Next month Americans will elect a new president. On the foreign front, Ukraine’s at war with a major nuclear power, Israel is reducing Gaza to rubble, and the South China Sea remains a “flash point.”. Domestically, homelessness is up, as are prices and immigration—the only thing that hasn’t gone up over the last 50 years is real wages. But that’s all just business as usual in human affairs. What really matters is that brands on the internet are sharply divided and leading their simps and paypigs in barbs-trading which could ignite into a full-fledged online civil war between Team Red and Team Blue at any moment. Goon hands and phone hands are taxed beyond their normal operating parameters, and social media addicts aren’t just “so tired right now,” to use a stock phrase from the online realm, they’re absolutely exhausted. As such, the upcoming election is the single most important event in American history. Americans need bold, courageous leaders who will make tough choices, but since they’re not going to get that, they might as well get a few good laughs. The question is—who will provide the greatest entertainment prospects over the next four years, Trump, or “Dancing Queen” Harris?
During Trump’s first campaign, revelations of his “pussy grabbing” played prominently online, as did his comments about immigrants crossing the Southern border illegally and allegedly murdering untold numbers of citizens. He made promises to build a wall that never came to fruition, and to re-establish a once massive manufacturing sector which provided “wages of decent living” laying the foundation for materially robust families and communities. Instead it was a standard Republican administration of tax cuts, deregulation, and tariffs. The real entertainment value didn’t come from Trump himself (though, to be sure, he did provide some great laughs with his characteristically gesticulating reaction to the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg), but from his adversaries. Who can forget those timeless performances like screaming woman? And recall the summer of 2020 when towns and cities all over the land were burned and looted. My favorite from this updated Summer of Love was the cheesecake woman, in which a young woman stole a cheesecake from a shop in Seattle amidst rioting. The cheesecake incident itself was fun to watch, but the real pleasure came in the discussion around the event. Was she a common thief exploiting strained circumstances for her own selfish ends, or a fearless liberator fighting fascism and launching the first salvo in a new human rights campaign to guarantee cheesecake for everyone?
Should Trump win a second term, abortion access will play prominently in online discourse. Democrats are fearful it’ll result in a federal ban, despite Trump’s repeated assertions that he wants to leave the matter to the states. The show will feature Team Blue “shouting their abortions,” angering and irritating Team Red, and will continue to do so in front of clinics where those procedures are performed. The show won’t include the thoughts and opinions of the vast majority of Americans, who lean towards keeping the practice legal, but hold nuanced opinions on the issue. Since the show thrives on outrage it’s unlikely that civil discussion will find a place. Who wants to foster civil engagement when you can get digital blood and guts on demand? Given the history of previous programming, the possibilities for novel entertainment will fall short, and few, if any, laughs will be had about abortion.
War will also play prominently if Trump wins. If he stops providing aid to Ukraine and works for peace in the region, this could anger the leftist online hive, and unleash the greatest conflagration the digital world has ever seen. It might also prevent a nuclear holocaust in the real world, but at great cost. The American online left, just like all other groups of sufficiently motivated people, will show the world they’re as capable of blood lust as the armies of Genghis Khan. The only thing more remarkable than what the content consumer will witness should Trump manage to move the clock back from midnight has already come to pass—the instantaneous, unquestioning consensus among this cohort of support for funding the war. Only social media has the power to turn off critical thought (or, just normal, everyday rube-thought) of the sort that advises caution in supporting a regime whose enemy has a stockpile of nuclear weapons on a hair trigger.
Let’s move on to Kamala, who hasn’t had as much time as Trump to establish herself as a worthwhile entertainer, but nonetheless offers opportunities given her creepy laughter and bad dancing. She equals Trump in her inability to answer simple questions, and instead engages in marketing-drivel. She also enjoys talking with children, and addressing adults like children. One wonders why the Democrats don’t cut her out completely and run Elizabeth Gilbert of Eat, Pray, Love fame for the presidency—might as well go straight to the source. That’s all we have to go on given her vague policy proposals. The laughter, dancing, vague responses, and child-speak do provide decent entertainment value in exchange for attention units, but will it be enough for a four-year stint in the White House?
Real gold will be mined by the people online who hate her—the online right hive. Their reaction to her has given a glimpse of the entertainment we might expect should she win in November. But how will they react as she continues to express herself in dance? Will the child-speak evolve to harvest more of those of precious attention units? Could her vocal expressions regress to an infant-babble? Will she provoke Russia into a nuclear conflict that kills us all? Will her living, laughing, and loving precipitate a mass suicide event? Unless drastic measures are taken, the next four years won’t provide any new or particularly funny entertainment in the political arena.