Take solace in the fact that we’ll get a new candidate next election cycle. The trick will be convincing the democratic establishment that “not Trump” won’t work forever and they need to start putting forth candidates that actually get the voters excited.
Honestly I have my doubts (not in the US but very similar political setup here) the options seem to be that you can vote for shit (right) or mud (centre), or no one of course. The three outcomes for each vote always seems to be:
-no one: shit and mud both decide they need to get shittier to attract more voters.
-shit: mud decides it needs to be more like shit.
-mud: mud concludes that we’re all perfectly happy with mud and there’s no need to actually try and be anything pleasant.
I wouldn’t imagine it’ll even work for longer than an election cycle or two; Trump is pretty old and hasn’t taken as good care of himself as he could (though admittedly he is rich and therefore has access to good healthcare), so if one goes too long, he won’t be around to run and so anyone voting to avoid him specifically won’t have that motivation, and even if he lives a long a healthy enough life to keep running for some time to come, if he loses a couple more elections and continues to turn the people against him he may begin to fade from political relevance (he’s got his dedicated supporters, sure, but if he’s not gaining new ones those will become a shrinking fraction of the electorate). Finally, if Trump wins another election, then either he successfully dismantles or controls the election system, making the issue moot, or he does not, and is therefore ineligible to run again after that term.
There’s the potential that whatever republican replaces Trump gets people similarly upset at them to use the same strategy, but relying on Trump himself to drive people to vote against him won’t be viable for long whatever happens.
Take solace in the fact that we’ll get a new candidate next election cycle. The trick will be convincing the democratic establishment that “not Trump” won’t work forever and they need to start putting forth candidates that actually get the voters excited.
Honestly I have my doubts (not in the US but very similar political setup here) the options seem to be that you can vote for shit (right) or mud (centre), or no one of course. The three outcomes for each vote always seems to be:
-no one: shit and mud both decide they need to get shittier to attract more voters.
-shit: mud decides it needs to be more like shit.
-mud: mud concludes that we’re all perfectly happy with mud and there’s no need to actually try and be anything pleasant.
I wouldn’t imagine it’ll even work for longer than an election cycle or two; Trump is pretty old and hasn’t taken as good care of himself as he could (though admittedly he is rich and therefore has access to good healthcare), so if one goes too long, he won’t be around to run and so anyone voting to avoid him specifically won’t have that motivation, and even if he lives a long a healthy enough life to keep running for some time to come, if he loses a couple more elections and continues to turn the people against him he may begin to fade from political relevance (he’s got his dedicated supporters, sure, but if he’s not gaining new ones those will become a shrinking fraction of the electorate). Finally, if Trump wins another election, then either he successfully dismantles or controls the election system, making the issue moot, or he does not, and is therefore ineligible to run again after that term.
There’s the potential that whatever republican replaces Trump gets people similarly upset at them to use the same strategy, but relying on Trump himself to drive people to vote against him won’t be viable for long whatever happens.