Rise of the Zombie Voters for Clinton

Rise of the Zombie Voters for Clinton

Now that Hillary Clinton is “officially” the Democratic nominee for president, I am expected to get behind her. If not for the sake of “party unity” than because we must do everything within our power to stop Trump from getting into the White House.

Well, I am neither impressed by Clinton’s qualifications or intimidated by a Trump presidency. This usually causes most Democrat’s heads to explode. Suddenly I’m amoral, a closet neo-conservative, a spoiled child having a tantrum (boy, that’s projection if ever I saw it), I’m the good-German, and anti-America. And all usually said in one breath too.

What is hard to miss about these comments though is the state of total fear that they come from. In the minds of most Democrats, Donald Trump is Hitler. A fascist dictator that can only bring death and destruction.

I do understand where they are coming from. I remember thinking exactly the same thing when W Bush was elected. All of the Hitler hallmarks were there. He stole the election and got away with it. The 9-11 attacks were Bush’s Reichstag Fire which aloud him to consolidate his power and to cow any remaining political resistance. He launched an illegal war on fabricated evidence, instituted massive government surveillance programs, used drones to begin randomly killing civilians, started indefinite detention and brutal torture programs. If that’s not the return of Hitler, its pretty darned close.

But there are two vary important points to keep in mind here. First – we are still here. As bad as the Bush administration was, we still didn’t see the words “The end” role across the screen. While damaged and greatly eroded, Democracy has some how managed to survive.

But there were other predictions I remember thinking as being true that never happened. I remember fearing internment camps where Democrats would be rounded up and ultimately killed as part of some perverted ultimate solution. I even saw pictures of alleged death camps being constructed. I remember being quite certain that he would never stand down once his term expired. Those never happened. And as for 9-11, it turns out that it was exactly what Bush said it was. As some one who used to be a Truther, this was a profound, and difficult revelation to deal with.

And point number two, Bush’s legacy remains the new order, even under the Obama Administration. The illegality of the Iraq War still remains to be excised, and if anything, the doctrine of regime change remains is still in place, Obama dramaticly expanded Bush’s drone program and state surveillance. We know that the prisoners of Guantanamo Bay are still there, still awaiting trial, still awaiting charges, and are to simply assume they are no longer tortured or abused because – well its Obama we are talking about here.

If Bush was the American Hitler, than logic demands that Obama must also be Hitler. That’s why I must be sympathetic to Trump here, he isn’t proposing anything that’s really new, and in most cases are already established Washington doctrine.

If Trump is Hitler, than he can only be the third one in a row. But Trump is not Hitler, and the people who are making the accusation that he is are the ones that need to be confronted.

And Clinton is no saint. Recent revelations have brought to light how deep the collusion was between the Clinton campaign, and the DNC which was supposed to be the neutral arbiter of the primary. The election was basicly stolen for Clinton. Clinton can violate the public trust as Secretary of State and not be held accountable. No, she isn’t the next Hitler ether. But that doesn’t mean I have to get in line with some one who is so blatantly corrupt. And it certainly doesn’t mean I am going to sit down and shut-up.

Voting for the Lesser of Two Evils?

Or VLOT for short, is kind of the default argument of many Clinton apologists, both positive (those who are authentically for our first female president) and negative (those who feel they have no choice but to vote for Clinton as the “lesser evil.”) Yes, even the positive apologists will invoke VLOT, or at least they do once they realize you aren’t already in love with her.

The idea seems simple, its your basic cost/benefit analysis that adds up all the positive and negatives. Once you crunch the numbers, Clinton is the “obvious winner”. So obvious it would seem that one need-not bother crunching the numbers.

The problem is that VLOT is disingenuous. As an argument, its not reinvent so long as you have an option. So why were Sanders voters beaten over the head with it even before Iowa, when Clinton was said to be “inevitable” and Sanders was accused of being the next McGovern? And as for that cost/benefit analysis, the tendency is to ignore Clinton’s negatives and Trumps positives. They do actually exist.

Since becoming an Atheist, and learning a lot more about the practice of skepticism, I have already become familiar with VLOT under another form; the creationist/evolution debate (assuming you can call it a “debate”). Creationists try to argue that the theory of evolution is flawed because it doesn’t enplane this, that, or the other thing. If evolution is flawed, then Biblical Creationism must be true – as if it wins by default. To put it another way, Creationists attack evolution, then try to smuggle creationism past they very arguments they used to dismantle evolution.

