The tagline for the otherwise forgettable "Alien vs. Predator" film read “Whoever wins, we lose.” The prospect of either alien hunters who kill humans for sport or aliens, who literally rape people’s faces to produce offspring, winning a fight is justifiably terrifying, except the audience doesn’t want to see squishy humans getting in the way of a fight between two iconic movie monsters. They want to see the movie monsters actually fighting one another, regardless who wins; who wants to see a bunch of humans getting killed, like every B-grade horror movie ever produced.
I could say the same about the 2016 presidential race: the Republicans are the Aliens, the Democrats are the Predators, and everyone else plays the dual role of the squishy human and the disappointed audience.
The Democrats are definitely more organized and united than the Republicans. Their pool of candidates started small, and got smaller from there until it’s down to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and “democratic socialist” Bernie Sanders.
Hillary has for some time been leading in the polls, but Sanders’ recent wins in states like Washington have given his campaign a little more momentum to challenge Clinton. Which is all well and good because I don’t like Clinton.
Clinton, in my eyes, is a perfect politician. Take that for all the negative connotations you might think of; a lot of what she says feels artificial, pre-planned, like she’s really only saying these things to get your vote. And then there are the numerous controversies surrounding her, like the handling of the Benghazi attacks and her deals/history with big corporations like Walmart.
She’s tried to refute these accusations, and has gone on record saying that she’s tired of Sanders’ supporters “lying” about her, but they still remain. That shows me that she does not have the kind of control needed to run the most powerful nation on the planet; if you can’t handle a few rumors and accusations, what will you do when Putin wants to carve out another chunk of Eastern Europe?
Sanders does not exactly inspire confidence in me either. He talks big, and he’s fairly popular among my age group, but like Clinton, I remain unsure if he has what it takes to run a country. His styling the campaign as a “political revolution” has the historian in me curious and a bit worried, but I doubt he’ll go full Lenin and make America communist (and you shouldn’t be worried either; socialists and communists have hated each other since the two ideas were invented). Sanders just appears too radical for the U.S. at this point, and some of the old guard might balk at the changes he brings to the table, thus resulting in nothing getting done (unless of course someone pays attention to the midterm elections and votes in some senators that might listen).
What really closes the deal on Sanders is his fans. Some of his policies are a bit out there, and some I agree on, but I do not “Feel the Bern” as so many of my colleagues (and even a few of my teachers) have. Sander’s has run a relatively clean campaign, which I have admired, but his fans are more than happy to dig up as much dirt as possible on Clinton and other political rivals. All those things about Clinton’s ties to big business? Brought to light by Sanders’ fans. Yes, such things might need to be said, but can you please stop shoving them down my throat every time I go online? It’s like my worst experiences on the internet come to life; everyone is trying to force Sanders on me, and if one person criticizes him in any way his fan base is on them like sharks on a whale carcass. This kind of mob mentality, where the creator is never wrong, leads to oversights and inflated egos (more so the former in Sanders’ case), and once again not much productive can be accomplished. Heck, genuinely good advice might be ignored because it was critical.
And if Sanders wins, then I can’t use my “Even brilliant lights will cease to Bern” joke. I’m petty like that.
Moving on we come to the absolute opposite side of the political spectrum: the New York-based tycoon Donald Trump. Like Sanders, Trump talks big, boasting about how he’s going to be tough on illegal immigration, tough on foreign powers, and tough on domestic policy. In some ways I like this; Trump brings with him a certain authoritarian air that has been sorely lacking in Washington since … Teddy Roosevelt, I think, and he might just be the guy to get things done.
That is, if he wasn’t Donald Trump.
Of all the candidates running, Trump is the one I hate the most. He is everything that I despise in a person: loud, rude, arrogant and immature, and his hair gives Adolf Hitler’s mustache a run in bad hair styling. His supporters admire how he’s more than willing to speak his mind an “tell it as it is.” Fine, but apparently “as it is” translates to an immigration policy straight out of the Reconstruction period, when the US banned all immigration from China to stop Chinese people from coming in to America during the latter half of the 1800s. His plans for Mexico to take the bill for his wall is absurd, not to mention insulting, but then who hasn’t Trump insulted? He’s already insulted women, Hispanics, Muslims, Veterans, intellectuals, foreigners, America -- the list shrinks by the day. And Trump is just as unreliable as Clinton is accused of being; he flip-flopped on numerous statements, most recently retracting his statement that women who have abortions should be severely punished (much to the outcry of pro-life and pro-choice groups).
Perhaps what has scared me about this guy the most is that he has started to cultivate something much worse than simple support: fanaticism. Trump rallies gain national attention when supporters start attacking protesters, while Trump chuckles and says that he’d love to get his hands on the protesters. He has warned that if he doesn’t get chosen to represent the Republican Party, there would be trouble for everyone. When you support violence at your rallies and suggest that the people will riot if you’re not No.1, you’ve got a major problem on your hands.
Finally, Trump is an immature bully. Attacking your rival’s wife and making jokes about your penis does not make one endearing.
Ted Cruz, Trump’s main Republican rival, comes off as something close to “Trump-Lite”. While he’s much more respectful than Trump, their policies line up a bit more than you think. The BBC ran an article on just how radical Trump was back in February, and Cruz was surprisingly close to Trump in many fields; both ranked highly for anti-immigration (Cruz at 9 while Trump earned a solid 10), though Cruz was much harsher on abortion than Trump was and both were equally big on foreign policy expansion. Cruz has the advantage of not being as loud as Trump is, and while Trump continues to alienate people Cruz is able to win over supporters with a resounding “I’m not Trump”. Personally, He comes off as bit of an ineffectual milquetoast: good at what he does, but not good enough to be No. 1. And he’s engaged in some of the same childish antics that Trump’s been up to, if the fracas concerning their wives is anything to go by.
At least he didn’t make penis jokes.
So no, I don’t think the presidential campaign has a great selection of players. We have a politician, a radical with plenty of mob rule, a milquetoast, and Donald Trump. I still plan on voting come November, but at this point it appears to be more “who will hurt America the least?” rather than “who’d be the best guy for the job?” Maybe one of the candidates will do something to change my mind, but as optimistic as I like to portray myself I’m beginning to have some doubts.
