How the wisdom of science fiction could have helped me decide who to vote for in the united states elections

The U.S Elections are coming to their climax tomorrow.

And even this late in the race, it is still unclear which candidate is worse. Donald Trump is still a riddle. Douglas Adams' the Hitchhiker's guide to the Galaxy comes to mind, with a similar puzzle regarding president of the Galaxy Zaphod Beeblebrox.
We are still learning to distinguish -
"between him pretending to be stupid just to get people off their guard, pretending to be stupid because he couldn't be bothered to think and wanted someone else to do it for him, pretending to be outrageously stupid to hide the fact that he actually didn't understand what was going on, and really being genuinely stupid."
Is it true, that Trump, just like Beeblebrox, prefers "people to be puzzled than rather be contemptuous"?

Unlike Trump, Hillary Clinton has never pretended to be stupid. It might be one of the most obvious differences between these two nominees. And yet, her image is tarnished in the eyes of many voters. Considering the gap in governmental experience between these two nominees, it can be said with confidence that more than Trump beating Clinton, these have been elections in which Clinton was constantly displaying an ongoing inability to become acceptable as a nominee in the eyes of a great part of the republican college of voters.

comparing the levels of loathing in both camps, it seems that despite Trump's horrible collection of blemishes, which may very well be an unprecedented record in U.S history of elections, Clinton is still the most loathed nominee to be campaigning for ages. Considering the fact that she is following the campaigns of Barack Obama, the first non-white U.S  president, this says something.

Facing with two nominees who are utterly unacceptable in the eyes of the other half of the nation, the U.S has a very difficult time ahead, whoever may win.

This may very well be a good time to take another bit of wisdom from Douglas Adams, this time from the Restaurant at the end of the universe:
"...one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them. To summarize: it is a well known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it. To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job. To summarize the summary of the summary: people are a problem."

The solution proposed by the ingenious Science Fiction writer? the ruler must be someone who does not want to do it. Democracies have chosen a different path. But in times of great alienation within the nation, the difficulty of finding a unifying leader may be impossible to overcome. Think Abraham Lincoln. His election did not bring unity. It brought a civil war, because people opposing him knew what his election meant.

What does the election of Trump or Clinton mean to the other side of the political map?  Can either one of them find within oneself the great (and currently hidden) ability that shall be demanded to lead the U.S of A towards a unified future?

Of the two, Trump seems as the less probable one to be able to become a non-divisive president. That is the reason why, had I been a U.S citizen, Hillary Clinton would have been my vote. Not because of any confidence in what type of president she might become. Because of the certainty of what kind of president Donald Trump cannot become.

And if you wonder if there is another secret ingredient behind Donald Trump's success in his 2016 campaigns, John Oliver has an interesting suggestion:

אין תגובות:

הוסף רשומת תגובה