None Of The Above

When the presidential election of 2016 takes place in November, my older son has informed me that he intends to write in the name of (extraordinarily) dark horse candidate Vermin (Love) Supreme. This isn't Supreme's first rodeo, having run for president on several occasions in the past. Admittedly he hasn't done well, but he is persistent. His platform includes

1. Mandatory tooth-brushing laws ("Gingivitis has been eroding the gum line of this great nation of ours for long enough and must be stopped.");

2. Time travel research ("I'm the only candidate who is willing to fully fund time travel, go back in time and kill baby Hitler with my bare hands before he's even born.");

3. Zombie preparedness ("I am the only candidate who has a plan to protect America from the imminent zombie invasion and I will be harnessing the awesome power of zombies to create electric energy utilizing the latest in giant hamster wheel technology."); and

4. Free ponies for all Americans ("A federal pony identification system and you must have your pony with you at all times.").

I recently saw a comment by a college classmate of my wife's (his name is Steve Berger, Brandeis 1959) – an opinion piece that commented on the upcoming suffrage (and sufferage). It reads

Several of you have commented on the (November presidential) election. My advice is get an absentee ballot and do a write-in for Harry Truman on the grounds that Harry dead is better than any of the bunch of them alive.

It was written a while back, when there were more candidates in the main parties, but, while on the surface they are ludicrous, both of the opinions expressed reflect the general anxiety of voters. There is no lesser of evils. Both of those likely to be candidates represent a threat to our country: one is acting like a populist – a “loose cannon” – whose primary goal is to stir up the fury of the masses, and the other is seen as someone with overweening ambition– a “liar” – whose only goal is to be elected, irrespective of what it takes. But how will that affect the rest of us?

We'll be faced with a choice between two politicians with vastly different styles: one, an inexperienced billionaire who speaks (and, I fear, will act) without thinking. In frontier tradition, he shoots first and asks questions afterward. He lacks a filter, which is very appealing to the frustrated who share his views but, until now, haven't had the nerve to utter them. He presents no practical plan for implementing his policies. Indeed, he presents relatively little in terms of what his policies are. His campaign is primarily aimed at acting macho. He is adored by some members of his own party who have all but made him the nominee. But the majority of that party, and most of the independents and members of the other party fear what he might do. And with no political experience, there is great concern that he will also act without thinking when dealing with leaders of other nations, as well as with our own.

The likely nominee of the other party, only a millionaire, tends to lead from behind – finding the issues that will sell best, and building a campaign around catering to the voters. She's an experienced politician, and has no compunctions about raising funds from those she will publicly attack, although it is not clear that her verbal assaults aren't simply window-dressing and that she might not serve their needs if elected. Past performance suggests a propensity for position changes and “spinning” that are the cause of great apprehension by voters. She, too, is seen negatively by the majority of voters. And her primary fight with a socialist (also a populist but at the other end of the spectrum from the one already described – and also a man without practical and implementable policies) has pushed her away from the center she hoped to conquer.

Our current President vowed to bring us together, yet we're probably as polarized as we've been in a long time, and he has some responsibility for that. Dangerous masses support both candidates, and any rescue by a third-party candidate with reasonable policies and with integrity seems unlikely. It appears that it will be necessary to tolerate a President we fear for one or two terms, and to hope that our nation will survive and return to its senses after that. Let's hope it does.

In the meantime, we can hope for execution of the Supreme dental health mandate and bite the bullet. But, in view of the current rhetoric, we can only hope it's not really a bullet.