We're entering an election season where I feel like the stakes have never been higher. And I say that not just because I'm afraid that my "team" will lose. This isn't a sporting event where the outcome results in months of bragging and celebration for the victors, and the losing team goes home in shame and finger-pointing. This is a choice between a single man who has fundamentally transformed a political party and has tugged the institutions of government to himself, and a party and platform that, yes, is represented by one man at its head, but as a spokesman rather than an autocrat. We have a literal autocrat vying for a second term with no agenda except to keep doing what he's already been doing versus a moderate consensus builder with a detailed platform to address crises that currently beset our country.
There are people within my own family that will reject my very premise. I wish I could understand why. I used to be a like-minded Republican. I believed that taxpayer money should be spent judiciously and sparingly. I believed in the Reaganism that "government is the problem," and that the interests of Americans were better served by the 50 experiments of democracy, which would determine their own best course in governing their own people rather than a centralized power would. I believed that a strong military would be used to deter violence and head off threats while they were small and manageable. I never really strongly identified with the "culture war" elements of the Republican ticket, such as guns rights, LGBT legislation, and abortion.
The first presidential election I actually was able to pay attention to and participate in (I was on my mission in 2004) was in 2008. There was McCain, a bit of a rogue element from my 2nd home state, a hawk and someone willing to defy the wishes of the party when he believed his course was better. Having lived in a country that was in Russia's orbit, I liked that he was willing to be tough on Putin and challenge him on things like the incursion into Georgia. Obama was charismatic and spoke loftily of transforming and expanding social programs, and he was weak in foreign policy. The choice seemed clear to me then. My side lost, but I was really more annoyed than anything. I knew that Obama respected the country he was elected to lead, and that he would be limited by the checks and balances within the system. I grumbled and complained as he pushed his health insurance reform through Congress without giving much opportunity for discussion with the Republicans. As I graduated from college and got my own insurance plan, I started to see how even "Obamacare" fell short of reining in medical costs. I suddenly found myself in the unlikely camp that his reforms didn't solve the problem.
In 2012, the Republican presidential nominee was a member of my own faith, for the first time ever. I was even related to him, somewhat distantly. I realized that Romney's health insurance plan in Massachusetts served as a model for "Obamacare," which I thought should give him credibility in criticizing and improving it. Instead, he was forced to swear fealty to the Republican platform which simply opposed what Obamacare was, despite not really having clear criticisms besides "it's too big" and "something something death panels" which was always a big nothing-burger. I knew that Romney was a faithful member of the church, and that his principles would be in the right place, but I saw how the Republican party forced him to twist in the wind and walk this line that he wasn't actually fully on. It was closer to him than the Democrat line, however. Obama was struggling to maintain credibility in an increasing crisis in the Syrian civil war, and his continued refusal to build consensus with Republicans grated me, so my choice again was clear. I lost, and again I was disappointed and annoyed at the leash the Republican party put on my candidate, whom I knew was better than the caricature he was forced to become. Still, I knew that Obama would more or less preserve the nation, just in a way I wouldn't be thrilled with.
2016 was the year in which I lost all faith in the Republican party. Despite a few promising hopefuls, a showman and braggart, Donald Trump, secured the nomination. The previous Republican flagbearer, Romney, repeatedly condemned him for his horrible xenophobic and racist tendencies and his broken track record of leadership. I watched on, horrified, as he had locked up the nomination before I even had a chance to vote in the Republican primary in California. He had his challengers kiss his ring, and suddenly it appeared that the party was really all about one man, not about a large community of aligned goals. Suddenly it was more important to build a wall on the Mexican border and cut taxes than it was to stand up to Russia. In fact, Russia should be embraced!? The bizarre 180° turn from Romney, who declared Russia as one of our great geopolitical foes (and got laughed at for the thought), boggled my mind. To add to this, Trump displayed the moral turpitude that Republicans had condemned President Bill Clinton for, with dozens of women accusing him of assault and even sexually violent comments recorded from the man himself. But the Faustian bargain had been struck--the party had become the man! I wasn't a huge fan of Hillary Clinton--she came off as an insincere, Machiavellian politician, but...she was a politician at least. She knew how the government worked. And to my horror, the electoral college delivered a win to the candidate who garnered 3 million fewer votes nationwide.
