Hispanic Fanatic

It’s that time of the electoral season, when journalists, political scientists, psychologists, and experts in every field (up to and including herbology) spend innumerable hours attempting to figure out what motivates voters.

This is a quest that is never focused on progressives. Apparently, we are easy to figure out. Liberals just want to smuggle a billion undocumented immigrants into America, burn down all the churches, perform forceful abortions on every woman, and make all the guys marry each other. It’s that simple.

But Trump voters? Truly they are a mystery of the modern world.

For example, CNN recently profiled Republican primary voters and included this nugget of pure wisdom: “Trump critics who think his supporters are blindly loyal would benefit from some time in the quarry with McIver, or on the boat with Konchek.”

Well, those are fine all-American names. And in the article, McIver and Konchek come across as admirable, hardworking, humble men.

You see, just like Trump fans will never stop supporting him, the mainstream media will never stop insisting that blue-collar dudes who embrace bigotry and fascism are great guys.

Also, the idea that liberals “would benefit from some time” with Trump supporters reinforces the idea that progressives are obligated to get out of our bubbles, get into that quarry or fishing boat, and work hard to empathize with Trump supporters. 

But we will never ask the same of MAGA. They can go right on screaming that all progressives are pedophiles. To ask Republicans to listen to progressives is ludicrous, even insulting, and we certainly can’t be criticizing conservatives.

The gist of the CNN article is that Republicans are not “blindly loyal” to Trump, and they question some of his actions. But as the article makes clear, they go ahead and vote for him anyway. Seriously, every one of the free-thinking conservatives profiled in the article admits that, come November, they will vote for Trump.

Maybe I’m missing something, but that seems pretty damn loyal to me.

For almost a decade now, media outlets have been straining to portray Trump voters’ motivations as more complex than they actually are.

Mountains of data going back years show that the most accurate indicators of Trump support are racial animosity, a yearning for traditional gender roles, and comfort with authoritarianism.

So if you are racist, misogynistic, homophobic, and love dictators, we have the perfect candidate for you.

Of course, not all Trump supporters possess these unsavory characteristics. There are also those who believe, against all logic and data, that the economy does better under Republican presidents. Others have a mortal fear of liberals. And still others, billionaires mostly, stand to benefit from another Trump administration. 

Christian nationalists also love the guy. But so do hard-core conservatives who want to live in a world where nothing changes, ever. These people are the greatest, in that they espouse a made-up legal philosophy, originalism, that insists Americans can carry heavy weaponry that didn’t exist in colonial times even though in just about every other aspect, we should live exactly like Benjamin Franklin did. It doesn’t matter that most Americans don’t want to live in the 1700s, because originalists demand that we do so.

By the way, no other industrialized nation seems to have this hero worship of their leaders from hundreds of years ago. No other developed country says, “Let’s base our laws on the best guess of how our prime minister who’s been dead for 200 years would rule.”

Another aside: Isn’t it odd that conservatives, who shriek that discussions of civil rights are irrelevant because they originated way back in the 1960s, have adopted a motto that clamors for taking America back to the 1950s? And they are straight-up obsessed with Confederate generals from a century before that. It’s all about picking and choosing from the past for these guys.

In any case, media coverage of Trump supporters is invariably fawning or apologetic. This is not a surprise, since the man himself gets more positive spin than most would-be insurrectionists could ever dream of receiving. 

This is because news outlets are constantly striving to “find something that is genuinely suboptimal about the Democratic candidate and dwell on it endlessly to ‘balance’ coverage of the criminal in charge of the GOP.”

The approach works well for Trump and Republican leaders, who want to convince voters that they are “simultaneously just little guys like us — helpless victims of a liberal police state — and strong, powerful father figures who will protect us from the bad guys.”

It’s quite the balancing act.

So I was standing in line to vote yesterday, and I was feeling cautiously optimistic. As it turned out, of course, I should have placed more emphasis on the “caution” than the optimism.

In any case, a woman exited the polling station and, perhaps brimming with civic pride after casting her ballot, spoke to all of who were waiting in line.

“Just remember,” she said. “Whether your candidate wins or loses, tomorrow we will still be the United States of America. And we all need to come together.”

And I thought her sentiment was nice — and also naïve and ridiculous.

After all, we have just elected a racist, misogynistic bully who will be the only president in history with no government or military experience, and who has total contempt for the US Constitution.

I mean, what could go wrong?

Well, for example, I wouldn’t be surprised if Trump’s first trip overseas ends with him snapping at Angela Merkel to go fix him a sandwich or he’ll nuke Germany.

Now, there are those who say that Trump’s obnoxious behavior will disappear once he is inaugurated. But saying Trump will calm down once he is in office is like saying your boyfriend will stop punching you once you get married.

Still, the country will survive this travesty. It is not the end of the world — well, hopefully not. And I’m sure many lessons about politics and progressivism and racism and delusion and class conflict and all the rest will illuminate us in the future.

And we have to imagine that this future will be brighter than today is.

So the United States has resumed its wild, impetuous stab at having a functioning government. After this latest farce, internet sites are alive with comments along the lines of the following:

“We need to kick out every member of Congress and start fresh.”

I know we live in a country where nearly half the citizens people can’t name the vice president, but I find it hard to believe anybody is so ignorant of the political process that he or she thinks voting out all 535 members of Congress is a realistic option.

We’ll start with the fact that elections are staggered (hence the term “midterm election”). As such, I doubt anybody’s rage is going to last another five years or so, which is how long it would take to excise all the offending congressmen and women. And we’ll add on the stat that while most people hate Congress, they tend to like their own reps, so we will likely see most of these supposedly toxic incumbents return.

This idea is even less practical and more insane than the delusional belief, which I’ve written about before, that we can easily deport 11 million undocumented immigrants.

In the interest of saving time, here are some other political ideas I’ve heard recently that appear just as likely to happen.

“We need to separate into two different countries. Red states and blue states.” (I’m pretty sure we fought a war about this, and the outcome was rather conclusive. We appear to be stuck with one another for the foreseeable future.)

“We need a task force of really smart leaders who will come up with bipartisan solutions to our problems.” (That’s what Congress is supposed to be.)

“We need to mandate IQ tests to make sure people are smart enough to vote.” (Anyone who thinks an IQ test accurately measures political acumen probably doesn’t have a very high IQ.)

“We need to confiscate every gun in America that’s not in the hands of the police or military.” (It amazes me how liberals think that Second Amendment advocates—many of whom are paranoid and all of whom are armed—will somehow go along with this idea.)

“We need to use Jurassic Park-type technology to reanimate the Founding Fathers so they can tell us their original intent regarding the Constitution.” (OK, I made this one up, but wouldn’t that be cool?)