Saturday, February 24, 2024

A Brief Introduction

This is going to sound weird,
but Greg was never really
my friend.

Greg was someone I knew,
who was in the next class up,
who was a fellow actor
in school productions,
and that's the brief summary
of what he really was,
in the grand scheme of things,
in relation to my life.

But more than that,
he ended up meaning
a great deal
to me,
and I will never let the name,
Greg,
Greg Lefler,
be forgotten,
if I have anything
to say about it,
which of course I do,
which is why
I'm writing about him,
again,
and will continue to do so
for as long as I have means
to do so.

The Popular Vote

So the popular vote
is what you get
when you go
to a polling station
or mail in your ballot
or fill it in early
at city hall,
the one that counts
every vote,
that shows exactly how popular
a candidate is,
and when a candidate
is a truly overwhelming favorite
I think no one worries
except the other party,
which redoubles its efforts later
to make sure that can't possibly 
happen again,
at least not next time.

The only time we elected someone
four times, we let that guy
actually die in office
we were so incapable
of imagining anyone else
(not that other presidents
didn't die, besides by assassination
while serving).

Somehow no one has ever really
been too popular
for the good of the nation
to move on
and find someone else.

Which is the point.

So that's another reason
to stop worrying
so much
about the one of two ways
we determine
who has the mandate,
because in the final analysis
it's always the American people,
which is the whole point.

Jerrymandering

Of course you've got to acknowledge
jerrymandering,
in which politicians
redefine
the lines
in which they're coloring,
just trying to find
some small advantage,
but unless people
are actually moving,
choosing where to live,
based on the results,
I mean,
who's really worried
so much as someone
who thinks such petty maneuvering
changes anything
but the goalposts
in a game with enough time
for the Patriots
in their best form
to pull of a victory
in the very jaws
of defeat.

It's just another stupid political tool;
if you can't work your way around that
you already lost.

Political Parties, VII

And,
most of all,
quit thinking
of elected officials
as the elite
even if they
invariably
are drawn from them,
maybe just imagine
them as Jimmy Stewart's Mr. Smith,
headed to Washington,
naive enough
to think they can get something done
because most of them
really do start off that way
and it's only the relentless pressure
that changes them
into something else,
a soundbyte
that existed
long before social media
where everyone else
could parrot the same lines,
with different thoughts
behind them,
a vicious cycle
and circle
that eats itself
like an ouroboros,
a snake in the grass
that needs tending,
the blood of patriots
(now probably metaphorical). 

Political Parties, VI

I've been registered
as an independent
for as long
as I've been a voter.

It's kind of a tradition
up in Maine
where I grew up.

Jesse Ventura
grabbed all the headlines
in his buckskin
and memories
of when he was
"The Body"
over in Minnesota
but in Maine
we had Angus King
who went from Augusta
to the Senate
and that was all a kind of affirmation
for someone
who still believes
there can be
a middle ground
in the battlelines
of politics
in the United States.

I'm not saying
it's a solution
for everyone
but I'm kind of tired
of the overpolarization
of society,
of the inability
to imagine
reaching across the aisle
much less 
just trying
to be a civil servant
and getting things done
every once in a while.

Political Parties, V

Third parties
haven't existed
in any real sense
since the two party system
was codified
in the wake
of the Civil War.

And this is
a kind of shame.

Anytime
someone has tried,
and here I think
of Teddy Roosevelt's Bull Moose,
the Green Party,
all the many small parties
that crowd out
the instant also-rans
every election ballot,
even Ross Perot,
whatever he was,
they forget
how hard it is
to compete
with the two conventions
that get all the coverage
the summer before
we vote.

To be effective,
I think,
you've got to participate
in both these things,
even if they can't vote for you,
you've got to appeal
to both parties
and to neither.

You've got to pretend
you really want
to find some way
to unite
the United States.

Crazy, I know.

Political Parties, IV

Now,
I have to explain
once again
that I don't hate
all Democrats
or the party itself
mostly because
the last time
I talked about them
in poems
someone took it
really really really
badly,
not just because
I called them Demagogs
but maybe?

To me the Democrats
aren't Jefferson
or Jackson
or Clevend,
Wilson, Carter,
Clinton, Obama, Biden
or even FDR,
but JFK,
whom I still like to idealize
as one of the greatest Americans
who ever lived,
whose ambitions for the country
were greater in public
than they were in private,
whose rhetoric truly soared
and is still unequalled
except maybe by Lincoln,
who was assassinated
at about a thousand days
and whose work
was completed by Johnson,
who would never have dreamed
of a great society
if not for that day
in Dallas,
who suffered
through the darkest days
of the Cold War
and brilliantly navigated
through tragedy and triumph
as no other president had before
or since,
and we all still live
in his shadow
and can't agree
how he was killed
mostly because
we remain
in shock
that it ended
so suddenly,
and so can't honestly contend
with his legacy.

That's the Democrats
to me,
what they've been so obviously chasing
ever since,
not just Clinton
but Carter before him,
Obama, 
the true myths 
of Camelot
held up by a stiff backboard
and a winning smile
and a brother
who could also
have been great,
helped him be great
and suffered the same fate
for it.