Over the succeeding years, I observed Trump stumble and totter along as he formed his government. It soon became a revolving door of disillusioned civil servants. It was going to be another administration marred by the lack of an attempt to build consensus, just like Obama. Except this time, the aims of the administration were inexplicably misguided. Almost cartoonishly villain-like, Trump sought to remove as many foreign-born people from the country as possible, using everything from weasel-worded legal technicalities to outright human rights abuses. He couldn't bring himself to condemn a white supremacy rally that resulted in the killing of counter-protester. He cut taxes on the rich and then blamed Americans for not appreciating how much money it gave them (all it did was screw up my withholding and caused me to pay more out of pocket on tax day). He continued the misguided Republican war on Obamacare, specifically on things that actually worked well, like covering pre-existing conditions or granting free access to contraceptives. Like Obama, Trump was incapable of standing up to Russia for their defacto invasion of Ukraine--not just because he was ineffective, like his predecessor, but because he actively curries favor for the strongman at the head of the oligarchy. His bumbling stance in this question is ultimately what got him impeached, withholding Congressionally approved military aid to Ukraine until they threw shade on his potential presidential rival. Of course, the Republican party could not permit everything they stand for--which is now just Trump--to be wiped away for anything--not even high crimes and misdemeanors. Only Romney stood in opposition to his own party as Trump was acquitted in what was effectively a mistrial, as no witnesses were even called. But at least Trump appointed culture war heroes to the judicial benches of the land, right? Stalwart individuals like Brett Kavanaugh, who was accused of rape during his job interview, but hey, it couldn't be proved, so that's OK--why try to appoint some other culture war hero who isn't under such a cloud? The moral ground of the Republican party has been so thoroughly eroded that only Trump cards hold up the house.
Then the gosh dang global health crisis of the century strikes. I hoped that Trump would at least manage to rally together a cohort capable of rising to the occasion. My expectations were so completely dashed that I'm not sure why I had even raised them in the first place. After futile gestures such as limited travel bans, the virus spread throughout the nation and all Trump could do is complain about how we didn't "create" the problem. In the ensuing months, Trump continued to undermine his medical and science staff, rattling his saber at the governors who were trying to limit the spread of the virus, hawking bogus cures and then complaining mightily that even testing for the disease was making him look bad. To date, over 180,000 have died, and many more have been sickened, many who have long-lasting complications, more than in any other nation. He complains that America was uniquely susceptible, which does have a shade of truth to it--Trump is our pre-existing condition. Now we've advanced to the point where he just doesn't acknowledge the ongoing catastrophe, probably because not enough of his supporters are suffering from it directly. And that's what Trump has done to our country--he has inserted himself like a wedge in the racial and social fissures of our society, making a sub-country of his own out of it, where he is universally praised and adored.
Even against the backdrop of the pandemic, the racial tensions stoked by Trump have caught fire and he golfs as our cities burn. Black people have long been disproportionate victims of law enforcement violence, and with wider adoption of handheld cameras, these incidents are now being projected to the world at large. A man is pursued and killed while jogging by a former police officer. A woman is killed by a spray of police gunfire while in her bed during a horribly fumbled no-knock raid. A man dies after having a policeman's knee placed on his neck during an arrest. A man is shot several times in the back after walking away from agitated policemen and entering his truck. Each incident sparks protest and even destruction of property. This destruction of property is all that Trump and Republicans latch on to (well that and painting the victims as criminals, which is great because we all should get behind extrajudicial killings of people who don't make the correct choice), completely ignoring the root cause. We're now at the point where Trump-aligned citizens are showing up at these angry protests and provoking the very violence they supposedly condemn. The president's campaign cynically comments that the unrest in the cities only strengthens his electoral position, because what better way to end protests against police brutality than with the promise of an even more brutal crackdown following his election?
There is absolutely zero affirmative case for Donald Trump as president. I know it's usually a more broadly appealing tack to make the affirmative case for your preferred candidate, but this is where I am. I will vote absolutely as a referendum against Donald Trump, who sunk below my low expectations due to his gross incompetence and promised to continue his efforts which are actively damaging the fabric of our society.
I will vote for Joe Biden because he is a consensus-builder. I will vote for Joe Biden because he has a moral compass. I will vote for Joe Biden because he will seek to solve the COVID-19 crisis, not ignore it. I will vote for Joe Biden because he will reach out to communities of color and address the problems with our law enforcement, offering healing rather than hate and contempt. I will vote for Joe Biden because he does not kiss the boot of Vladimir Putin. I will vote for Joe Biden because he believes in building up the standard of living of all Americans, not just his wealthy friends. I will vote for Joe Biden because he believes that America can be the city on the hill that invites people from all nations to come and see, not just people who are white and speak English. I will vote for Joe Biden because he supports good government and a technocracy, not a kakistocracy and a kleptocracy. I will vote for Joe Biden because of my religious beliefs, not despite them like I would have to for the opponent.
I wanted to say this here on my blog mostly because it has a smaller audience. Facebook is noisome and barely worth the energy to moderate. Plus, I don't expect people to agree with me, and I'd rather not have any arguments. It took enough energy to write this, and I don't want to expend any playing pigeon chess. If anyone is interested in seeing how I've arrived at my political views, I've laid out a general timeline here. I'd be happy to share more, but I'm content to let this be my piece.
