Skip to main content

"All the President's Men" + "Red Sparrow" + "The Americans" + "The Manchurian Candidate" + "Idiocracy" = Donald Trump and the United States of 2018

It's really quite the sad sight, to take a step back with a clear mind and see what we've become as a nation. Sure, I could sit here and say I'm surprised at our current state and how we arrived here, but I'd be lying. I've seen this coming for a long time and here we are. Of all the times I wished I was wrong but wasn't, this one tops the list.

In many other industrialized countries, the people took control early, didn't let up, and the government ended up fearing them. Every election year, the attack-ad season was short, and with a handful or more of legitimate parties from which to choose, only a small percentage of people felt left out, like there wasn't a candidate whom represented them and their beliefs. This led to higher voter turnout. False ads were either rare or completely barred. With so many parties involved, this forced them to compromise in order to get things done and move forward. Otherwise, they'd pay the price on election day. Politicians weren't owned by special interest groups and lobbyists; they were owned by the people. 

Things have taken a starkly different turn here in the United States. Our campaign seasons tend to take up the majority of a politician's tenure. Attack ads are more prevalent than dead fish flies in Michigan around this time of year, featuring exaggeration greater than stories your crazy drunken uncle shares on Thanksgiving. Only two parties have a better-than-average chance of coming out victorious on election day. All this corporate money and dishonesty, not to mention a lack of term limits for anyone whom isn't the president or a governor, has led the people to possess a black-and-white mentality and fear the government. Due to this, the voter turnout is down when compared to other industrialized nations; social activism is more scarce; and regardless of what politicians say, they aren't owned by the people; they're owned by big money.

While I'm not a fan of Ronald Reagan's politics, he was quite beloved during his time as president. There's even a minority on the left referred to as Reagan Democrats if that tells you anything. His two terms ended in January of 1989; George H.W. Bush took over for one term; and as voter participation appeared to be reaching new lows, Bill Clinton took reign in January of 1993. Fox News debuted in '96. Talk radio heads like Rush Limbaugh started hitting it big. Misinformation began spreading like wildfire on the Internet. These trends increased in the early 2000s, and especially once Barack Obama entered office in January of 2009. The Supreme Court ruled corporations couldn't be limited on funds they dole out for political campaigns. The most partisan among us voted in midterm elections. Congress has become more divided as a result. Then everything came to a head with the election of Donald Trump in November of 2016. 

The businessman and millionaire seemingly came out of the political woodwork to run for and eventually become the President of the United States. The man's campaign basically revolved around two things: 1) Constant lying and 2) Telling people it was okay to be an -ist (racist, sexist, xenophobe, homophobe, etc.). Sugar-coat it as much as you'd like, when Donald Trump bashed political correctness, he was essentially saying it's okay to be an -ist. It was okay to call Mexicans rapists; okay to talk about banning Muslims; okay to refer to the Black Lives Matter movement as immoral and racist; etc. Fact-checkers were called liberally-biased, as was the media. Lies uttered by anyone in Trump's inner-circle were termed "alternative facts." Up was down; black was white; right was left; McDonald's was doctor-recommended; etc. The Trump campaign took the troubling trends from the past two to three decades and used them to their advantage to persuade the uninformed/gullible. Facts were no longer relevant when establishing an argument. The truth was whatever we made of it.

Now, with each passing day, it appears more likely that the Trump campaign worked with Russia to essentially rig the 2016 U.S. election. I didn't want to believe it at first. Like with any such story, I was skeptical. For as much as I disliked Donald Trump and wanted to believe he lost the election, it was difficult for me to fathom that he worked with Russia to defeat Hillary Clinton in order to become president. The more indictments which get announced, the more guilty pleas that are put forth, and the more information which is leaked to the public regarding the probe, the more it appears as if our democracy was tampered with; the election wasn't legitimate; and we've become what we claim to hate. For generations, we've attempted to spread democracy throughout the world and look where we are now. Sadly, roughly a third of the population doesn't seem to care.

Often times I hear people, especially on the right, complain that things are "too political," that certain issues should be off-topic until we've had time to heal, but why does protecting our democracy have to be seen in such partisan manners? Why is it partisan to want every vote to count? Why is it partisan to not want foreign interference in our elections? Why is it partisan to want to believe our elections are legitimate, like we actually have a voice, and that our votes count for something? How can we sport "Support Our Troops" bumper stickers, claim it's disrespectful to our men and women in uniform to not stand for the National Anthem, but then shrug our shoulders at the thought of our democratic process being shattered? It doesn't matter what side of the aisle you fall on, if we truly believe in American ideals, we should care about the Robert Mueller-Russia probe, want all guilty parties to be severely punished, and do everything in our power to prevent this from happening again. If we truly support our troops and want to uphold what they fought and died for, that's the least we can do. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"