Political Parties, III

The Republicans
are called
the Grand Old Party
mostly because,
as far as I can tell,
due to their origins
under Lincoln
and the winning
of the Civil War,
although being in control
more or less
until Wilson
and the early 20th century,
tended to lump their achievements
under the dubious results
of Reconstruction,
in which politics
got in the way
of achieving things
as much as humanly possible
although you will seldom 
hear it described that way,
and more the litany
of Republican presidents
up to and including Grant
who couldn't get better results,
including the first impeachment,
Johnson, probably mostly because
he was going to try lenience,
which by the way
was also what Lincoln wanted,
but Johnson was in office
and someone had to make a point
and it kept getting made
and it's still being made
today,
and so Republicans
are now known
as the backward people
rather than literally the ones
who fought to make
today's America
possible
despite massive opposition
and not just from the Confederacy.

People forget
that the Democrats existed
in those days,
despising and working against
Lincoln all the way through,
that his election
was mostly because
the Democrats
couldn't find someone
they all agreed on,
but they certainly agreed
to oppose him
in the North as well as in the South,
and today we believe
thanks to Civil Rights
which became a legacy of JFK
that finally almost 
sort of actually happened,
because a few Democrats
became Republicans
during this time
it was believed
that all Republicans
somehow completely swapped places
with all Democrats,
who became the party
of the disenfranchised
so long as they could
get their votes
and keep them messed up
at the same time,
a proud tradition
that continues
to this day!

Political Parties, II

So incredibly,
Americans didn't always have
Democrats and Republicans.

We used to have the Whigs.
The Whigs!

I'm not politically savvy enough
with the history
to give you a lesson
about the roots
of all the parties
named and unnamed,
ahtough certainly
there were obvious allegiances,
divides,
all the way back to the beginning,
and I'm not just talking
Virginians
and everyone else,
or Bostonians,
who led the revolutionary charge
and were thus
the actual first party
in the country
(I heard they had tea!),
much less explain
what exactly
the Whigs
built themselves
around,
so this is just
an introduction.

How do you do?

Political Parties, I

Hey,
so why're they called parties?

No one seems to have any fun
at them.

It Doesn't Count If It Only Counts When You Win

I tend to be distrustful
of a party
when it complains about something
only when it doesn't win,
when it counts on its base
to trot out the same stupid argument
and the same need to explain
the same thing that has existed
for what is now
hundreds of years.

A Brief Explanation of the Real Origins

The genius
of American politics
that has proven
so difficult
to duplicate
let alone
comprehend
is the chaos
that is at its heart,
the chaos that is contained
in three branches
of government,
the concept
of checks and balances
that has so far
utterly failed
to actually produce
the kind of chaos
you will find
in the histories
of most other nations,
and here I'm including
the Civil War,
in which Lincoln's election
literally split off a piece
of the country
for a few years,
and most people
North and South
despised him
and yet he pushed on
and the North still fought
and ended up reconciling
even if we still seem
to be reassembling the pieces
some hundred and fifty years
later.

Now,
we have to start farther back,
of course,
in the aftermath
of another war,
in which thirteen colonies
which had banded together
on the battlefield
found themselves tasked
with finding some happy medium
in a single government
between them.

This was not a tidy
or swift
process,
no, not at all,
and even when Washington
took the lead
one more time
there was actual rebellion
that just continued
to happen.

The delegates charged
with coming up with a country
could hardly agree
on anything,
and even when they did
they had to come up with
a series of amendments,
a term so common now
we take it for granted,
and the reason for all this
was because the "united states"
still thought of themselves
as separate and each wanted
to be taken seriously,
not just the ones
with the loudest voices
but, well, all of them.

So they took the popular vote,
the one that counted all of them,
and supplemented that
with the Electoral College,
 a weighted, mathematical solution,
and declared this one,
where all voices could truly be heard
and said this was how
presidents would win office.

The term
"tyranny of the majority"
is what keeps getting bandied about
to explain the concept,
and yet it never seems
to get the job done,
because mob rule
always tries to legitimize itself
even when it inevitably
succumbs
to the rule of the few,
which is what representation,
which even when it never seems
to represent anything
but bickering,
means,
which is kind of
the whole point
of the United States,
and therefore
that pesky Electoral College.

Fake History

these days it's popular
to complain about people
spreading fake news
but i'm sorry to report
that this has been happening
probably for as long
as people had spoken language
and probably even before that
so to complain about it now
is a little disingenuous
but the real problem
is people being led to believe
fake history
not just edited history
but outright fake history
such as explaining
the real origins
of the Electoral College
were specifically
to codify
the institution of slavery
so that black people
could be counted
but not included
in the vote
which i cannot even begin
to comprehend
as a rational explanation
because of course
it's the complete opposite
of what the Electoral College
actually does
and this is not to complain
that there are people 
who actually believe this
or to judge them for it
but to illustrate
how easy it is
to let fake history
permeate
and even encourage it
so that you can get
the election results
you want
or at least hope you can
use it as a continual
bargaining tool
rather than
actually trying
to do the things
you say you will
when all you really want
is to win an election
with or without
the Electoral College