Two years ago I watched as a two figure irrational minority group of a city’s population used emotion to manipulate their local government officials into ceasing efforts to close the municipal golf course. They didn’t use facts, because they couldn’t. The facts showed the golf course had not been profitable for years, but the facts did show that the location of the land alone was profitable. Totally devoid of facts, they used anger, fear, and distraction instead. First, they became angry at the city council, and considered it a personal affront that they were trying to close the golf course. Next, they began going down an irrational apocalyptic path of worst case scenarios as to what the motivations behind the council’s actions could be, frenzying the attendees of the forum into panicking that only sinister intentions could be coming from these politicians since that’s all politicians are capable of. Having successfully moved the discussion away from the closure of the golf course, they began to continue to distract any who would listen by encouraging them to reminisce on memories had not just at the course, but throughout the city, back during simpler times before corporate driven politicians began trying to snatch up any amount of land with sentimental value in order to sell it back to their cronies for an illegal profit at the hands of the taxpayer. In fact, the only time the golf course was mentioned was when someone would stand up and proclaim that the course couldn’t be closed because when they were growing up one could play there for less than a dollar, and our children need a place like that; never mind the fact that one can’t even buy gum for less than a dollar now, because that doesn’t fit with the narrative trying to be portrayed here. Not one opinion or assertion was backed up with any sort of evidence, one’s validity was assured through volume and aggression. Those who said their piece the loudest or repeated themselves were perceived as the the most truthful, the most logical, yet they never actually said anything, they just repeated evocative generalizations that could either be refuted or confirmed depending on what little research one chose to do.
After watching all of this first hand, why then was I surprised when the exact same thing happened to the Republican Party? Why did I become so upset when a minority of irrational people driven by emotion hijacked an entire political party and nominated a candidate with zero political experience, zero diplomatic experience, zero executive experience, zero military experience, and, relatively interpretable economic and negotiatory experience. I watched these exact same measures, these exact same tactics play out on a national stage, yet I reacted as if I’d never seen it before.
Maybe what was so surprising and upsetting to me is how people could make such a terrible choice. With the litany of candidates available, how could they choose the one individual who from the very beginning stood the weakest chance of defeating Hillary Clinton? Moreover, how could the .046% of the nation’s population, or, as they like to call themselves, the “Silent Majority” that voted for Trump be so blind? How could they be so hypocritical, so shortsighted, so irrational, so doomed for failure? Since Barack Obama’s election in 2008 it has been plainly obvious that Hillary Clinton would run again for President. For eight, yes, EIGHT years we have known who at least one of the candidates for President would be. Those solidified in their support of the Republican party have known for eight whole years that one of their potential political opponents was Hillary Clinton, yet rather than base their thinking on who could be chosen that will defeat her, as Trump supporters are now so urgently calling us to consider this November, they instead allowed their minds to narrow and shorten, their principles to fly out the window, their emotions and panic to cloud and override any sort of rationality, and so in desperation, triumphant, misinformed, foolish desperation they tossed up a candidate who in all likelihood will lose to a woman whose political career is almost as corrupt as Joseph Stalin’s.
Let us attempt to follow the rationale of a Trump supporter. They claim bias in the media, corruption within the election system, yet rather than select a candidate who the media might have a tougher time going after, who the media might have to hide their bias and be a little more objective towards, they nominate a reality TV show host known for his crass comments and inability to handle the news media. They claim that the worst thing for the country would be if Hillary Clinton were elected, but when poll after poll showed Donald Trump as the only candidate who would lose to Hillary Clinton ten times out of ten, they still wanted to nominate him, why? Why in the primary was it not priority number one to find a candidate that could beat Hillary Clinton? Why now that the primaries are over is it now all of a sudden a two candidate system, whereby there is one or the other and the other is certain doom? They claim that, “The Establishment” has to go, yet they want nothing to do with defeating this so called establishment. They still elect incumbent after incumbent local congressional representative, totally unaware that they have all the resources necessary to remove this imaginary establishment already at their disposal, and that they don’t need their orange skinned savior to do it for them. They acknowledge Trump’s flaws, citing that no candidate is perfect, but he is certainly better than the alternative. So why then did they demand perfection from all of the other candidates in the primaries? Why were Rubio and Cruz held to perfection but Trump was allowed mistake after mistake? Cruz’s spotless political record of defending the constitution regardless of party affiliation was totally ignored because Trump supporters became blinded by idiotic tinfoil hat conspiracy theories about his family and his religious affiliation, but Trump’s proven political cronyism and social misogyny gets wiped clean? Rubio couldn’t have the job because during the earliest part of his tenure in office he became part of a failed immigration policy reform attempt, a mistake he has acknowledged and atoned for, but when Trump continually gaffes issue after issue that’s suddenly okay because he’s just a political rookie? The irony is unbelievable. The hypocrisy is maddening.
