Democracy - the worst form of government

 So I believed the polls.

For two reasons. One, I believed the pollsters were embarrassed by their "failure" in 2016, had analysed their errors, and would have adjusted for their mistakes.

So this time around, they should be better right?

Their polling results were worse.

If they were off in 2016, they were off even more in 2020. Pollsters just couldn't explain or account for Trump.

The other reason I believe the polls was because it was the reasonable and rational thing to do. The fact that I was wrong to believe the polls suggests that 

a) it was not reasonable

b) it was not rational

c) it is not reasonable to believe that people will act reasonably

d) it is not rational to expect people to act rationally

e) it is not reasonable to believe people will act rationally

f) it is not rational to expect people to behave (or vote) reasonably.

Or maybe Democracy is playing a different game with different rules.

Four years ago, I believed the polls and expected Clinton to win comfortably. All the reasonable analyses and simple (or simplistic) observation of Trump and his utterances would suggest that a Trump Presidency would be laughable and disastrous.

But two things. 

One, the Republicans nominated him as their Presidential Candidate in spite of a field of many more experienced nominees. Obviously the Republicans believe he could win.

Two, his populist appeal. Voters love a maverick.

So the part of me that is cynical and leery of democracy, hoped that Trump would actually win. Not because I wanted horrible things to happen to the US (and the world), but because if Trump was elected, it would clearly show that (pure, simple - or simplistic) Democracy is NOT the best way to pick competent leaders.

If you are a North Korean today, you can hardly be blamed for Kim Jong Un being the Supreme Leader (or whatever his official title is). You didn't choose your dictator.

If you voted for Trump...

And here is something to think about: Tens of Millions of American voters VOTED for Trump. In 2020. After 4 years of his Presidency.

One explanation is that Trump's appeal was his anti-liberal position. He stood for conservative values. (Even if he did not model those values.)

I still believe (or Hope, as of this writing, Biden has 253 electoral votes) that Biden will win, and the trickle of news suggests that his chances of winning is getting better with the count, but even if he wins, it is utterly depressing!

After an economic and public health shock, after four years of exhausting drama, after impeachment, Americans have not emphatically rejected either Donald Trump or Trumpism.

Even if he loses the White House to Joe Biden, that will be the central lesson of the US election for a watching world, as much as for one nation’s anxious liberals.

An unfancied president made short work of Florida (the pollsters’ Waterloo) and put paid to rash talk of a blue Texas. At worst, Mr Trump will lose by a respectable margin.

We remain hopeful. Biden hasn't won yet, but the count is in his favour. 

Yes, we try to see the light at the end of the tunnel. We try to look on the bright side. We try to defend what we believe. That Truth will win out. That lies and deceit cannot stand the light of day. We point out Trump's mendacity, and his attempts to subvert and undermine Truth and Democracy and the American Way. And that we will DEFEND Democracy. 

But the fact that it comes down to this, that deciding between a charlatan, a conman, a narcissist, a (to quote Anderson Cooper) "obese turtle on its back flailing in the sun", and a reasonable choice (I like Biden, but he's like a well-meaning Uncle, not someone to get excited about, so "reasonable choice"), and it's NOT a landslide? NOT a "no-brainer"? NOT obvious? NOT open and shut?  

That. Is. Sad.  

In 2016 I BELIEVED Clinton would win. She was the Reasonable, rational choice. Trump had NO chance. According to the polls.  

The Polls were wrong.  

In 2020, the pollsters said they realised their mistake, adjusted for it, and this time their polls would be better. More accurate. Nope. The polls were worse.  

But the polls told me what I wanted to believe. That after 4 years of lies, drama, incompetence, public health mismanagement and an impeachment, the people have had enough. There was "Republican Voters Against Trump". There was the Lincoln Project. There was Meidas Touch. It should have been obvious. The choice should have been obvious. 

This should have been a reasonable, rational, repudiation of Trump and Trumpism.  

Instead it is a testimony to the resilience of Trump and Trumpism. That he and what he represents will not be rejected outright, but will have dignity of a respectable loss. Which he would no doubt parlay into an ignoble, litiguous, drag-him-out-kicking-and-screaming-and-twittering defeat.  

Or the Second American Civil War.  

This drawn-out, edge of the seat, "victory" (if it comes) is also an indictment of Democracy.

The sad sad truth is that even if Biden edges out a win, this POTUS election is an indictment of Democracy as the best way to elect competed leaders. 

If democracy is the best means to elect leaders, then the incompetence of Trump, the corruption, and callousness, and self-aggrandisement should have made his repudiation unquestionable.

But instead, even more people voted for him in the 2020 election.

Yes. You are close to the truth. The problem with democracy is that ultimately, it is a popularity contest. The problem with democracy is that we are asking people to choose, but we leave it to the individual to decide what is the important criterion or basis for choosing. 

So someone might decide to choose based on whether the candidate has experience in government, whether he has a track record for making good decisions, whether he surrounds himself with experts and experienced people and he listens to them, and leavens their advice by listening to the voters, and whether he mediates between expertise, experience, and the lived experience of the people, and makes decision based on facts. 

Another person may choose someone who goes to the same church as them, or espouses the same faith, or share the same fears, or eat the same food, or promises the good ole days when men were men and women love them. 

Democracy lets the people choose. It doesn't teach them how to choose. 

The "mythical, magical" thinking is not mythical or magical. The simple difference is that we are arguing facts with values. Or we expect people to choose based on objective facts. Not personal Values.

Factually, the choice should be simple. It is a fact that Trump has been bad for the US (in international relations), has been bad for public health, has been bad for healthcare, has lied consistently and shamelessly, has been impeached, has been incompetent, and has acted corruptly. 

But his voters support him not for the facts, but for the values he espoused. He gave them Gorsuch, Kavenaugh, and Barrett. 

Facts and Values. Two different worlds.

Actually, that is not true.

In the US, the liberals vote for someone who espouses liberal values, and conservatives vote for those who espouses conservative values.

Then they try to rationalise their choices. 

Actually, that is not true either. 

It happens in any democracy, not just the US. The US is just more polarised then most, and they have institutionalised their respective polarising worldview into Democrats and Republicans.

The point of a Trump Presidency (at least for me) and the point of a narrow defeat of a Trump re-election bid (IF he is indeed defeated) is that in the first place, democracy is a TERRIBLY irresponsible (and unhinged) way of selecting a political leader. Devoid of any other mechanism or structure, democracy is simply a popularity contest, an expression of demagoguery, an appeal to nativism, populism, and tribalism.  

The cycle of democracy is simply swinging from one party to another, one ideology to another, one perspective to another. 

It is thesis-antithesis that never progresses toward synthesis.

Democracy in and of itself, as practised by the US, is no answer to the question, how do we choose competent leaders.

Democracy is a necessary but insufficient condition for selecting a good government.