Flummoxed by voters

Stringer Wireman interviews failed congressional candidate Vain Whipsmart.

Wireman: Thank you for doing this interview, Vain.

Whipsmart: First of all, please address me as “sir” or “doctor.” My background and credentials demand it.

Wireman: All right, “sir.” My apologies. To begin with, our readers would like to know why you think you lost the last election?

Whipsmart: As you probably know, most people in this state are morons. They have no clue about today’s national issues. If they vote at all, they simply look at a specific political party and press the button. If Joseph Stalin were alive today, no doubt these fools would vote for him!

Wireman: But you lost by more than 3 to 1. Can you really blame it all on uninformed voters?

Whipsmart: Look at my background: I have a masters degree in political science and a Ph.D. in economics. I’ve taught at some of our best universities and have been an advisor to three presidents. I’ve published over 10 textbooks. My opponent barely finished high school — and you’re trying to tell me he won by being the best qualified?

Wireman: Why did you leave your university positions?

Whipsmart: Have you been to a college campus lately? Have you seen the idiots they call “professors” nowadays?” Most don’t have the English skills to write a proper research paper — let alone teach uninformed dunderheads.

Wireman: Are there any other reasons that may have caused you to lose?

Whipsmart: I don’t kiss anybody’s derriere.

To be successful in this business, one has to play the game. You’ve got to raise money and bootlick some of the most horrible people in the universe.

But that’s not me. People should have realized I was the best qualified. During the debates, I wiped the floor with my slow-witted rival. Yet no one seemed to care.

Wireman: Most in the press supported your opponent. Can you explain why?

Whipsmart: Sure. Let’s face it. Most people in your so-called profession are imbeciles. They have some of the lowest SAT scores, make less than a fast food server and couldn’t earn a Ph.D. if their mother was Felicity Huffman. I wouldn’t expect anything else.

Wireman: Well, that’s a rather derogatory opinion, but moving right along. When you talked to voters, what kinds of concerns did they express?

Whipsmart: “Concerns?” Are you kidding? The majority of these fools only care about what some slick politician is going to give them for “free"… free college, free healthcare, free childcare, free maternity leave… I could go on and on.

They’re too dumb to realize it’s going to be they who pay in the end. They are stupid enough to believe what my opponent tells them: “Tax the rich” — as if the people paying for his campaign are going to let that happen. Ha!

Wireman: I think I’m beginning to see why you lost. You’re obviously a smart guy, but you sound cynical, cold and defensive. I don’t think people out there can relate to you.

Whipsmart: What am I suppose to do? You expect me to stoop to their level by promising stuff that will never be delivered, shaking their virus-covered hands and kissing fatherless babies mooching off welfare?

Wireman: I don’t think people really care how smart you are until they know how much you care about them. Whipsmart: (silence) Wireman: Do you really think you can gain the support of others by making them feel inferior and stupid?

Whipsmart: (Pause) You know, I really don’t care what they think, nor do I see any point in continuing this ridiculous interview.

Wireman: Well, thanks for your time, sir. It’s been informative — to say the least.

Whipsmart: You know Wireman … I am right: You really are a pathetic loser!