Like many here, I pay a great deal of attention to politics, to campaigns, to platforms. This year’s primaries are, for an old junkie like myself, endlessly fascinating. And troubling.
Our two candidates are not nearly as distant from one another as their supporters often are. Many of their differences are of degree, not kind, means, not end. And yet, some supporters seem to have declared open war on one another, as if their heroes are from different parties, even different planets.
I wonder if that divide is more a difference of experience than of goals.
Sanders, the pollsters endlessly tell us, is bringing to the race a wave of first-time voters, people who’ve never paid a great deal of attention to politics. Clinton certainly has been around the block a time or two, with many, one can assume, of the same followers. Could this freshness v. familiarity be a cause of our division?
When a politician comes along with that rare commodity—honesty—it’s pretty heady and inspiring. It makes you want to shout, tell your friends, let the world know. It’s so unusual and so wonderful.
On the other side, when you’ve followed those rare, truly better, pols and watched them get beaten by the banal or the truly evil, time and again, some cynicism (proudly called “pragmatism”) can be expected. Inspiration’s a harder sell for one who’s laid everything down for a McGovern… and a Carter II and a Mondale/Ferraro and a Dukkakis and a Dean and…
The old pols see the newly inspired as naive. The excited ones see the dinosaurs as callous and calculating.
And neither sees the treasure the other holds.
Pragmatism without enthusiasm doesn’t win elections. Ask President Romney (or President Kerry, for that matter). Enthusiasm without pragmatism is equally impotent. Ask the folks named a few paragraphs up.
I don’t know if this is an accurate assessment of the current schism in our party, but I can’t shake the feeling that it is significant. And I don’t think we can achieve the historic victory this country requires of us this year, up-ballot and down, unless we understand how valuable and essential the qualities that drive our—temporary—adversaries are.
I’ve admitted this is just speculation on my part. I’ve attempted, within the frame of that speculation, to be equally fair or unfair to each side. And I’m genuinely curious as to whether I’m on to something.
So try not to crap all over the comments. Too much.
The Shameless Self-Promotion bit: In case this gets a few eyeballs, I’m not making the mistake I made last time. Check out the new vid if you haven't already. And remember, this guy’s followers are very enthusiastic, and once the party regulars get over the vapors, he’ll have a lot of very pragmatic (and cynical) people behind him.