Thoughts from a heathen liberal as she tears the fabric of society to shreds by supporting heinous things like the separation of church and state, voting rights, and government assistance.
Welcome to the post-U.S.-election world. The forecast calls for heavy rain with a chance of dystopia, so grab your umbrella and a box of MREs, but don’t lose hope yet. Things may seem bad now, but actually they’ve been bad for decades. How’s that for a silver lining?
Here’s the gist of our new reality: Donald Trump, with Mike Pence as his running mate, won the 2016 election. They are surrounding themselves with lobbyists, abusers, and the inexperienced. Moreover, the 115th United States Congress will be overwhelmingly Republican. (Didn’t I say a lot could happen in a few days?) Some people are happy or indifferent about these results, but far many others are unhappy, frustrated, and scared. That’s why there are protests and riots.
As mentioned in my last post, most Americans don’t like Trump. We don’t like Republicans, either. So how on earth did Trump become president and Congress go to the Republicans?
People have lots of opinions about that, as it turns out. White supremacists gave us these results, says The Nation. Eh, it’s just white women, says The Guardian. It’s more complicated, says Pew Research. Blame the DNC, says The Observer. And Facebook, says Fortune.
Some of what’s said may be true (or true-ish), but it is tangential, regardless. The biggest and simplest truth about this and every U.S. election is that many Americans fail themselves and each other by not voting. Whether you wanted President Clinton or President Trump or President Dear God, Someone Else, Please in 2016, the reality is only half of the citizenry ever participates in any election, meaning only a small percentage decides the fate of the nation. That’s a huge problem in a representative democracy, but it’s also solvable.
The 2016 Election: How Many People Voted (or Didn’t Vote)
Two hundred million** citizens were registered and legally able to vote in the 2016 election. That’s 61% of the current total population (about 325 million) and 89% of all citizens of voting age (about 226 million).
We’re still counting ballots from this election, but voter turnout appears to be low—possibly the lowest it’s been in 20 years for a presidential election. If this holds true by the final count, it’s further proof that we couldn’t stand either candidate.
- As of November 14th, 121 million votes have been counted. At the time of my writing, there are 61,039,676 counted votes (47.81%) for Hillary Clinton, and 60,371,193 (47.28%) for Donald Trump. Another several million votes have gone to third-party candidates like the Libertarian Party’s Gary Johnson and the Green Party’s Jill Stein. There has also been an influx of write-in ballots, as seen in Virginia and Maryland, where write-ins nearly tripled.
- This means about 61%, maybe 62%, of registered voters participated in the 2016 election. That number is depressing enough as it is, but it gets even worse when you pair it with all potentially-eligible citizens (i.e., those registered to vote and those not), or 226 million people, in which case 54% of citizens voted and 46% did not.
It’s easy to get hung up on demographics or the incongruent relationship between the popular vote and the electoral college. But, as much as I’m inclined to agree people sometimes vote for horrible reasons and that the electoral college needs major adjustments or to be thrown out entirely, none of these things tells the real story of not just the 2016 election, but all U.S. elections.
The real story is this:
60 million votes can decide who runs the world’s biggest superpower.
This is 30% of registered voters, 27% of citizens of voting age, and 19% of the total U.S. population. If you want to take it even further, it’s less than one percent of the world’s population.
Is it right or good that less than a third of the citizenry might decide the fate of a nation, one that, in many ways, decides the fate of the world?
This is not unique to the 2016 election. In U.S. elections, the few have always decided the fate of the many. Even when Obama pulled in big numbers in 2008, less than half of registered voters—and a mere 33% of all citizens of voting age—elected him.
Participation is even worse during midterm elections:
*All data from the U.S. Census Bureau, the United States Election Project, the World Bank, and Wikipedia.
**Voter registration stats from U.S. Census Bureau, with the exception of 2016’s, which comes from TargetSmart, a Democratic data firm. Probably inaccurate, as it’s unlikely 47 million people registered in four years.
