![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Da Election in 9 months
So we've had a confusing, muddled caucus and a somewhat less confusing, muddled primary, both in overwhelmingly-white, largely-rural states, and it's looking like (in order) Bernie, Buttigieg, Warren, Klobuchar, Biden. I would much prefer to see Warren than Bernie as the standard-bearer for progressivism, but I could vote for any of those. We'll see what happens in Nevada (which has Hispanics) and South Carolina (which has blacks), and then it's Super Tuesday and things will probably settle down. All of these primaries and caucuses would be more informative of voters' actual feelings, of course, if they used ranked balloting so we could tell whom voters find "pretty good too" as well as their first choice, but that's a different rant.
But I'm thinking about the November election. There's been conspiracy-theory talk for a long time about whether Trump will accept the results if he loses, whether he'll go quietly on Inauguration Day if he loses, whether he'll try to run for a third term if he wins, etc. And mostly I've written it off as conspiracy theories. But it occurs to me that Trump's modus operandi, throughout his Presidency and his business career has always been "immunize myself from downside risk, then try something extreme and see if I get away with it; if not, I'm no worse off than if I hadn't tried." (In fact, studies have shown that this is true of most successful entrepreneurs: they're good at taking risks with other people's money, not their own.) So of course he'll dispute the results if he loses the election: why wouldn't he? He has nothing to lose by disputing the results, and a great deal to gain on the long-shot chance that he succeeds. Past Presidents and candidates have made a point of "conceding graciously" as soon as the results were clear, but as far as Trump is concerned, "gracious" and $2.75 will get you on the subway. What matters is whether you win.
But I'm thinking about the November election. There's been conspiracy-theory talk for a long time about whether Trump will accept the results if he loses, whether he'll go quietly on Inauguration Day if he loses, whether he'll try to run for a third term if he wins, etc. And mostly I've written it off as conspiracy theories. But it occurs to me that Trump's modus operandi, throughout his Presidency and his business career has always been "immunize myself from downside risk, then try something extreme and see if I get away with it; if not, I'm no worse off than if I hadn't tried." (In fact, studies have shown that this is true of most successful entrepreneurs: they're good at taking risks with other people's money, not their own.) So of course he'll dispute the results if he loses the election: why wouldn't he? He has nothing to lose by disputing the results, and a great deal to gain on the long-shot chance that he succeeds. Past Presidents and candidates have made a point of "conceding graciously" as soon as the results were clear, but as far as Trump is concerned, "gracious" and $2.75 will get you on the subway. What matters is whether you win.