Did My Novel Forsee An Election Threesome?

My junior year in college ('03) I started writing a novel. The story took part in the near future, when a high profile terrorist attack becomes a harbinger of political revolution and a second civil war. The attack occurs in an election year, and a right wing nationalist candidate rises in the Republican Party. Running against him is an ineffectual, uninspiring Democrat, and a surprisingly charismatic third Party Independent candidate whose support is growing by the day.

In the novel, the election season proceeds deep into the summer, and the Democratic candidate and third party candidate run neck and neck, while near 40% of the electorate remains solidly behind a Republican candidate whose incendiary speeches against Muslims are attracting his own fanatical followers. The Democrats try to get the Independent candidate to back down and unite--but it's no longer clear that scenario will bring out a majority. In late October, the Independent candidate appears to have a distinct lead over the Democrat. 

Another attack just a week before Election Day swings the electorate. Now the nationalist candidate is polling at 51% nationwide. The Democratic candidate and Independent candidate need to join forces but it may already be too late.

I don't want to tell you what happens next in the novel--you'll have to buy it circa 2017-- but needless to say, what happens next is a disaster.

It's strange how this election season has shaped up to (somewhat) match my vision. In my novel, the Republican candidate is a far more lucid and intelligent man than Trump is. In fact, what makes him most dangerous is how he deftly weaves a kind of logic into his speeches--in the grand tradition of eugenics--he's a slick but deeply principled salesman of hate. Imagine Trump wasn't some blubbering haircut in a suit but instead a convincing and calculating presence.

In my novel, the Independent candidate is young, in his early 40s, a first term governor for the state of New Jersey (hey, I got the Northeast part right). He's a centrist, an ex-Republican. He doesn't preach about the evils of Wall Street but he does preach a message of equality. In a stirring speech at the convention, he paints a portrait of human beings as responsible for advancing life throughout the universe, and making sure all souls have a valued role to play among the stars. "We live on a tiny rock hurtling through the vacuum of space, spinning 'round a burning ball of angry fire, while asteroids and meteors and cosmic rays, earthquakes, tornadoes and all manner of natural disasters conspire to kill us, and yet--the thing we fear most is each other?" His campaign motto--I swear, this was really it--is, "America Can Be America Again."

In my novel, the Democratic candidate is just a dull old white guy.

There are enough similarities between my (yet to be completed) manuscript and this election season for me to wonder. Maybe Bernie... gasp... doesn't drop out. The way the Independent candidate in my novel didn't drop out. Maybe this goes three ways down to the wire. Maybe at a certain point, between now and election day, it's Hillary who clearly has less poll support. What does she do?

Hillary supporters deride Bernie supporters as delusional, guns in their own mouths, sore losers who will split the party and help elect a egotistical madman. But what if, in late October, the numbers are reversed? As statistician Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight points out (in an article about Donald Trump's "unstoppable momentum") the fact is that many voters, "wait long enough to be reasonably sure they are picking a winner," and Hillary has not yet reached the point (a sort of golden ratio) where her election is inevitable. What if Bernie's appeal could be sharpened between now and November--not just as some TARP sour grapes and Occupy Wall Street word salad--but as a unifying human rights message with real power to change the world?

Well, then, wouldn't us "establishment" Democrats--the reasonable ones, as we've told ourselves--need to switch our support to Bernie? If he managed to somehow swing more than just his Bros and Bernettes, and most importantly, grabbed support from dissatisfied Republicans (a scenario that might only be possible for the centrist candidate in my novel)-- then wouldn't we have to bite the bullet too?

Somebody does, before it's too late.

Counter Strike


The Real Cause Of The Writer's Strike: Refusal To Work On Crap Like Cavemen

With no end to the Writers Guild strike in sight, one has to wonder: what do the studios have up there sleeve? Production has already been shut down on many, if not all, of the shows slated for the 2008 season. This week, the studios fired the writers they had on hand, throwing even next year's television slate into jeporady. Thanks to the writers' strike, Lost, Season 4 will only be 8 episodes long, meaning that the answer to the four-toed statue mystery will not be coming anytime soon.

The writers, and just about everyone else, figured the studios would have blinked by now. But the fact that they haven't indicates--at least to me--that the studios have a plan to weather the storm.

This worries me, as a member of the tv-watching public, and it should worry you. Because if you watched that pathetic Golden Globes, it's obvious that without writers (and the actors that support them), all we're left with is Billy Bush and another season of "Battle of the Choirs."

