We all have somebody like her in the family. At first, her offer to host the family at her lavish House seems generous—it’s the perfect venue for that special gathering. Perhaps she’s ready to be the bigger person and get beyond her seething anger. Deep down, we worry that she will end up disrupting the happy occasion with her usual bad political behavior. She awkwardly alternates between forced mirth and bitter anger at “that man” who makes her blood boil.
Why is she so angry with him? Something about betraying his oath, she says. But that’s not it. It’s his success and, worse, that he so frequently can’t be bothered to be bothered by the unrequited venom of people like her.
Previous performances gave us reason to worry she might act up: in the middle of a public address, she would pause to gulp “water” but flinch as it burnt her throat. Audiences would nervously chuckle or flinch at her stammering rants about how “that man” escaped justice. Her anger is real but the words justifying her anger never seem to materialize.
In his big moment, social decorum forces her to make a timid offer of a handshake as he prepares to address the audience gathered in her House. He didn’t refuse her hand. It’s far worse than that. He didn’t notice her. She stewed silently as he thrilled the audience with a rousing speech. Cynical congressmen can be seen dabbing at their tear ducts with their sleeves. The applause inflames her anger white hot. A chant of “four more years,” makes her grind her dentures.
And then it happens. In the final moments while she remains in the frame of view, she stands to commit unspeakable vandalism on an artifact of the Constitution, the 2020 State of the Union Address as delivered to the woman third in line for the presidency. She divides the pages of the written speech into smaller stacks thin enough to tear through. With one rip, she cleaves asunder the president’s praise of Americans leaving behind the despair of unemployment and poverty. Another rip tears through his words promising to defend Americans against terrorists who would harm us. Another rip mars the story of an African American veteran who broke barriers to fly in World War II. Never mind this man. If it helps “that man,” it must be destroyed.
Less than 24 hours later, Americans barely notice the whimpering end of her ill-conceived impeachment project. “That Man” won the vote by 100 to 0. How? I’ll explain. Angry Aunt Nancy urged Americans to reject the trial as illegitimate because there were not enough witnesses to make the trial fair. But 47 Senators disagreed and voted that the House did have adequate opportunity to present and prove its case to the required standard of proof. Each vote of “guilty” was a vote ratifying the fairness of the process. The 52 senators who voted “not-guilty” decided the issue to legal conclusion: acquittal. 47 said it was fair. 52 said it was fair and he was not guilty. That’s 99 Senators who ratified his victory. And Senator Mitt Romney had perfect hair.
There’s a growing sense that the hatred of “that Man” is the only thing holding the tent up. Without all corners straining against that central and uniting tent pole, Democrats unravel and deflate like a circus tent at the end of the Iowa State Fair. “That Man,” is the only reason that billionaires, red socialists, and insider machine Democrats can coexist without turning their fire on each other.
The dirty tricks are beyond not working. They’re backfiring. His popularity rose during impeachment as the Democrats increasingly fume over his success. The next time Democrats try to win an election by criminalizing their political opponent, it will work even less well than it did this time. They’re like singles poisoning a church mixer by bitterly retelling the injustices of their divorce. Democrats can’t help but turn up the anger and vitriol to 11 on a 10 point dial in the vain hope that the voters will comfort them with electoral victory. Increasingly, though, the angry accusations sound like the ravings of a street corner preacher condemning to hell everyone who isn’t just as unhappy as they are.
There’s always an asterisk, according to the losers of so many contests. Justice Thomas had an Anita Hill asterisk. Bush had an asterisk in 2000 when he beat Gore because Democratic operatives were not allowed to continue gaming until the chads aligned. Trump had a Russian interference asterisk. Justice Gorsuch had a Merrick Garland asterisk. Justice Kavanaugh had a Blasey-Ford asterisk. Impeachment had a Bolton asterisk. “Unfair” is any result that does not align to their expectations.
Angry Aunt Nancy’s vandalism of the State of the Union address is confirmation that the rage has exhausted all legitimate outlets. Americans have patiently listened to their complaints. Some were persuaded. But many more have tuned it out for the repetitive farce that it was.