Turning to Robert Frost on an Oy Vey Eve

Jeff––Saturday   The wreckage depicted in the photo above is the result of a seven-year-old at work on her toys.  It’s innocent child play, but it brought a smile to my face, and a bit of calm to the real anxiety we’re all sharing these days.   It led me to search around for something to write about that appropriately conveyed my thoughts on enduring the double whammy of post-election madness and genocidal Covid-19 behaviors. I fell upon this parody I’d written seven years ago based on Robert Frost’s iconic poem, “Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening.”    It struck me as an on the nose description of how I feel these days.  Now to see how many others share it.     Whose words these are I think I know. My mind is on to pillage though; To find something for blogging clear Some thoughts that matter, not for show.    My blogmates all must think it queer To see a poem this time here With so much news of fraud and fake, And daily tales of more to fear.   But now I think it’s time to wake And trust there might be some mistake. To hope somewhere beyond the sweep There will be peace for all God’s sake.   We know what’s out there’s dark and deep. And if we choose we all could weep, But I prefer to pause to reap, The promises men swore to keep.   ***** Of all the words Frost did compose. The ones that hit it on the nose, For how to live amid the whirl, Are those his tombstone did unfurl:   “I had a lover’s quarrel with the world.”   Not a bad philosophy for all that’s about us these days.   –Jeff

The world is confused

Stanley - Thursday

As you can imagine, there is anxious anticipation around the world about the election because the outcome will affect every country. The anxiety is heightened because the system is so little understood, especially after the 2000 election and the election of President Trump, despite a loss in the popular vote.

One thing that is certain is that most of the world is totally confused by the electoral system in the United States. The items below are not ranked by their confusion-inducing ability. 

1. The electoral college system came into focus in 2016 for the rest of the world when Donald Trump beat Hillary Clinton, even though he trailed by over three million votes overall. What is the electoral college and why was it created?

2. The election period preceding a presidential election is at least two years. The consensus overseas is that Americans must be masochists to tolerate a system that lasts so long. For most countries that I am aware of, the period running up to an election is a coupe of months.

3. Members of the House of Representatives are elected every two years. People overseas look at this and wonder how any work gets done, because it seems that as soon as an election is finished, fundraising for the next election begins.

4. Money! It boggles overseas observers' minds that an estimated $11 billion to $14 billion will be spent on the elections this year. 

5. Money! From foreign shores, it seems reasonable to limit individual contributions to candidates. However, when it comes to PACs and Super-PACs, there is bewilderment, not only as to what they are, but also as to what and how they can support candidates financially. As a voter, I have tried to understand the rules, but have generally failed. Click here if you want to find out or if you are having trouble sleeping.

6. In all matters, not only elections, people in other countries fail to understand that the United States is far from united when it comes to laws. They don't realise that laws can differ from one state to another. This raises much confusion when reading the results of similar challenges to vote counting, for example, resulting in differing opinions. Yes, state 1, you can count mail-in ballots that arrive after election day as long as they are postmarked on or before election day. No, state 2, you cannot count mail-in ballots that arrive after election day even if they are postmarked on or before election day. 

7. It is puzzling that US voters accept jiggery-pokery when it comes to elections, no matter which side they are on. Surely, observers ask, people realise that if one side tries to limit the other side's votes or voter participation, it will happen to them when the tables are turned? Then where is democracy?

8. The Postal Service may not have the capacity to deliver all votes in time? Huh?

9. Some people have to stand in line for HOURS to vote? In the richest country in the world? Huh?

10. Nobody knows when the results of the election will be known? Huh? Remember 2000 and the hanging chads? Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe is reputed to have offered to help the USA with subsequent elections. What happens - enquiring minds ask - if the results are not known before the electoral college convenes?

Overseas observers are not confused by one thing - the need to have free and fair elections everywhere.

Elections

Stanley - Thursday

Last week I provided a little help to an old friend who was running in a Democratic primary in southwest Michigan for the House of Representatives. The last time I was actively involved in a political campaign was fifty years ago in Johannesburg, where I worked hard for the only Progressive Party candidate who made it to the national parliament. Her name was Helen Suzman, and she was constantly a thorn in the side of the apartheid-supporting National Party.

Helen Suzman

Having been brought up in a parliamentary system, I have always been fascinated by how different the system is here in the States. A candidate like my friend in Michigan would not have to fight a primary in South Africa or in most (maybe all) parliamentary systems. In those, each political party’s central committee would nominate who would run in each election.

The benefit of that system, is that each candidate is sure to have the backing and support of the party. It also means that no money is spent before the final election. Of course, one downside is that it largely precludes anyone out of step with the party hierarchy from running.

In my friend’s case, there were four Democrats vying to be the candidate to run against the Republican incumbent in November. What has always shocked me about the system is how much money is spent. In this case, the four contestants raised over $1.5 million in total. And this was just to elect a candidate. How much more money will be spent when the Democrat goes up against the Republican in November?

As I went door to door, I found a lot of people saying they would vote in the primary for the Democrats. When I asked which of the four candidates they were inclined to support, many were surprised that there was more than one candidate. They were either ignorant or fobbing me off.

While the idea of a primary appeals to me, my enthusiasm is tempered by the typically low turnout. In Michigan, the turnout surged to 29% from previous insipid totals. To my eye, one problem with this is that an organised minority can win a primary even if the majority of the party’s supporters don’t agree - the Tea Party is an example.

There was a special election in Ohio on the same day, where a Republican was going against by a Democrat in a constituency that Trump won by 11 percentage points. This was for the House of Representatives. The person holding the seat had resigned so a new election had to be held. Because it was such a tightly contested race, the Republicans, desperate to hold onto the seat, poured in $5 million of support versus the Democrats’ mere $1 million. That is astonishing enough, but even more astonishing to me is the fact that the tenure of the winner of this race is only until the general election on November 8, where the two candidates will go head to head once again.  Who knows how much more will be spent then. At the time of writing, Wednesday 15th, the votes are still being counted. The election is too close to call, despite the minority president - Trump - hailing a victory. Balderson, the Republican, is leading Democrat O’Connor by a whisker. I hope they have them tallied before November 8.

To me the biggest weakness of the voting system in the USA is the role and influence of money – BIG money. For example, the total spending for all elections in 2016 approached $6.5 billion, with the presidential race costing nearly $2.5 billion. Yes, those numbers are billions. I always think how much good that money could do, in contrast to the generally abysmal quality of so many people who make it to Washington.

There are two encouraging aspects of this year’s election – I think the turnout will be high, fuelled by Trump’s divisiveness; and many more women are running for office than ever before. I only hope they are successful.

Knowing the stresses my friend and his family have felt over the past year or so of his campaign - the long hours, the fund raising, the constant need to be on - I can only admire the dedication it takes to run. What astonishes me, if my friend had won the primary, then won the election in November, he would have to start campaigning again almost immediately for the next election in two years. I couldn't do it.

For our democratic system to work, it requires as many people as possible to vote. To vote is just a matter of choice. But I fear the tsunami of money coming from special interests is going to overwhelm free elections. And we'll become irrelevant.

Please vote.

______________________________________

Some good news!

Poisoned Pen Press has bought our stand-alone thriller DEAD OF NIGHT, which will be published here in the States in mid-year 2019. It was published by Orenda Press a month ago in the UK.