Trump supporters could have nominated a black neurosurgeon pacifist Christian so as to combat the bias they believe exists in the media, but no. Trump supporters could have nominated one of the most constitutionally intelligent minds in the country to reform what they believe to be a broken system, but no. Trump supporters could have nominated a Hispanic man born from two immigrants who is pro border security increase, but no. Trump supporters could have even nominated a woman who rose to the highest position in her corporate field based solely on her own merit, without any sort of political appointments or favoritism, but no. Instead they nominated a known philanderer whose success rode first on the coattails of his father and later on the political cronyism of those with whom he could curry favor. Why? Because they are lazy. They don’t want to fix the system, they want someone else to do it for them. They think all it takes to fix the system is filling out a ballot. They’re egotistical. They think 14 million out of over 300 million is somehow a majority. They think that the country has for so many years been operating on their silent acquiesces to personal after personal offense, and that now Trump has inspired the sleeping giant of homogenous Americans to wrest the direction of the nation out of the hands of social activists and back to those who prefer their country be guided by a much more authoritative director, so long as they perceive him to be representative of “We the people,” (but only a specific group of people). They’re hypocritical, they blasted voters in 2008 and 2012 who voted for Obama solely because he was a Democrat, but they label any Republicans with hesitations for Trump as traitors and immediately assume they must surely be supporting Hillary then. In fact, their hypocrisy is so unbounded that they can’t even see the disgusting amount of audacity necessary to put forth a candidate under the grounds of, “it’s time to let someone besides a politician give it a try,” yet they suddenly become supremely loyal to the political system that they are so certain is broken when they see our government as only being comprised of Democrats and Republicans. They’re out of touch. They’ve shrouded themselves with like minded thinkers so as to reinforce the notion that there exists a quiet force of the population large enough to reclaim ideological authority without them ever having to do any sort of work on their own. They’re gullible. For eight years they’ve listened to biased pundits on both sides of the spectrum use them as pawns for profits and they’ve taken every piece of sensationalist pandering as gospel so that when a pundit becomes frantic and insists the country is “on the brink,” they believe it, they believe the frailty of the nation and they blame those with political differences, they interpret their actions as malicious, that there exists a group of people whose sole intent is to ruin the country. They’ve lowered their standards. They no longer do any sort of independent research or fact checking, so that anyone with a platform is the next Moses holding tablets from Sinai, rather than some sort of fanatical conspiracist conjuring theories outside of existing reality. Last, they’re stubborn, so that
if when Hillary wins in November, they’ll circle their wagons and point to any speck of evidence that it was anything but Donald Trump’s fault, whether it be election fraud, or those seeking to sabotage him. This sort of mentality only furthers the depth of their hypocrisy because they condemn anyone who rejects personal responsibility, unless of course the person rejecting that is their political deity. They’re insecure, because they believe the failures of the country can be traced back to some suspicious brown people who are flooding our open borders by the bushel, hellbent on taking over and enslaving all Americans.
Should Hillary Clinton win in November the blame rests squarely on the shoulders of that minority of vehement Trump supporters whose unspeakably loud and unbelievably unfounded opinions forced through a fake tanned con artist with the political experience of V.I. Lenin. They couldn’t take Ted Cruz because he might be an unnaturally born Canadian with an assassin father whose Goldman Sachs wife belongs to a religious cult bent on taking over the world. Despite Cruz’s repeatedly proven track record of fulfilling his constituents’ desires as well as the duties the Constitution lays out for those within political office. They couldn’t stand Marco Rubio because he was a foreigner who only wanted to overthrow the government so all of his foreign relatives could come floating onto our shores to steal the hard earned money out of their wallets. They couldn’t take Ben Carson because they thought he wasn’t smart/aggressive enough for politics, despite hating politicians, they still wanted someone not quite as removed from the political stereotype as Ben Carson. They couldn’t stand Jeb Bush because they had had enough of political dynasties, yet they’re willing to put forth a candidate who can’t beat the dynastic Clinton political crime family. So come November if we’re watching Hillary walk into the White House, remember where your principles were, and ask yourself if it was worth selling the nation down the line just because you wanted a Fox News contributor as the Republican nominee.