No. of Recommendations: 10
June 14 is two weeks past a history making guilty verdict in a criminal trial involving a past President and current Presidential candidate and two weeks prior to the first of two promised debates between the two Presidential candidates. That's as good a time as any to dispense with the fallacy of the undecided voter and pre-emptively debunk all remaining "news coverage" of the 2024 race. Here's the news flash:
There isn't a single American who hasn't made up their mind on their preference for President, US Senator, US Representative, Governor, State Senator, State Representative, Attorney General or Secretary of State. Even if their state hasn't completed primaries for these races, I doubt a single American is truly undecided about how they will vote. R or D it is. The actual name doesn't matter.The only problem with predicting the outcome of the election is that some percentage of potential voters don't want to discuss their choice, even with an anonymous pollster and some percentage are so clueless about the consequences of this election that they might feign sophistication and disgust at "how political" everything has become and not vote at all because "it's all so meaningless."
Since 2016, a dynamic which first took hold after the 2000 election turmoil has come to dominate any attempts at political chit chat at work or around the neighborhood. In a small enough group -- bigger than one on one which becomes immediately awkward and smaller than (say) six where hinting at "politics" might be viewed as coercive -- any talk of current events will tip toe round the economy, inflation, employment trends (especially involving lazy youth and immigration) and "law and order." At some point, I find those I suspect lean "conservative" will then very... very... gingerly hint that the current President is "out to lunch" or "looks absent minded at the podium," etc. Then they'll back off as if "got my point across..."
I make it a point not to draw people out in public situations nor do I attempt to counter every point (or even any of them) being made. However, I find it interesting to test their awareness of events and facts on all sides any particular topic or issue. This week, in this kind of conversation, some gaffe that Biden made was brought up in this exact kind of conversation. I listened to the point, listened to others weigh in on the point as well, then quietly asked... "If you think Biden is having trouble connecting the dots, did you see Trump's rally in Las Vegas where he wandered off script when talking about electric cars? He started by outlining his thoughts on how he would want to die if he was in an electric vehicle that fell into the water and risked electrocuting him as the water shorted the battery out then went on a further tangent about dying by electrocution versus being bitten by a shark."
"Nope. Never seen that..."
That was it. No more conversation. End of that topic. I don't think I "won" my point. I don't even think it registered. I didn't expect it to register. I don't think the person involved has any interest in accepting new information about their presumed preferred candidate. They have internalized the idea Biden is "feeble" and "feeble" means "weak" and they don't want to vote for anything that makes them contemplate "weakness" so their mind is made up.
To be perfectly clear, there are people who might be inclined to vote either Democratic or Republican who fall into the "sophisticated cynic" camp. These people are equally idiotic and completely ignorant of history and the potential impact on the rule of law and the operation of our judicial system based on the outcome of this election.
So what SHOULD voters be contemplating in 2024 if they really want to make a sound decision about the two looming candidates? Perhaps the best way is a modern day resurrection of a series of old Doonesbury comics from October of 1980, a series Gary Trudeau called "In Search of Reagan's Brain - Brought to you by Anacin."
If you don't get the reference, check it out here:
https://www.gocomics.com/doonesbury/1980/10/27I strongly recommend clicking the single arrow button > to step through that entire week's strip.
Here in 2024, America has had four years to observe the brain of BOTH candidates in the highest office in the land. America now faces a choice between two elderly men facing equal problems with energy level and the ability to connect points of thought in their head accurately and rapidly for extended periods of time.
HOWEVER...
One candidate's head is filled predominately by accurate facts about the physical world, economics and government and new ideas that are formed regarding his official actions seem to have a consistent pattern of trying to provide economic or social improvements to OTHERS. He has an entire cabinet of officials with similar collections of reality-based facts about the real world they use in assisting him. When he vacated his Senate seat to become Vice President, he was among the least wealthy Senators. His current net worth is estimated to be around $10 million dollars, much of it from appreciation in real estate from owning two homes. He clearly did not make a life of politics with the intent or result of exploiting his position or inside information for money.
The other candidate's head is filled with fractured fairy tales, a horrifically incomplete understanding of history, science, the arts, etc.. The other candidate already burned through any halfway rational actor who might be willing to serve in his cabinet in his first Administration and it is now clear the bar on the rationality scale isn't just low, the candidate demands IRRATIONALITY and a willingness to abuse power in exchange for admittance to his circle. Even prior to his first Presidency, this candidate had a 30+ year track record of financial failures, civil fraud convictions and personal moral failures across three marriages. More importantly, any action taken by this candidate can be consistently, repeatedly traced to his own financial or legal self-interest and most can be consistently traced to immediate and long-lasting bad outcomes for America. Everything this candidate undertakes is animated primarily by hate, greed, fear and revenge.
If I am forced to choose between two candidates with equal deficits in "connecting mental dots" together, I will opt for the choice who at least has dots based on reality and isn't animated in every waking moment by such vile motives. And for the record, that is not damning Biden with faint praise. Many questions can be posed about the financial wisdom of the college debt relief program or US strategy regarding Israel and the Hamas war but overall, Biden's Administration has achieved what EVERY other industrial economy dreamed of at the outset of COVID -- a rapid financial recovery rather than a depression and a "soft landing" as stimulus was pulled back from the economy. US labor markets and competitive forces are not perfect but would workers feel better with unemployment at seven percent and economic growth at one percent instead of three? Uhhhhh... No.
The reality in 2024 is that there are no truly undecided voters left to sway. There are only those that have made up their mind and will share their preference, those that have made up their minds but will not share their preference and a smaller block that are too clueless to vote. The only factor changing poll results is the random selection of those polled. The only factor that can change the final outcome is apathy in those that can't be bothered to vote. But even the apathetic have made up their mind.
WTH
