It’s no secret that Republicans are anti-intellectual, but it makes you wonder what their end goal is? Why do they keep electing dumber and dumber presidents? Is it just to own the libs? Do they just not care? They’ll get what they want regardless of how smart their presidents are, so why always pick the low hanging fruit?
The only smart Republican of the last 60 years was Bush Sr, and he was a one-term wonder who rode Reagan’s coattails into office.
Nixon was notoriously incompetent as VP, almost beat Kennedy in 1960, threw what should have been a career ending shit fit in 1962 after losing the California governor’s race, but not only came back in 68 and win because Goldwater was so unpopular in 64, but won 72 in the greatest landslide in history up to that point. Corrupt to the bone, he resigned before he could be impeached for hiring burglars to steal dirt on a political opponent, covering it up, and lying about it.
Ford was appointed VP to replace scandal stricken Spiro Agnew, specifically chosen because he was known as an honest politician. His reputation evaporated the second he became president because his first act was to pardon the guiltiest man in the country; he lost handily in 76.
Reagan was an actor who wanted to play politician so he could hurt the people he didn’t like; blacks people, poor people, gay people, women. It was a power trip for him, and because he was good at reading cue cards and delivering jokes written by other people, everyone let him get away with murder. He committed treason by selling weapons to Iran; this isn’t hyperbole, the actual definition of treason includes giving aid to out enemies, and after the oil and hostage crises of the 70s, Iran was an enemy first and foremost. Oliver North took the blame and had his secretary shred the evidence, the President Bush pardoned everyone involved. Reagan won in an even bigger landslide than 72 in 84, and Bush won in a major upset against Dukakis in 88.
Bush lost in 92 in no small part because of Ross Perot splitting the ticket; no third party candidate has ever done better nationwide than Perot in 92, with 19% of the vote (though he didn’t win a single state, which some minor candidates have done). Clinton won with 43% of the popular vote. Forty-three percent! 57% of people voted against him, and he won. 92 was a farce, as was 96 with less than 50% voter turnout, the lowest in modern history. Perot ran again and got 8.4% of the vote, Republican Bob Dole only got 40.7%, and Clinton got 49.2%. This means that less than a quarter of eligible voters voted for Bill Clinton, and he still won. FARCE!
Al Gore rightfully won in 2000, but the conservative majority Supreme Court stole it from him. Florida was too close to call; whichever candidate won it would become president. George W. Bush’s brother Jeb was governor, and he ordered the federally mandated recount be stopped, breaking the law. The Supreme Court decided not to restart the recount for no discernible reason besides they wanted Bush to win. He was notoriously dumb, stereotypically dumb, so dumb a lot of people thought it was an act and voted for him because they thought he was a secret genius who was just pretending to be a cowboy running for president off his daddy’s legacy. He was the stupidest president we had ever had up to that point, and hired a lot of smart people to do horrible things so he could claim plausible deniability. That Obama didn’t send Dick Cheney to the Hague was a deafening silence. Bush only won re-election in 2004 because he started a war in Iraq in 2003 and the country didn’t want to change horses midstream; same exact tactic his daddy used, only this war lasted longer than the Gulf and “worked” as planned.
2008 was a ceremonial race; McCain didn’t stand a chance. He was not incompetent, but his running mate was. Sarah Palin was even dumber than Bush, and like Gingrich in the 90s was responsible for a conservative revolution we’re still feeling today. Barack Obama wasn’t an amazing president, but he was an AMAZING candidate. Everybody loved Obama in 2008, he won more votes than any candidate in history until 2020. McCain was a career moderate, and after the last 8 years of failure both parties were running on a platform of “I am not George W. Bush.” Turns out a young charismatic smart black man is less like Bush than another old white guy.
Obama lost a ton of momentum going into 2012 because he didn’t really DO anything his first term. His only major accomplishment was the Affordable Care Act, which was an act of the Democratic congress than anything else, and it still wasn’t nearly as progressive as it needed to be (the US is still the only developed nation without universal healthcare). Romney, a Republican governor from the Democratic stronghold of Massachusetts, could have beaten him were he not a classist piece of shit. Romney hated poor people more than Reagan, and once wore brown face to a campaign event to make himself look more like Obama (they didn’t paint his hands or neck, just his face). Obama made a lot of promises he didn’t keep, in no small part because of the Tea Party and the devastating losses in 2014 (we suffer under Mitch McConnell because of that).