We must stop focusing on how people are voting because the truth is . . . many people aren’t voting, either because they don’t care to or because they can’t. Half of the country didn’t vote for Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton. They didn’t vote at all.
Drawing broad conclusions about Americans from this election—on anything other than our apathy—is pointless. We won’t ever know what Americans think or want or can become if more people don’t vote.
So Where Do We Go from Here?
We all desire to be seen and heard, and to be treated well. Most of us are good people who want that for each other, too. Plenty of research even suggests we have similar visions for society. We are less divided than it seems. But we have to prove that to each other.
Below, I have compiled a list of what might be achieved at local, state, and national levels to improve voter turnout and thus representation. It isn’t a small list, but it is actionable.
- If you are already registered to vote, you need to follow through:
- on making sure your registration stays up to date.
- In many states, there are deadlines for making changes to your registration details.
- Registration purges may affect you if you don’t participate in every election. You may need to re-register. Yes, this is a form of voter suppression. Baby steps.
- by participating in primaries and caucuses, so we get the candidates we want in our elections.
- The 2016 primaries had a “high” turnout: 28.5%—that is, 15% of Republicans and 14% of Democrats. We can do better.
- Primaries and caucuses are largely managed by the two main political parties, and a little less so by the states. This is because you are picking the candidates for the parties. Rules for these elections can, therefore, be very different from those set for more state-managed elections. You may need to temporarily align yourself with a political party to participate. Read more about open vs. closed primaries.
- by voting on ballot measures, representatives, judges, sheriffs, etc., so the laws affecting us and the people serving us better reflect our beliefs.
- Many laws start at the state level, where your vote counts the most. This is often a more effective and less controversial way to promote change over time. Stay involved locally.
- Ballot measures work very differently between states, but there is a formal way to promote change and action in every place.
- by voting in midterm elections.
- In 2014, only 36% of eligible voters participated in the midterm election. This is tragic, considering Congress is just as important as the president, if not more so.
- If you are left-leaning, note that left-leaning voters are notoriously bad about showing up for midterm elections.
- by voting in presidential elections.
- Vote early and/or by mail to avoid long poll lines. Most states have some form of early voting.
- Registered, but not sure how to vote in a general election? Find your state among the videos in the How to Vote in Every State series.
- Use sites like My Time to Vote and RealClearPolitics to find out when elections take place in your state. If you can’t participate for some reason, find out if you can submit an absentee ballot or a surrogate affidavit. Do this as early as possible so deadlines won’t catch you by surprise.
- The most commonly cited reasons for not voting are a conflicting schedule (28%), particularly among 25 to 44 year olds; not being interested in the election or candidates (16%), especially among younger and middle-aged voters; and being hindered by an illness or disability (11%), particularly among individuals 65 or older. As employers and employees, fellow citizens, and caretakers, we can find ways to increase voter participation.
- Encourage early voting, absentee voting, and time off to vote. Be open to helping people get to the polls.
- While it might be nice to persuade someone to support a candidate you like, we honestly need less arguing over candidates and more discussion about the process of voting. Make the election process approachable, not off-putting.
- The younger a person is, the less likely he or she is to be registered. It is the duty of anyone who lives or works with young people to make sure they know how to register to vote.
- According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Asians and Hispanics (of any race) are much less likely to be registered to vote. This is partly because those communities have a high proportion of immigrants who are not yet citizens, but this is not always the case. If you are part of, or close to, either of these communities, make sure that everyone who can register is doing so.
- Use or direct others to Vote.gov to begin.
- Try to support legislation that would automatically register citizens to vote.
- Caucuses, while they can encourage discussion, need to be used in conjunction with primaries or abolished because they disenfranchise low-income workers, young people, the elderly, and the disabled.
- All primaries either need to be open or have same-day political party registration. We need to stop disenfranchising the 40% of Americans who identify as political independents.
