Over the last few months, candidate advocates – in the improbable quest to prove that their candidate is the only true Democrat – have created narratives about the other front-runners. I summarize them as follows:
CLINTON is a Republican-lite, Murdoch-loving DLC corporatist establishment insider.
EDWARDS is a former war-mongering hedge-fund lover who only discovered his progressive side out of electoral expedience.
OBAMA is a mushy, centrist, High Broderite who wants to make nice with Republicans and give away our strong bargaining position against a ruthless enemy.
Each of these myths has sprouted from seeds of plausibility. In assembling a case against their non-preferred candidate, advocates have been able to cease upon actual statements and factoids to make their case. But in the broader sense, as a holistic description of the candidates’ philosophies and a prediction of their likely governing style and policy outcomes, each of these myths fails the most basic test of logic and veracity. I won’t rehash the specific flaws in each myth (it's all been covered ably by candidate advocates) – but I will point out the following:
-ALL of our (top three) candidates seek to move the country in a progressive direction.
-ALL of our candidates would work to undo Bush’s damage to the Constitution, the rule of law, and to our place in the world.
-ALL of our candidates would work to make America’s healthcare system more fair and inclusive.
-ALL of our candidates would work to end the Iraq War as quickly as possible, within the confines of the untenable position in which Bush has left us.
-ALL of our candidates would replace John Paul Stevens with a justice who will protect a woman’s right to choose.
-ALL of our candidates would likely be the most GLBT friendly president in American history.
-ALL of our candidates are electable.
-ALL of our candidates are electable (in case you missed it the first time).
-ALL of our candidates are charismatic and skillful enough to parlay an electoral mandate into real change.
-Finally, ALL of our candidates’ aggregate policy positions are far closer to a typical progressive than are those of any potential Republican nominee. And yes, I feel silly even having to point that out.
I’m compelled to make this argument today – in the last hours of being behind the veil of ignorance – before we know whose supporters must begin to grapple with supporting a non-preferred candidate. After tomorrow, it will be harder to separate such arguments from "ha ha, your guy lost!" For now, though, we can all toy with this idea together.
Y’all have done good work in the service of advocating for your excellent candidates, and I congratulate you for your passion and activism. But many of you, whether intentionally or not, have also contributed to the myth making. I humbly urge you to consider a very basic point: the sooner you disabuse yourself of the myths, the easier it will be to rally behind our nominee in the quest to bring the presidency back to the Democratic Party.
Good luck to your candidate.