This election year in the U.S. has been rough, and as I mentioned, the "fall back" change comes in the middle of the last days of the election, meaning it will be one hour longer than it needs to be.
It's only an hour, but even an hour is an eternity this year.
One of the reasons this year has been so hard is that the two presidential candidates are so different. People really can't understand how anybody could support the other side.
That's why I thought this article in the HBR was so helpful. It provides ways of helping people who support Trump an exit-ramp so that they can avoid supporting him without being "wrong" for supporting him in the first place.
I was thinking about that this morning when a friend posted a picture from an annual tradition that he has.
Every year on the last day of Daylight Saving Time, he and some other faithful go for the last sunrise that comes at a reasonable-enough hour, and take in the sunrise, and then they head into the Lakeview Lounge. This is a throwback drinking establishment that opens at 7 a.m.
So I suggested to my friend that this tradition will have to change, or at least evolve, if we can get rid of changing the clocks back and forth for #DST.
He said only, "Don't do it." (The guy was busy drinking at 7 a.m., so I didn't expect a long answer. ;-)
But he's got a legitimate point of view. Taking away the clock changing would take away a fun annual event for him.
Are there other arguments in favor of changing the clocks twice per year? I really haven't heard any. I've heard from lots of people that like either year-round DST or year-round standard time.
But other than my friend and his desire to have a once-a-year cocktail at 7 a.m., I haven't heard of anyone who likes the clock-changing aspect of DST.