- Our main election day must be a public holiday and cannot be held on a day with religious significance. Making election day a public holiday would greatly increase voter turnout, given that the most common reason people cite for not voting is a conflicting schedule.
- Alternatively, more states need Oregon, Washington, and Colorado’s vote-by-mail options.
- Voting machines, which are buggy and easily tampered with, must be abolished in favor of paper ballots.
- Paper ballots need to have an accessible, standardized design that doesn’t change from state to state.
- We must restore voting rights for felons who have served their time.
- We need to consider “recalibrating” or abolishing the electoral college, which has caused great strife between Americans four times in U.S. history—twice in the last two decades. The idea behind the electoral college is to prevent tyranny of the majority (and foreign interference with our government), but it comes with many negative side effects, including unintentional voter suppression (e.g., Republicans in a heavily-Democratic state—or vice versa—may not bother voting because they feel their vote will not count).
- Being forced to vote for one candidate alone means voters often have to choose who they feel is “the lesser of evils.” Instant run-off voting or some other ranked voting system can solve this problem.
- It might not be a bad idea to have compulsory voting, as seen in places like Australia, Luxembourg, and Argentina.
Until the midterms in 2018, we should focus on our local governments and communities. It’s where we can do the most good.
The Chicago Cubs have won the World Series. I couldn’t care less about that if I tried, but the statistics behind their victory interest me. The odds have not been in the Cubs’ favor for a long time. Before last night, they hadn’t won a World Series championship since 1908. To put that into perspective, that was before both world wars, the polio vaccine, and the moon landing. As recently as October 30th, FiveThirtyEight published that the Cubs had “a smaller chance of winning than Trump.” As in, their chances were slim. Trump, at the time, had a 22% chance of winning the presidential election.
A lot can happen in a few days, though. The Cubs can win the World Series for the first time in a century, and the controversial reopening of the FBI investigation into Clinton’s emails can make the 2016 election less certain. At the time of my writing, Clinton has a 65% chance of becoming president, compared to Trump’s 34% chance. Trump’s odds aren’t that great, but they are improving, and he may yet be the 45th president. Anything seems possible after a Cubs win and Brexit.
Odds aside, a majority of Americans don’t like either candidate or their campaigns. The endless scandals and “misspoken” moments aren’t helping. In fact, nearly a third of likely voters are simply voting against the other candidate. Behold, the wonders of democracy in a two-party system. Let us weep together.
This year’s election is like living in the latest, lamest horror movie from the Saw franchise. You wake, chained to a chair, only to hear Jigsaw ask if you’d rather be shot in the leg or have your intestines pulled from your body. You’re more likely to survive losing a leg to infection, but that doesn’t make it any easier to say, “Sure, go ahead and shoot me in the kneecap.” Meanwhile, no one around you can stop talking about Ralph Nader.
While there are die-hard Clinton and Trump supporters, and there are even more die-hard supporters of the Democratic and Republican parties, more than 40% of us identify as independents, and so are left to wander a political no man’s land. (This is why so few participate in the primaries, during which voters are typically required to identify with a party to make their vote count.)
Pick apart our nation’s collective psyche, and it’s not so surprising that nearly half of us are dismayed. We are a people brainwashed to fear words like socialism, and yet when asked about specifics we are far more socialist than our system or the people who manage it. We are disgruntled, if not unhappy. This partially explains why, relative to other nations, voter participation is low in the States.
Many of us know that, no matter which party controls Congress or occupies the White House, we are going to be screwed. This is the true cost of having so much money in politics. It’s only a matter of how we’re screwed and who gets screwed. Hint: It’s almost always the poor and middle class.
If you loathe both candidates, the person you believe to be more survivable comes down to political leanings. I lean further left than the Democratic Party, so Clinton is the saner, more predictable, and more qualified of the two from my perspective. But even as we survive and perhaps even see some positive changes under Clinton, I also know many will suffer. It’s likely the nation will end up entrenched in costly controversies and conflicts under her guidance. We have under every president for decades now. The subject of war is particularly distressing considering Trump fancies himself a strongman and Clinton is a well-known war hawk.
