“Double haters”—voters who dislike both Biden and Trump—will decide the election.
Love the Hate, Hate the Haters
Ted Rall
Ted Rall is a syndicated political cartoonist for Andrews McMeel Syndication and WhoWhatWhy.org and Counterpoint. He is a contributor to Centerclip and co-host of "The Final Countdown" talk show on Radio Sputnik. He is a graphic novelist and author of many books of art and prose, and an occasional war correspondent. He is, recently, the author of the graphic novel "2024: Revisited."
2 Comments. Leave new
Double haters … in the Swing States.
I guess people finally got tired of being members of the “Holy Your Nose” Party. The choices literally became too horrible. Still, if I had to choose, I think, after a long time, I’d pick Trump.
Unlike Biden, Trump isn’t senile. Trump’s word salad? It isn’t that he can’t remember what to say. It’s that he never PREPARED anything to say in the first place. He’s the fifth grader who didn’t even crack open “Gulliver’s Travels,” trying to vamp his way through three minutes of an oral presentation. Why doesn’t he prepare? Because his base doesn’t want to be lied to with massaged stats. It isn’t that Trump is all that concerned about getting “the truth” to them. He just understands the key here: Give the voter what they want. But work at it? Screw those people. They’re all losers. Why make the effort to take in gigaquads of data when they’ll cheer just as loudly for the 30 seconds of prep that he does while he’s on the toilet reading his phone.
Also, with Trump in office, it’s just possible that the democratic party will implode. Perhaps Gen X could finally come to power on a “Look. You never gave us a turn, and look how absolutely shitty it turned out. So let us do what we’ve done our entire lives: handle the goddamned mess other people either left or couldn’t figure out how to clean up.”
“Hater”: an example of an efficient, short-hand end-product of the devolution of the idea of “America” … from a government of guaranteed & protected free speech … to a collection of various, hysterical, totalitarian mechanisms to quash anything remotely resembling UN-permitted speech … AND the even more “threatening,” the thoughts that give rise to such dangerous speech as, for example, “bipartisan enabling, cultivation and provocation of a) imperial piracy
b) unabashed public genocide and c) total nuclear annihilation is simply NOT in my best interest.”