Supporting Senator Joe Biden is truly a labor of love.
He is an underdog for the Democratic party nomination. (Which is, of course, a testament to the diversity of our party that the old white guys are the underdogs on the Presidential ticket.)
He is the second poorest Senator in the Senate, so he cannot bolster his war chest with millions of dollars of personal funds. (He made a campaign promise, that he KEPT, in 1972, to never buy stocks or bonds to avoid any possible conflict of interest while serving as the Senator of Delaware.)
I spent some time in Iowa speaking about why I was supporting the Senator's candidacy. This was definitely an eye-opening experience and more than a little disheartening.
Senator Biden, apparently, is the Catch-22 candidate.
People said they would be more likely to say they support the Senator's candidacy IF his numbers were higher in the polls.
But his numbers would be higher in the polls if people would say they support him.
People with the media said they would give him more coverage if he got some traction.
He would have some traction IF THE MEDIA WOULD GIVE HIM MORE COVERAGE.
People say they would donate money to his campaign if he had more money in his campaign fund (and thus was more "viable".)
(I know you know where this is headed.)
HE WOULD HAVE MORE MONEY IN HIS CAMPAIGN FUND IF PEOPLE DONATED TO HIS CAMPAIGN.
This was JUST LIKE trying to get my first job in high school. All those employers that wanted me to have work experience first but how was I supposed to get work experience if no one would hire me?
The thing is, ALL OF US have been there. The Catch-22: X won't happen until Y happens but Y won't happen unless X happens. And it is infuriating. You cannot get out of a catch-22 until someone takes a chance and makes Y happen so that X CAN happen. No one wants to be on the "losing" team, so even when they are moved by seeing Biden speak, they hedge from committing to his campaign; yet it is their failure to commit that prevents it from being the "winning" team they would like it to be.
What saddens me is that I think many people are looking at who is going to win the Democratic nomination, who the Dems are going to love the most, and I fear that person is NOT going to be the candidate who the general population is going to like the most--or, as is most likely the case, dis-like/hate the least. I am afraid the Dems are being lazy. We are ASSUMING we cannot lose to a Republican, no matter who we put up on the ticket. THAT IS A MISTAKE. Despite probably unprecedented disenchantment with the Republican party, we were unable to obtain more than a very simple, SLIM majority in Congress. Quite frankly, it was embarrassing.
If you look at the qualities of our candidates, SEnator Biden has the greatest appeal to the general population. He has the strongest foreign policy/national security credentials (yes, even more so than Richardson). Say what you may about him, but rarely is his knowledge of the issues challenged. A consistent comment on Biden is that he has command of the issues facing our country, and it is always apparent.
I hear people say that the next President doesn't need to have personal knowledge and experience to deal with our problems as a nation because that is what his or her advisors are for. Are you kidding me? Wasn't that the same rationale that put Bush in office? TWICE? (Although I am not saying ANY OF OUR CANDIDATES ARE ANYWHERE NEAR AS VAPID AS BUSH, but you get my point.)
I hear people say that we can elect X candidate and he or she can implement Biden's plan for Iraq. To which I have to point out, X candidate will implement X's plan for Iraq. That is how that usually works. If you want Biden's plan for anything, you have to vote for/support BIDEN.
I read about Biden being Secretary of State and I think a lot of people think he is so great with foreign policy, we can just have X as President and then Biden can be SEcretary of State (funny, no one mentions Richardson for this slot) and handle all of our messy foreign policy issues. Of course, Secretary of State IS NOT ON THE BALLOT in November and there is no guarantee that X will make Biden Secretary of State. Further, as I believe none of the other candidates are going to be able to win the general election, X Democratic nominee will remain just that: the Democratic nominee. So if you really believe Biden is the candidate most capable of handling our foreign policy, then Biden is the person you should be supporting for President.
What I am hearing and reading is really a lot of rationalizing. I think many Democrats realize that we need Senator Biden's leadership as a nation, at least in the area of foreign policy. What he says and who he is RESONATES with us. But so does Obama. ANd so does Hillary. And Edwards. We are confronted with several candidates who each represent the best of the Democratic party, which is rich in its inclusivity and diversity, and give us so much to be proud of that we are really trying to find a way to have it all when it comes to this election. But if we try to hard to have too much, we may end up having nothing. IE, the dream Democratic candidate probably is not the generally electable candidate. Our dream nominee probably will not be the next President of the United States.
I think we need to be more strategic as a party. The dream Democratic candidate SHOULD BE the generally electable candidate. WE HAVE TO ENSURE (and not simply assume) that we present this country with an electable Democrat after eight years of Bush-led Republican trampling of our Constitution, destruction of our environment, depletion of our military, and erosion of our national security.
In "Crashing the Gates," the authors charge that the greatest weakness of the Democratic party was its inability to sacrafice individual and group interests for the good of the party. This is so true. We are seeing it happen right now. We are so caught up in pushing through a certain agenda with our nomination, that we are compromising our chance to regain control of the White House. Whereas if we chose the most viable, albeit less ground-breaking, candidate for the party nomination, and we actually gained control of the White House, then we could REALLY implement the very agenda we were trying to promote with a candidate that was unelectable among the general population.
Senator Biden will represent the Democratic party with honor. He will redeem our party in the area of defense and national security but he will also promote our Democratic values of elevating and equalizing the opportunities and experiences of all Americans, regardless of race, gender, or sexual orientation. Senator Biden will do this. He can do this. But first he has to get the Democratic party nomination. If we start thinking more strategically and realistically, he will.
At the very least, next time you give money to Obama, Hillary, or Edwards, split the donation with Biden. Why not see what he could do if he broke free of the Catch-22?