Strangest. Election. Ever. Or how choosing a president sank from civics to reality TV

At this point in the presidential campaign, the people covering it are running out of adjectives to describe it. “Extraordinary,” “bizarre” and “unprecedented” have been deployed so often they’ve lost their impact. As this crazy train screeches toward its final destination, with a nation hanging on for dear life, here’s a look back at some of the sights along the way.

About The Author

Ron French

Ron French is Bridge senior writer, based in Lansing. He can be reached at

Comment Form

Add new comment

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.


Tue, 10/25/2016 - 2:55pm
Trump is mentally ill and needs professional help.
Laura Carter Callow
Tue, 10/25/2016 - 4:30pm
There is an old adage: "He who the God's would destroy, first make mad." I think that is what is happening to Trump
Tue, 10/25/2016 - 2:56pm
Thanks for the laughs. We'll never( please God) see another presidential campaign like this one.
Tue, 10/25/2016 - 3:16pm
Ahhhhh, Hellary, the best bought election, from the primaries to the finish.
Rich Andrews
Tue, 10/25/2016 - 7:30pm
I concur: Trump is mentally ill and needs professional help.
Tue, 10/25/2016 - 11:22pm
I can't understand why Mr. French claims this election is so bizarre. Who decides what is reported on, is it the voters or the media editors? I wonder which one of those clips/articles Mr. French highlighted was selected by voters and which by editors. Bridge gives it own data point, Mr. Power doesn't even have a position article on campaign spending. As best I can tell this election is just what the media wants. They seem to want to avoid the issues; they want to avoid the reason the DC hasn't delivered, they don't want to report on the results government programs have or haven't delivered, they don't want to talk about past campaign promises, they don't even what to talk about campaign spending [since Hillary is out spending Trump and the GOP, and no Koch brothers to claim are buying votes], they surely don't want to report on cyber security, so it seems the best way to avoid all of that is to make this about personality. One candidate has a larger than life personality and the other has one we can't see since she is kept out of public access [how many news conferences?], so they use the bigger personality to fill their 'pages'. There is nothing bizarre about this election season, it is what the media wants [they learned from cable TV, fill the space on the cheap?] so this is what we get.
Michigan Observer
Sun, 10/30/2016 - 5:30pm
Duane fails to understand that the media is just supplying what the voters want.
Sun, 10/30/2016 - 8:59pm
Observer, How can you be so sure? If the the media needs only a small portion of the public as readers, to pay the bills then couldn't they be presenting only what their small group is willing to listen to and ignoring the rest of the voters and what they could use? We hear many in the media complain that that is just what FOX News does, and they seem to have the largest audience, but what about the NBC group of stations, the New York Times, the Washington Post, and so on. Even Bridge seems to have some tendencies in what they report? I wonder how may reader were hoping that Bridge would report on the campaigning for a county drain commissioner. How many in Wayne, Washtenaw, Kent, etc. counties are even interested in their own Drain Commissioner selection let alone one in a county that has no impact on them? I have to admit I have no idea of how Bridge selects the articles they assign reporters investigate, but how can you be so sure that it is what the voters want or even more important what they could use? I think the Bridge article on conflicts of interest in Lansing triggered some good ideas, but I notice there is none of that when it comes to Washington, more specifically this Presidential campaign. Do you wonder why?
Wed, 10/26/2016 - 7:27am
The MSM has made this circus building up jerk. Followed by protecting fibber. In doing so the nation has been deprived of qualified candidates.
Daniel Schifko
Wed, 10/26/2016 - 3:30pm
All the headlines shown in this comic piece were written by so called reporters who are at best commentators and at worst manipulators of low information voters. As my seventh grade journalism teacher said, "the media is the message". It is now the Circus as well. And by the way, I have only seen proof of democrats registering dead people to vote, Rudy is correct.
Thu, 10/27/2016 - 9:25pm
Hank, I heard a recent 'get out the vote' ad that said that JFK won his election to President by on average one vote per precinct. That seems an almost infinitesimal percentage and yet it mattered. It also seems that there are still questions about the voting in Illinois the election when Kennedy carried Illinois by 8,858 votes and got all the electoral college votes for Illinois. What about the 2000 election when Bush won Florida by some 1800 votes. Where the Democrats had a strategy to invalidate the votes of those serving in the military outside the US, authored by Democrat lawyer Mark Herron and sent out to Democrats in that elections. And we can't forget the 'hanging chad' of West Palm Beach County [a Democrat election board] and how they were deciding what 'spoiled ballots' to count. Wasn't there an election poll worker in Ohio convicted [pleaded no contest] in 2013 of multiple counts of election fraud, later embraced by the Democrat Party for her efforts. You may see election improprieties only when it is proven the dead have voted, I learned about the dead voting in my youth in western Wayne County. But the reality is that there are many ways for people to get the voting they want. I think each time, whether a single vote or many votes, there is a violations of voting it is criminal and an attempt to subvert the democratic process. By the way, back after the 2000 Presidential elections and one candidate graciously accepted the results he then turned to the courts trying to overturn those results. It was unlike the 1960 election that for the good of the 'country' all parties accepted the results and move on and yet after the 2000 elections Democrats never let go of how they felt President was illegitimate, they event tried to impeach him. If you think voter fraud is confined to the dead voting, you have lived a sheltered political life. [NPR reports Pew Center says 1.8 million dead are registered to vote] Do you think that would be enough to sway this election?
Thu, 11/03/2016 - 2:06pm
We need campaign finance reform and a campaign limitation on how long candidates can campaign. We're all sick and tired of campaigns that have gone on for nearly two long years. Our postal system is overburdened with junk mail campaign flyers (that fill up our recycle bins), we're besieged with robo calls that interrupt dinner, family conversations, and our "down" time in the evening. We're tired of everyone that is running for office; we're sickened at the vast amounts of money spent to campaign. Maybe we could wipe out cancer if all that money were to go to research. Why, we could even subsidize prescription drugs for low-income families and treat PTSD vets . . . ANY NUMBER OF WORTHY PROJECTS EXCEPT THIS LONG, DRAWN-OUT FIASCO OF A PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN.