The "they" (Patreon)

Whenever an event of political significance occurs, pundits spring forth. They are there, afterall, to help us make sense of what just happened. Or rather we are there to help you make sense. Because through my various media engagements I consider myself as having pun-did.

I can recall vividly doing Newshub Nation. And John Key had done a pre-recorded interview with Lisa Owen. Following the interview we three chucklefucks who made up that days panel wandered the short walk from the fruit platter in the green room to the buzzing neon of the studio.

We all sat round the table. People fiddled with our microphones. I tried to sit in a way that looked engaged but like I should be there. Maybe tuck my shirt in a bit more if one of my stomachs was in portrait mode for the camera. And as we leant forward to spouse our take on the very banal interview that had aired 4 minutes ago it dawned on me that I was adding nothing. I possessed no special insight that could help the viewers, who had watched the interview now 5 minutes before, make relevant whatever soundbites Key had said. I didn't suddenly draw Key's malapropisms and blue sky thinking down to the people of suburbia, of Ruatoria, of Queenstown, of anywhere. I was adding content.

And of course it was all content about how people would react to it. And that's what we pundidded. Oh this event happened, and we expect that the people of New Zealand would react in this particular way. But who are we pundits, if not the they? Why do we divorce ourselves of the voters and project a different reaction as though we are elevated and different? The they are below us. The they will have watched Key speak, and they will be confused because the they is not us. We work in politics. We know the real meaning and thus we know how the they will react. Listen to us, they, for we are the magi of political discourse. And other pundits? Why your framing of Key's interview is now done by us. You will write column inches that will also tell how the they will react. And your theys may be different to my theys, but deep down, we all know they must be told how to react. We are the people in cars, complaining in concert of the traffic jam.

And so it is that the attempted assassination of Trump has brought forth the mecca of pundidding. So many people of pundit classes, telling everyone how the they will react.

Most seem to think the they will rally behind Trump. That the image of him, fist aloft, Star Spangled Banner fluttering as though posed for a moon landing behind him, bloodied ear like a Trojan Hero, will give people the strong man they crave.

And I mean sure. It might. But it also might scare the hell out of a lot of theys. I know it scares me. And when I'm scared do I want a leader who promotes scary words? Maybe I want the kindness and gentleness of the softly spoken other guy. Who is neither kind, nor gentle, but is in comparison.

Maybe it doesn't actually make a difference. That my views of the candidates are baked in. Or maybe I don't care. Is Trump being shot at good? No. Does it help me with affording food, or my job, or putting shoes on my kids feet? Also no.

So much of politics is how things feel to pundits who tell they how they'll interpret it. And so much faith has been lost in our political systems. Because politics is no longer of the people, but of the vibes. Trust me. I know.