While I back the writers in this fight, I have no desire for TV to become a wasteland of half-baked reality tv and crappy game shows. So I've compiled a list of five ways networks can continue to put out programming that the viewing public can enjoy:

1. Re-run Cancelled Classics. Sometimes, awesome shows met their ends wayyy too soon. CBS's Jericho, for example, about a small town that survives in a post-nuclear-attack America (which was brought back for a second season after pssionate fan demand). Or Fox's Firefly, about a ragtag bunch of space travelers in a wild-west galaxy. No one saw these shows because the networks were glutted with high quality fare like "Celebrity Boxing," "Who Wants To Marry a Millionaire," and "Baby Bob." Now is the time to bring them back for a second run. A dedicated cult following will watch the shows, and they'll appear brand new to those who haven't seen them before (and that's most people). Better yet, the shows may undergo a "Family Guy"-style rebirth, with renewed interest sparking DVD sales and increasing demand for new episodes.

I'm not the only one with this idea. Alan Sepinwall, tv critic, is featuring the cancelled tv show "Cupid" on his blog, as part of his "Strike Survival Club." How long until the networks follow suit?

(also, what about a show featuring failed pilots (like "Heat Vision and Jack"?? Wouldn't it be interesting to see what the network execs passed on?? They're already in the can, and could be either great or unintentionally humorous.)

2. Feature High-Quality Online Hits. Notice the words "High Quality." I'm not talking YouTube sensations like that crying "Leave Britney alone" guy/girl and the infamous dancing baby. I'm talking about drawing from a pool of millions of shows that are only currenly available online. These include animated cartoons, comedy sketches, and fully-produced live action sitcoms. Check out programs like Jonah Ray's Freeloader's Guide To Easy Living. You're telling me a show like this couldn't fly on Fox? While many online shows have their dedicated followings, none enjoy the type of viewership that comes with having a program on network television. Nearly all would jump at the chance to take their show, and their production values, to the next level.

3. Go back to season one. Lost is a brilliant show, but if you haven't seen the first season, you probably don't know what the hell is going on. Same thing with Prison Break. And 24. While the first seasons of these shows were all huge hits, it's likely that millions missed them. Now's the chance to get those viewers caught up.

The first season of a series is usually the best, because everything has been planned out and fully conceived by the time the season starts. The writers and producers had a long time to imagine and construct a great plot, and most likely, had a signifigantly higher budget than they would have in the following years. By re-running these first seasons, networks can attract new viewers who will watch the shows when they come back on, and remind current followers of the show just what greatness these shows are capable of.

4. Go British!! Ok, so no one cares about the Golden Globes. That's pretty apparent from the bulk of the comments people made after this week's "ceremony." "Best Golden Globes ever!" some people shouted. But what happens when the Grammys get cancelled? And the Emmys? And (gasp) the Oscars??

Enter the BAFTAS.

That's right. The British Academy of Film and Television Awards. All the fun of the Oscars... plus british accents! Half the celebrities on tv and in movies now are British anyway. And Americans have been copying British sitcoms (like The Office) for a while now. So lets go back to the motherland and mine their shores for entertainment.

5. Hire me. I am not a member of the WGA. I will work for peanuts. And I am very talented. Hire me and a couple of non-union actors and actresses, and we'll put together a show that will be at least as funny as ABC's Cavemen.

With all these options available, the writer's strike doesn't need to be the end of television. But let's hope this thing gets settled soon, because there's only so much the American public can take of reruns.

And I need to know the story behind that damn four-toed statue.

Young Playwrights Festival



Way back in high school, before youthful idealism and creativity gave way to malaise and cynicism, I wrote a play. It was about a vampire who worked at a convenience store and lived in a closet. It was called "I Am A Closet Vampire," and I entered it into the New Jersey Young Playwrights Competition. The judges recognized brilliance when they saw it. I was a winner.

The best part was the prize-- a staged reading of my play by professional actors. The actors chosen to perform my play told me they liked it so much that they memorized it; so it was less of a staged reading and more of a real staged play. It was incredible to see something I wrote come alive. People laughed at all the right parts. It was pretty close to how I had envisioned it. The one difference actually ended up being beneficial-- one of the actresses was missing on the day of the performance, so one actor took on two parts-- both husband and wife, both cops. This made for a wonderfully schizophrenic character that I never would have come up with on my own.

This year's Young Playwright's Festival concludes today. But I suggest you check it out next year. Go to the Playwrights Theater website for more information.