"Fire, fire, the bridge is on fire
Burning away your last connection
Fire, fire, our bridge is on fire
Your social skills resemble arson
You seem okay with this
So deleterious
Remorse for you is not an option
What’s the matter, Beavis?"
Burning away your last connection
Fire, fire, our bridge is on fire
Your social skills resemble arson
You seem okay with this
So deleterious
Remorse for you is not an option
What’s the matter, Beavis?"
On the night of November 8th, 2016, I went to bed at a normal hour, confident that the morning would bring the expected result in the US election, the one I'd whole-heartedly assured my son was a definite thing. At about 2 or 3am, I awoke to use the washroom. I knew I wouldn't be able to sleep if went back to bed curious, and so I went to take a peek at the current situation.
In the hours that followed, I chatted by Facebook Messenger with an American friend out in California who was up watching the results roll in. We tried to convince one another that things could turn around, and that the projections were wrong. She just needs... well, if she got... and... and... I can't recall if I cried or not. I know I wanted to. A part of me wanted to wake Liza-Ann and be in her arms, but I knew I'd be a sack of shit at work the next day (at an important first meeting at the start of a project, no less), and didn't want to wish the same fate on her. Sleep well, I thought, it might be the last good night's sleep in a while.
I eventually decided that I needed to at least try to sleep, so I turned in at about 4am (I think), and eventually drifted off wondering to myself, how do we explain this to our child?
It was with great fear in my heart that we woke him the next morning, and the three of us sat on his bed. We talked and talked. Dan was resilient. He listened patiently. He asked questions. He was
bothered, just as we were. But, like ourselves, he took a deep breath,
stayed calm, and got back to the matter of his morning routine. We put on our bravest faces and went about our days, and I
discovered quickly that my disheveled state was no more remarkable than that of my shocked coworkers.
It was at least a few days before I didn't feel a steady state of anxious.
In the weeks that have followed , we've
discussed it further among ourselves, and I've certainly discussed it with family, friends, and coworkers aplenty. So I can no longer remember exactly all the things I rationalized that morning, the various points I made to
diminish my own dread to within my capacity to cope, and to find what
inklings of hope I could to help Dan and Liza-Ann keep it together too.
But I remember some of the key points, so I'll repeat them here. And bear in mind: I'm not a political pundit. I'm not a journalist. I'm just some guy, on the outside looking in, and wondering how the hell did that happen? I probably didn't go into all the detail then that I will now, but it accounts for the ongoing conversations between as well.
So...
He does not have the support of all Americans. Not even close.
The divide in popular vote has increased since that night, but even then I argued: first, he only got half the votes, and second, only half the people voted. The US has a history of exporting democracy, but aren't as keen on practicing it. Voter turnout in the US tends to trail a great many developed democratic nations. And in their recent elections, it continues to slide downward. (Don't be too proud, Canadians, we're not much better.) So if only half the nation voted, and only half those voted for Trump... Now I know many would say that among those who didn't vote, it might be reasonable to assume they would split along the same lines. I spend my day-to-day dealing with "metrics" and "key performance indicators" at work, and I know (read: preach) how dangerous statistics and assumptions can get. But first, I'm trying to find some hope here, goddamnit, so sure, maybe I'm deluding myself, and second I don't believe that to be true in this particular case for this simple reason: since virtually all the polls leading up to the election were predicting a Clinton win, anyone making a deliberate choice to not vote was making a choice to allow that expected result. If someone was adamantly pro-Trump and thought he was going to lose without their vote, wouldn't they go vote to help him? I believe a lot of the "no shows" were a way of expressing "neither (but I expect Hillary will win)". "Why did Hillary lose?" isn't the question I'm asking or answering here. That's a whole other kettle of fish.
Next, from those who voted Trump, remove from that list those staunch Republican voters who are so party-minded that they'd check a box with Gumby on it as long as Gumby had "(R)" after his name. ("Pokey (R)" as his running mate, of course.) Even within our multi-party system in Canada, there are people we know who always vote for Party Whatever because, goshdarnit, that's how they were raised and who their pappy voted for and who they've always voted for and their kids will vote for. I believe the two-party system of the US is even more polarizing in this fashion: consider the very notion of "swing states" vs those that simply... always vote the same. That's party loyalty. There were, I'm sure, Republicans who plugged their noses and checked that box. And while it's no secret that I'm not a fan of the Republican party in general, I do not see them as the enemy. They can be, or at least should be, people who can be reasoned with. Honestly, I thought it would be better for them as a party if they'd swallowed their pride, thrown Trump under a bus with a "not our values" send-off, and willfully lost this election with the intention of running a better candidate next time, in the hopes of building confidence and integrity and a stronger base in four years. (I still wouldn't vote Republican were I American, but I'd have more respect for them.) But then, it's been eight years for them, they're probably too proud to swallow that pill, and I'm not a political analyst. (Also, I fantasize they still have a secret plan to impeach him and put someone else in.)