Tuesday—four full, unpredictable days from now—we’ll elect a new president. Well, people living in Nevada, North Carolina, Florida, and a handful of other places will. The rest of us will cast our ballot, and then warm ourselves by the dumpster fire that is the 2016 election.
2008 Hillary Clinton:
Obama doesn’t love guns like I do. I’m a pro-gun churchgoer. I still am, even after I had to run from invisible sniper fire. Obama just doesn’t know how to win over hard-working Americans—you know, white people.
2008 Donald Trump:
Obama can’t be worse than Bush.
2008 Bernie Sanders:
The middle class has really been under assault. The top 0.1 percent now earn more money than the bottom 50 percent of Americans, and the top 1 percent own more wealth than the bottom 90 percent.
2016 Barack Obama:
I’m with her.
2016 Hillary Clinton:
I am here to tell you I will use every single minute of every day, if I’m fortunate to be your president, looking for ways to save lives so we can change the gun culture. I’m just telling you the truth. I’ve always tried to tell the truth.
2016 Donald Trump:
Obama is the worst president in U.S. history! Oh, well! Let’s just see how many people want to burn it all to the ground. We have the best fire. We love our gasoline, don’t we?
2016 Bernie Sanders:
There is no justice when the top 1/10th of 1 percent—not 1 percent—the top 1/10th of 1 percent today in America owns almost as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent.
You do have to admit this is going to be a very good year for comedy.
In honor of Martin Luther King Jr. Day, I urge you to read The Warmth of Other Suns by Isabel Wilkerson. This book, more than any other I’ve read, provides historical context for the state of relations between blacks and whites in America today. There’s a reason it won the National Book Award for Nonfiction in 2010, just as there’s a reason Wilkerson won a Pulitzer Prize in journalism in 1994.
Wilkerson chronicles the massive, though perhaps little-known, migrations of African Americans out of the southeastern region of the United States, between 1915 and 1970. While closely following the lives of three people, she more broadly discusses the stressful and dangerous circumstances under which millions of African Americans migrated. If you’ve ever wanted to understand institutionalized racism—or have ever been skeptical about the concept—this book is well worth your time.
Never forget that what was done yesterday influences what takes place today.
Quotes from The Warmth of Other Suns
People like Ida Mae had few options, and the landlords knew it. New arrivals often paid twice the rent charged the whites they had just replaced for worn-out and ill-kept housing. “The rents in the South Side Negro district were conspicuously the highest of all districts visited,” Abbott wrote. Dwellings that went for eight to twenty dollars a month to white families were bringing twelve to forty-five dollars a month from black families, those earning the least income and thus least able to afford a flat at any rent, in the early stages of the Migration. Thus began a pattern of overcharging and underinvestment in black neighborhoods that would lay the foundation for decades of economic disparities in the urban North.
Like other mass migrations, it was not a haphazard unfurling of lost souls but a calculable and fairly ordered resettlement of people along the most direct route to what they perceived as freedom, based on railroad and bus lines. The migration streams were so predictable that by the end of the Migration, and, to a lesser degree, even now, one can tell where a black northerner’s family was from just by the city the person grew up in—a good portion of blacks in Detroit, for instance, having roots in Tennessee, Alabama, western Georgia, or the Florida panhandle because the historic rail lines connected those places during the Migration years.
[The Illinois Central Railroad] carried so many southern blacks north that Chicago would go from 1.58 percent black at the start of the twentieth century to one-third black by the time the flow of people finally began to slow in 1970. Detroit’s black population would skyrocket from 1.4 percent to 44 percent during the era of the Migration.
The children, having emerged from one-room schoolhouses with their southern English, were often labeled retarded by northern school officials, regardless of their native abilities. Segregation was not the law, but northerners would find creative ways to segregate the migrant children from the white children when so inclined.