Kamala: Crime." Really? Let's leave aside the obvious irony of Trump's various pending legal cases and just settle on what this is actually talking about. The only issue I can possibly imagine the sign's author thinking about here is illegal immigration. Never mind that Trump personally torpedoed the bipartisan legislation designed to begin addressing immigration issues out of fear that it would take away his favorite lever before the election. Not to mention that, while fully acknowledging that an uncontrolled influx of people into the country causes real problems, it's important to point out that undocumented immigrants are statistically less likely then the general population to commit crimes, as they are trying to keep a low profile.
I'm pretty sure that the Trump sign does not address any of the crimes that I'm personally concerned about. Mass shootings continue unabated while Republicans refuse to consider even the most minimal restrictions on weapons; huge corporations seek to control our lives through monopolistic practices while Republications seek to dismantle regulation; identity theft and digital vandalism get easier and easier while I suspect government is generally giving these issues inadequate attention.
"Trump: Low Prices/Taxes. Kamala: High Prices/Taxes." It's a truism that Republicans are stronger for the economy than Democrats. But are they really? I can understand why the stock market responds well to Republicans. The stock market is not so much a measure of economic success as a giant game of chicken. Republicans tend to lower taxes on the very wealthy; the very wealthy tend to have money free to invest. Therefore, the promise of a Republican administration creates stock market enthusiasm. But how useful is that in the grand scheme of things? There's more to the economy than stocks. Let's consider recent history: the 2008 crash came on the watch of a Republican, at a time when a little more regulation and oversight might have prevented ludicrous irresponsibility in the banking sector. We saw significant recovery under Obama, and Trump rode that forward until a global pandemic caused the next round of chaos. While there's certainly room to debate whether COVID-19 could have been handled better under both Trump and Biden, I think it's pretty simplistic to pin all blame for inflation on Biden.
Regardless of the past, there's Trump's repeated praise of tariffs, which will surely cause prices to go up rather than down. Imagine a world where we abolish the income tax and put tariffs on all cheap imported goods: the idea of income taxes is that they're a percentage of income, so people who make more, pay more. So if we take them away, the rich pay proportionately fewer taxes, while tariffs cause the basic goods that the less-rich depend on to become more expensive, having similar impact to a new sales tax (but conveniently not called a tax, allowing empty promises to be made). This doesn't sound like a way to make the majority of people happier. And I'm not saying I can't envision scenarios where strategic use of tariffs might be beneficial (whether to boost domestic industry in the face of exploitive foreign competition, or to reduce the influx of useless plastic garbage that ultimately creates more problems than it solves); I'm just saying that I don't see Trump picking a thoughtful strategy.
It's also shocking to me that there is such nostalgia for the Trump presidency. I understand that groceries were cheaper, and I know that for many, high prices are more than just an inconvenience -- but as noted above, I don't think Trump can really claim any credit for that. My memories of the period are still pretty vivid. Being constantly horrified by cruel and arbitrary policies (treatment of children at the border, and the infamous "Muslim ban" come quickly to mind, but are certainly not the only examples). Being irritated by the rampant cronyism, prioritizing loyalty over competence and filling the government with the woefully unqualified. Being frankly embarrassed to be an American when interacting with foreign colleagues. And most importantly, seeing the active harm done to friends and colleagues as they faced increased volumes of harassment from newly-empowered bigots and/or discovered that people they thought they cared about were newly-empowered bigots. As a straight white male, I was personally unscathed by direct attack, but it didn't need to hit me directly to upset me. The toxic atmosphere sapped a lot of joy out of what would otherwise have been a thoroughly positive time in my life.
If Trump returns, I don't think there's much doubt that everything that happened the first time will be amplified. I'm confident that Trump has plans to benefit himself, and equally confident that he no has real plans for the good of the nation. The people in orbit around him have some ideas, though -- and that's Project 2025, which is a horror show all its own. I think I'm justified in feeling real concern that people that I care about will be irreparably harmed by the policies that would come out of this administration, particularly (but not exclusively) members of the LGBTQ+ community. And for what? Trump might feel better about himself and stay out of jail, but I promise you that the advertised safety and low prices will not be forthcoming, any more than his Mexican-funded wall was last time around.
I realize I have spent this whole piece complaining about what I'm against and not talking about what I'm for. That's not because I'm unimpressed with the Harris/Walz ticket, as I see considerable potential there; it's just that to me, this election feels like being asked to choose whether to eat a pizza or be set on fire. It's harder to think of the advantages of pizza when faced with the disadvantages of combustion. I believe that the Harris ticket legitimately wants to help everyone in the country and will make a best effort to improve things even while faced with an unavoidably uphill battle; I don't see how anyone could argue the same for the Trump ticket, which seems set only to glorify Trump and harm his perceived enemies. So can we please have a conversation over a pizza before we vote to burn everything down?