They’re both scum. At least be straightforward with your brain, which is already angry in its perpetual exhaustion. You try contemplating what flaming mess is sure to follow the election while the body struggles to fall asleep, and you’d be as cranky as your most thoughtful organ, too. Both the casually cynical and deeply ignorant claim that every politician is equally repulsive. This time, it’s true.
We can’t classify the way both hopefuls emerged from toxic ooze as a coincidence, as that discounts the shameful role free will played in the nomination process. As a result of millions of repulsive poor decisions, the phonily sardonic get to be right this once. Annoying self-proclaimed intellectuals feel they are above the fray, and feeding their delusions is the least worst thing about the least worthwhile election we’ve ever held.
The hobby of pretending that every politician is a thieving tyrant who recoils from honesty like a vampire at dawn is a fine American tradition. That doesn’t mean it’s accurate. Many elections feature at least one person you’d let housesit while you’re riding Space Mountain. You’d let at least half of, say, 1992’s election participants feed your cat. Personally, I wouldn’t give a house key to the future first First Man. Regardless, the hope of having a decent option, singular, is presently unobtainable. Curse these two repellant numbskulls for providing an example to those who don’t bother to learn the difference. Brace for chaos following putzing attempts to implement irksome nationalist hassles, as it’s on the way.
The choice between two people who feel life is communal and want the army to enforce it would undoubtedly please the Founding Fathers. Why be oppressed by a king an ocean away when there are fake real estate moguls and genuine kleptocrats right here who will do the job? So, that’s how democracy works now. You get to choose the least bad option, even though they’re equally disgusting. Mentioning that humans are allowed to negotiate with each other is as old-fashioned as a genuine choice. One candidate has dedicated her life to evading the Constitution, while the other needs an advisor to remind him the document exists. At least there’s consensus that the boss makes the rules.
The purported Republican does have principles. They just happen to be whatever Trump feels they are in between moments of pondering how much losers wish they could outfit their lobbies with this much pink marble. Backing a clueless wannabe fascist was a unique choice among his new party. Members were sick of not getting everything they wanted. Now, they get none of it. I guess going with someone like Marco Rubio who semi-disagreed on an issue or two was too much of a tease. Sure, Donald dreams of control just like Hillary. But he’s on our side, fools.
At least you can go with the plague if you don’t want leprosy. Choose between a fiend for whom “Machiavellian” seems inadequate who’s dedicated her life to convincing you she’s not an appalling liar versus a brute in a suit who never bothered to train how to deceive convincingly. “Everyone lies” is a lazy claim that’s right this election cycle. It’s a shame how those who use others’ dishonesty to justify their own have two giant fresh examples.
The atmosphere is self-righteous, but at least there’s a lack of awareness. If you’ve ever wanted to live in a Facebook rant about how both parties are stuffed with kleptocrats out to make deals for ersatz pals at the expense of the public, you’re in luck. Everyone else is trying to escape the Net’s virtual prison.
The deals between good and bad guys make this a nightmare wrestling story arc where Hulk Hogan never restores decency. The Iron Sheik is going to retain the belt in this Bizarro federation, so prepare for him going atomic. One candidate purchased the other’s friendship, and yet zealots for both maintain there’s a disparity. The chummy relationship between two unpleasant options somehow gets worse, as it signifies each’s dedication to what they can trade to those who have no useful goods or services to offer in return. Connivers sucking up to buffoons is not what we had in mind when we mentioned free markets.
Elections ideally feature at least one contender who pretends to think your life is your property. Forget it happening in plural, dreamer. The next ruler will expect you to submit. The only hope is the putzing weakness each has displayed. Maybe dissent will be fun. I’m trying to make the best out of being stuck somewhere as lousy as Kamp Krusty.
Bury your valuables and values. Assigning the few remaining trinkets to the most loyal henchmen will be the primary task of whichever tycoon of amorality wins. Exploitation and manipulation will be standard procedure, not unpleasant gaffes. Either of the leaders are happy when you’re sad because it means they might be able to harness your disaffection. This is why we’re all feeling pleasant. Knowing wretched statism will follow the election’s result isn’t as comforting as you’d think. Only contempt for whichever atrocious option prevails can save us.