What Creationist fail to understand is that the argument just doesn’t work this way. You can’t take down an entire theory by finding one flaw. Even if you were able to discredit this, that, and the other thing, all you have done is discredit this, that, and the other thing. The theory of evolution is vast however and is made up of tens of thousands of smaller hypothesis.

But even if I was, for the sake of argument, grant the Creationist argument that evolution as being completely discredited. Creationism still needs to prove itself.

VLOT is the same argument. Even if I were to grant that this, that, and the other claim about Trump as being true (and he is defiantly flawed, no disagreement there), you haven’t discredited the entire person or his platform. But instead of systematical going through his platform and dismantling them one by one, the arguments are increasingly becoming hyperbolic and verbose.

And even if one was to discredit Trump completely, Clinton still has her own case to make if she is to have any chance to win my vote. But this will never happen because the whole point of VLOT is to smuggle Clinton past any scrutiny at all. Any attempt to even discuses her character or polices gets shouted down as closet-Trump support.

The Zombi-Voter Apocalypse

Clinton is NOT a well liked or inspiring candidate. And then there is the DNC rigging of the primary, making it appear she is more popular than she is. Many of her supporters are reluctant, even critical, and yet they will still vote for her under VLOT. In their minds, they see that there isn’t much choice because Trump is so clear worse.

Often they have a “we will fix this later” mentality. Some even say that Clinton should and will face a primary challenger in four years, or that this will all go away once we enact clean election laws. We just have “just survive this election” first.

But this is an intellectual trap. We will always have to “just survive this election.” The Republican candidate will always be worse than the Democrat. And there will always be the need for “party unity.”

So at the end of the day, any skepticism about Clinton, or of Democrats in general, is pointless, little more than intellectual masturbation. These voters will always do the “adult” thing, hold their nose and vote the only viable choice, despite any reservations they may have. They become “zombie-voters”.

What is worse is that the Democratic Leadership has latched onto this as a campaign strategy. Your opinion of Clinton, good or bad, is irreverent, so long as you vote for her. And if negative criticism is irreverent, because voters never walk away, there is neither the incentive or need for the Democratic Party to address these concerns. They can put any policy in front of you and you will vote for it.

It’s a doomed strategy. If the party ignores the concerns of its voters, than the disconnect between the voters and the leadership is never addressed and can only grow. It then becomes an endurance test for the voter. With fewer and fewer voters able to hold their nose with each successive election.

But the real damage is in regards to policy. If the opinions of voters do not mater, than nether do the needs of the voters or the issues they face. Not even for the zombie voters themselves. Regardless of the opinions they hold, the necessity of “party unity” will always trump these concerns. What a perfect recipe to get voters to vote against their own self interest.

A candidate such as Clinton is the result of zombie voting. Time and time again, voters were stampeded into VLOT, always voting against the opposition, and never taking stock of what it was that they were voting for. This aloud corruption to take root in the Democratic Party and spread unchecked. This increases the pain voters have to endure to pull the handle for Democrats. And when the pain becomes too much, Republicans role into office.

Slaying the Zombie-Voter

A cording to Hollywood lore, the only way to stop a zombie is to destroy its head. The Zombie-Voter was created when the head was separated from voting one’s consensus, as well as a fear of the opposition. But perhaps the current solution of “letting Trump win” is not an ideal approach. As I said, I am not intimidated by a Trump presidency, so I can not be made to fear Trump and by extension can not be compelled to vote for Clinton. But that doesn’t mean I don’t have concerns. It just means I am not convinced Clinton is the better option.

This is one of the hopes of the Bernie or Bust movement, that a Trump Presidency will brake the back of the establishment’s control over the Democratic Party, finally allowing real candidates to get through the nomination process. But establishment Democrats have managed to survive two terms of W Bush. I fear they will survive a Trump Presidency as well. They would likely draw the wrong lessens, making it even harder for real candidates to participate in elections.

At some point, the Democratic Party ceases to be a viable party. It then becomes the true Zombie-voter apocalypses.

One counter strategy might be to separate party officials from those elected into office. Thus the leadership of the party is not contingent of LOTE victories. Of course how to carry out such reforms may be another mater.