2016 was a dumpster fire that shouldn’t have happened, and if either party had run a different candidate, it wouldn’t have. Sanders would have beaten Trump, Clinton would have beaten Cruz. It was a perfect storm of a very unpopular and insincere grandma running against a cartoon supervillain. You couldn’t repeat that with what we know now. Your vote in 2016 came to represent who you were as a person; people took it to the extremes, and the sunk cost fallacy made the entire Republican party shift so far rightward that we have actual concentration camps now and NOBODY GIVES A SHIT! Trump was a game show host, a used car salesman famous for being tacky and dumb and offensive. He was KNOWN for running his companies into the ground, that was his MO, he made a career out of bankruptcy, and Republicans still can’t believe that he drove us into the worst economic depression since the last Republican (history repeat itself, whoop-dee-doo). Biden won in 2020 because of record turnout, though 2020 was closer to the intentional walk of 2012 than the home run of 2008 in terms of enthusiasm for the candidates.
If we’ve learned anything its that Republicans just keep getting worse and worse, so it’s getting hard for me to imagine what 2024 has in store. Will Trump risk losing the popular vote 3 times in a row for a second term? i think he’ll pretend to so he can scam millions of dollars out of his base, but he’ll either lost the primaries and tank the Republicans by running third-party, or he’ll drop out and endorse one of his spawn. If Biden decides not to run in 2024, the nomination will almost certainly go to Kamala Harris, at which point I expect the Republicans to run a woman as well, so that we’re guaranteed the first woman president; she’ll be young, and white, and blonde. My money’s on Ivanka. Kamala vs. Ivanka will be a repeat of the 2016 dumpster fire, only worse because then everyone would be acting like both candidates are feminist icons, #GirlPower #SheRunsTheWorld #WarCrimesAreBetterWithTwoXChromosomes If Biden DOES run again, then I suspect the Republican pool will be wide early on (Prick Scott, Ron DeathSantis, Uncle Tom Cotton, Nikkki Haley, you name it), only to shrink before the primaries as they all coordinate to get behind someone strong enough to defeat an incumbent.
Republicans are very good at coordinating; they are the party of “Follow the Leader.” Whoever is in charge has 100% authority, no ifs, ands, or buts, no questions asked, just follow orders. It would be easy to call them lemmings, but it’s more insidious than this. They run dumb candidates for president, but have very smart people working behind the scenes to do horrible things. They’re willing to follow orders blindly to ensure that the party prospers, whereas Democrats are chicken running around with their heads cut off. There are no Democratic leaders. Pelosi? Schumer? Nobody likes those dinosaurs! The only really popular Democrats are progressives, and they will never have power as long as the moderates have a majority of the caucus. AOC could be a senator someday; she could replace Schumer whenever he retires, but that would hinge on her not having any moderate primary challengers. Moderates are still very popular because they are seen as “electable,” even though they never DO anything once elected. Progressives have big ideas and the concrete plans to get them done, but the moderate establishment is afraid of losing power, and would rather placate the other side doing nothing, changing nothing, making no waves. The party needs to shift leftward, or the country is doomed.
I would suggest the progressives splitting off to form a third party, but that would almost certainly destroy left-wing politics in this country as every safe seat would become split. In an ideal world, it would be a nominal change; they would be the Progressive Democratic Party, they would continue to run in blue districts and caucus with Democrats on votes, but would advertise themselves as anti-establishment. They would be like the New Democrats in Canada, which now that I think about it is a very bad idea because the New Democrats have no power and end up giving more votes to the Liberals and Conservatives instead. The Progressive solution is intended to show the caucus that the moderates don’t have total control, but it would end up with the moderate Democrats shooting themselves in the foot, running against Progressives in every seat, handing them to the Republicans. Every election cycle people act like a loss would spell “the end of the _____ party,” but this would actually be it for the Democrats. It would be a turning point, like the 1960s, with millions of people changing parties out of principle, a major shift. A Red Scare
I just want to crawl in a hole and die. I hate politics.