My point is (was and still is): I do not, in my heart, believe that 50% of Americans want to run around firing guns in the air, grabbing women by the pussy, and putting straws in their beer so they can still drink them through white hoods. I don't believe that. It's not even close to the truth. In fact, to portray all Trump supporters that way, to think it's that simple, is to misunderstand what motives them, to misunderstand what happened, and to misunderstand where the problems lie. You can't fix problems you don't understand. You need to look, to listen, to actually hear instead of just waiting for a turn to speak. Then you find a path forward.
The good news: those 'deplorables' are a small number.
The bad news: it only took a relatively small number of deplorables to put him over the line and into office. Because: electoral college. Because: the predetermination of states voting along party lines. Because: media portraying Hillary as a sure thing. Because: media portraying a false equivalence of capability and relevant experience. Because: the DNC hi-jinks that put Clinton ahead of Bernie put a sour taste in a lot of mouths (mine included). Because: Trump ran a campaign designed to drive down voter turnout knowing the undecideds weren't the ones going to make him win, but the already-decideds. Pussygate? Bring it on. It's dead-cat politics at its finest. Keep that media cycle churning. Piss people off so they don't vote, because the ones electing Trump have already decided and already stopped watching.
The good news: they're a relatively small number. This shock to the system serves as notice that we all need to be more politically active. We all need to stand up and be heard. We all need to understand that indifference can be equally as devastating as ignorance. We also need to sit down and listen. You need to take those people who voted him in in spite of being offended by his misogyny, xenophobia, or racist attitudes, and ask why? and then find a better middle-ground where they don't somehow still feel disenfranchised by a group espousing equality and justice for all. Win them over. Show them the merits of a better position. That's what progress is: a path forward together, not a tug of war over the same sloppy pit.
We're Canadian.
Apologies to my American friends, but yes, for the next few days I welcomed my wife and child with "Hello, fellow Canadians!" as a way of lessening the blow. I know we'll still feel the effects. I know we'll feel it less but it'll still be very real. And I have compassion for my American friends, I really do. But yes, I admit, it's a part of how I coped. I reminded myself, Liza-Ann, and Dan that we'd have to get on a plane and fly hundreds of kilometers per hour, for hours, to even reach the edge of the country that chose him.
Democracy is a flawed system, but it's what we have.
I'm fond of the old quote 'Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.' Barring dictablanda socialista clementia (secular socialist benevolent dictatorship) which has never and will never occur, democracy is basically what we're left with. The American electoral college is stupid. Two party system - screwy. Multi-party system in Canada... pretty much as screwy, just in different ways. Making multiple decisions with a single vote (who represents me locally, federally, as leader...)... is godawful unbearable. They've been talking electoral reform south of the border for ages. We've been talking electoral reform north of the border for ages. Problem is catch-22: only the party in power can make the changes, and if the current system put them in power, why the hell would they change it? (Solution: make it very clear that not changing it might cost them re-election, especially if it was a campaign promise. Mister. Trudeau. *COUGH*)
There is no big red History Eraser button.
Yes, the "leader of the free world" is someone who hasn't watched the what is the merit of proportional response? episode of West Wing and doesn't understand why the use of nuclear weapons is a Really Fucking Bad Idea™. He's a dangerous man with dangerous ideas. But he's not a dictator. And in spite of the fact that he's theoretically in charge, for shit to get done it has to be palatable enough to make it past a Republican government. Granted, there's plenty of things I don't consider palatable which Republicans do - and those are the battles people will be fighting the next four years (abortion, bathroom bills, gender pay gaps, way too much to list here) - but as for having let the clown out of the box, I do not believe there's a big red "Screw It" button in a room somewhere to which he's given the key and can walk inside and start Fallout 5: Live Edition!, just because he's not a fan of Alec Baldwin's work. It's not that simple.
Will he say stupid and rude things to other foreign leaders? Of course he will. And they'll regard him in much the same way we do: with the incredulous, awkward laughter of someone watching a toddler have a temper tantrum. I don't lay the smack-down on toddlers who misbehave, and I have to believe that calmer heads will prevail when it comes to foreign heads of state. Hollywood has a history of portraying the Russians and the Chinese as maniacal ne'er-do-wells for the purpose of spinning a tale, but that doesn't make it true. Sting sang "...if the Russians love their children too". Yes, I have to believe they do. I have to. I'm relying on it.
And I refuse to believe that one man, no matter how powerful, and even given four years, especially not that man, can undo what years of progress have brought. He is not weakening our resolve; he is hardening it. Go look at pictures of the turnouts for Women's March on Washington and all the sister marches.
So yeah, he won. Every dog has its day, even the straw ones.
He is just one man.
We are the unstoppable force of human evolution.
"Bullies are almost always outnumbered by the bullied.
We just need to organize."
[Ivan Coyote]
