The existential despair of Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump
In defense of sitting out the most depressing election in modern American history
Millions of Americans detest the idea of choosing between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. Perhaps you're among them. You may think that both presumptive nominees are unfit for office. You may loathe the way their candidacies are warping the personalities of your friends and family, particularly on social media. Perhaps you simply feel that each of these candidates is somehow undeserving of the time and energy that is required to vote.
You might also feel some pressure to suck it up and vote for "the lesser of two evils." Well, I have a simple message for you: Don't.
Don't let anyone steal that disgust from your heart. It is a precious thing. You should treasure your disgust as a sign of your decency, particularly because hardly anyone else will. Don't let anyone tell you that the nearly uncontrollable urge to retch at the thought of this election is disproportionate, or somehow uncivil. When you contemplate the fate of your country in 2016, you have the right to be depressed, or even despairing.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
You know that Donald Trump is an unstable imbecile. But this knowledge doesn't oblige you to discover new qualities in the bottomlessly cynical, power-mad grifter Hillary Clinton. In your heart of hearts, you may suspect that if she thought it would get her four centimeters closer to the presidency, Hillary Clinton would devour your squealing grandchild, or her own, live on the set of The View. It's a terror to contemplate. But in no way should this terror obviate your equally credible suspicion that Donald Trump is rabies in human form, likely to drive our country into a feverish search for scraps in the neighbors' garbage only to get us run over by a truck.
Tens of millions of dollars and an army of journalists and paid hacks will try to morally compel you to choose either Clinton or Trump. The internet and the nightly news will become a kind of active chain of volcanic pustules, emitting outrage and manufactured umbrage in your direction for the next five months, hoping that you scurry for cover underneath one candidacy.
Hold firm.
By refusing to choose or — more boldly — refusing to care, you will be joining millions of people, who, in any given year, act as if voting for one of the two major parties is useless. They may not exercise their franchise, but they are decent, law-abiding people. They floss and keep their lawns tidy. They see their friends and family losing their minds on Facebook and spend five minutes clicking "Hide Post" through their timeline. This is the truly civic thing to do: Preemptively conceal a person's public embarrassment for them. There is nothing wrong with being a non-voter.
Many of your friends will tell you that if you go on this way, refusing to choose, you are engaging in a "both sides" fallacy. They will say that in fact, Donald Trump is more likely to blow up the whole goddamned world, with his micron-twitch temper and the nuclear button. That may be true. But voting for Hillary Clinton as president and then living with her presidency may turn you into the kind of irritable jerk who wakes up every morning wishing the whole goddamned world could be blown up.
You may in fact believe one side is worse than the other. Even significantly. That's fine. In the sacred sanctum of my heart, I'd rather die at the hand of a knife-wielding relative over a game of cribbage than by drowning in an inflated kiddie pool filled with ammonia. I've gamed both of these scenarios out at length, and one of them is certainly preferable to the other. But I'm not going to interrupt a pleasant November day to endorse either of them.
And please don't tell me that I owe it to those who died on Utah Beach on D-Day, or at the Battle of Yorktown in the Revolutionary War, to choose between Trump and Clinton. If we really believed that electing a president was somehow connected to honoring our war dead, we would not have chosen a bilious moron and a greedy black hole of ambition as our candidates in the first place.
If you want to walk about in sackcloth and ashes and do penance, I think that's great. Glenn Beck suggested fasting to stop Donald Trump and then he started crying. It was the most sensible reaction he's had to anything in years.
Whatever you do, just don't let anybody trick you into thinking this choice is worthy of you or your nation.
Someone will inevitably ask you this question: "But really, gun to your head: Do you want President Trump? Or do you want President Clinton?" You should reframe the question for them like this: "When someone asks, 'Gun to your head: Do you want a gun to your head? Or a gun to your head?' The only response is: 'Just get over with it.'"
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Michael Brendan Dougherty is senior correspondent at TheWeek.com. He is the founder and editor of The Slurve, a newsletter about baseball. His work has appeared in The New York Times Magazine, ESPN Magazine, Slate and The American Conservative.
-
David Sacks: the conservative investor who will be Trump's crypto and AI czar
In the Spotlight Trump appoints another wealthy ally to oversee two growing — and controversial — industries
By David Faris Published
-
The future of fluoridated water is up for debate
The Explainer The oral benefits are watery
By Devika Rao, The Week US Published
-
'It's easier to break something than to build it'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By Justin Klawans, The Week US Published
-
US election: who the billionaires are backing
The Explainer More have endorsed Kamala Harris than Donald Trump, but among the 'ultra-rich' the split is more even
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
US election: where things stand with one week to go
The Explainer Harris' lead in the polls has been narrowing in Trump's favour, but her campaign remains 'cautiously optimistic'
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
Is Trump okay?
Today's Big Question Former president's mental fitness and alleged cognitive decline firmly back in the spotlight after 'bizarre' town hall event
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
The life and times of Kamala Harris
The Explainer The vice-president is narrowly leading the race to become the next US president. How did she get to where she is now?
By The Week UK Published
-
Will 'weirdly civil' VP debate move dial in US election?
Today's Big Question 'Diametrically opposed' candidates showed 'a lot of commonality' on some issues, but offered competing visions for America's future and democracy
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
1 of 6 'Trump Train' drivers liable in Biden bus blockade
Speed Read Only one of the accused was found liable in the case concerning the deliberate slowing of a 2020 Biden campaign bus
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
How could J.D. Vance impact the special relationship?
Today's Big Question Trump's hawkish pick for VP said UK is the first 'truly Islamist country' with a nuclear weapon
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
Biden, Trump urge calm after assassination attempt
Speed Reads A 20-year-old gunman grazed Trump's ear and fatally shot a rally attendee on Saturday
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published