Dearest Rachel –
Well, it’s over already (much to my surprise); and yet, it’s just begun, again.
I honestly didn’t expect to be up this early in the morning after having been watching the returns with Daniel until well past midnight. You know well enough that I rarely do midnights; then again, this was a bit of history in the making, no matter which way the pendulum swung, so I felt I needed to see it out, if at all possible. I did assume that, like last time around, it might take a while for everything to come in and be finalized, though.
But no; it was essentially called at midnight or so, and while several states hadn’t been confirmed (and still haven’t, judging from the screens in the gym this morning), it’s not like it matters at this point. We have, theoretically, a winner.
I say “theoretically” because I’m convinced that half of this country is still not (and never will be) willing to accept the results. Particularly in this state (and more to the point, this county that drags the rest of the state behind it, kicking and screaming), we’ll see lots of #Resistance folks here, who will announce proudly that the ‘winner’ is #NotMyPresident, and that there must have been something nefarious going on for this to happen. Russia must have been sowing disinformation, and the sheeple were (and still are) too stupid to realize how much better off they would be under their candidate. Hey, if insulting the electorate was a good strategy, people would have been using it so much more often, guys.
Indeed, I’ve been listening to certain podcasts on my way to and from my walk with Lars, and the folks having conniptions about the results are rife throughout the internet. The country appears to be suffering from a massive hangover from the effects of Guy Fawkes’ Day. Unlike the shows’ various hosts, I can’t say I take much pleasure in it, even as the reactions seem absurdly over the top – and let’s not forget the strangeness of recording oneself essentially either having (or faking) a nervous breakdown. After all, as the saying goes, “you can’t win ’em all.” I’ve been on the losing side of these contests before (it’s why I was never into gaming to the extent you were, as I hated losing, and because of that, I didn’t like winning because of what I was doing to those I was beating), so I kind of sympathize – although I still can’t relate to filming myself while having what amounts to a tantrum onscreen, though.
I think that the victorious candidate understood that, as well; while I didn’t actually see his speech, I assume that he’s taken a “with malice toward none, with charity toward all, as we seek to bind up the nation’s wounds” approach to the situation. The trouble is, we all know what happened to the man who actually uttered those exact words in a similar victory.
I can’t find it in me to celebrate the situation at hand, because winning isn’t the end goal here; not by a long shot. He actually needs to survive, in order to carry out the policies he’s been mandated to do (and no mistake, since he’s been given the popular vote, as well as what appears to be both chambers of Congress, it is a mandate). And given the fact that the hyperbolic rhetoric about him hasn’t changed – especially judging from the reactions of the supposedly common man (or maybe more accurately, the common woman) – one would suspect that there are those who are looking for the next Thomas Crooks to save the country from the horrors of another four years of this individual. There is this hope that someone will go from the voting booth to John Wilkes Booth. The fact that people are saying that this is the worst thing that has happened to them in their lives… I don’t know what to make of it. It makes me sad, and a little bit fearful, if they are to be believed.
It’s possible, of course, that it’s all being played up for the cameras. Maybe people are simply melting down for the internet clout. Then again, if that’s so, there are those watching them who approve of and assent to such behavior and beliefs, so whether it’s an act or not is a moot point; there are viewers who hold them, even if the actors do not. The fact that these get views and likes is enough to be a concern, regardless of whether the tantrum we’re seeing is real or not.
Meanwhile, Daniel tells me that, if I’m really worried about this like I say I am, I need to pray for our newly-elected leaders, and that they get the chance to lead like they’ve been essentially asked to by the electorate. God, he says, will protect them, if He’s asked. Although, while I appreciate that he has more faith than I do (and that probably ought to embarrass me for my lack, to be honest), I can’t help but note that, for whatever reason, He didn’t see fit to stop folks like the aforementioned J. W. Booth – and while He claims to be able to shape minds like we humans dig canals, these folks on both news programs and social media (and their viewers) don’t seem to have changed much in nearly a decade. Nothing is impossible for Him, I know this, but what I don’t know is what He does or does not see fit to do, and why.
With all that said, I will try to do what Daniel suggests, and maybe throw an extra one in for these actors and their audiences. In the meantime, honey, keep an eye on all of us, and wish us luck; we’re going to need it.
Letters to Rachel 