US Election and Media: Chaos and Comedy

There is a lot at stake in the U.S. election campaign — including entertainment. It’s becoming more important every year, and more trivial.

The American election lasts an agonizingly long time, and there is a lot at stake. The issues are very serious and the fears are great. Perhaps this is precisely why the election campaign keeps presenting itself as pure entertainment, a great mix of comedy show, sitcom and rap battles:

■ “Childless Cat Lady” Taylor Swift versus “I hate Taylor Swift” Donald Trump.

■ Elon Musk, who wants to give Swift a child to keep her quiet.

■ JD Vance, embarrassing himself while picking out donuts.

■ Tim Walz, who finds both Trump and Vance to be “weird,” and since last week has been reminding everyone at every opportunity that he also has a cat, just like Swift.

■ Kamala Harris, whose expressions during the TV debate went just as viral as when Trump said, “They’re eating the dogs, the people that came in, they’re eating the cats. They’re eating, they’re eating the pets of the people that live there.”

■ Joe Biden, forgotten by the world, who will remain in the White House for a few months.

■ Dozens of partisan experts on all the TV networks and the opinion pages of the leading media, who act as loudspeakers and spin doctors for both sides, and dictate the talking points.

And then the cohorts of late-night TV hosts, who every night exaggerate the absurdities of the day in order to make their audiences laugh despite all the despair. It’s no wonder that many Americans get all their information almost exclusively from this last group.

Yes, election campaigns in the U.S. have always been personal. This is part of the electoral system, and not just in the battle for the White House. And so there has always been more talk, ranting, anger and laughter about personalities in America than here in Germany. Nevertheless, the impression remains that every four years it gets sillier and a little more trivial.

The big question is what helps Kamala Harris the most? Support from pop icon Taylor Swift or from the approximately 230 former Republican government employees who see Trump as a huge threat?

The interesting thing is that they are almost the only ones who still change sides in a political public and society that’s firmly entrenched in camps, yet also make it public. Trump and his MAGA Republicans began to immunize their supporters against criticism several years ago: Anyone who talks back or even supports the “left-wing radical” Harris is a Republican in Name Only.

Immunity against outside influence or against counterarguments is also the main attraction of political comedy, which lies firmly in liberal hands. Only Jon Stewart, who returned to the “Daily Show” for a few months for this election cycle, stepped out of the general spin months ago, when he pointed out the age problem of then candidate Joe Biden — which earned him a wildly controversial response at the time.

In reality, almost no one will change their opinion because Swift or Musk says something; however, both of them are spreading an ideological message — for Musk, a misogynistic message; for Swift, a feminist message. In doing so, they reinforce their point of view in each of their communities. Just like Sean Hannity on Fox News or the far more intellectual and witty Stephen Colbert on the “Late Show” on CBS. Come together, America? Nope, not with those idiots over there.

None of this has anything to do with actual governmental responsibility, which is what’s actually being fought for. But it has everything to do with political representation in the 21st century. If democracy is no longer capable of balancing different interests in a reasonably honest way, then it becomes vulnerable. And that is no longer funny.