Who among us has not voted in order to keep the wrong evil lizard out of office?
But as we approach the primary campaign for the 2016 Presidential elections, I fear we are starting to see a massive misapplication of Wrong Evil Lizard Theory.
Douglas Adams described our Presidential elections well in his book
So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish, referring to a far off world:
“On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people.”
“Odd,” said Arthur, “I thought you said it was a democracy.”
“I did,” said Ford. “It is.” ...
“You mean they actually vote for the lizards?”
“Oh yes,” said Ford with a shrug, “of course.”
“But,” said Arthur, going for the big one again, “why?”
“Because if they didn’t vote for a lizard,” said Ford, “the wrong lizard might get in.”
When it is time for the general election in November 2016, we will dutifully line up and vote to keep the wrong evil lizard out. On that day it will be the right call ~ not the right time for sour grapes or protest ~ because we have all seen how much damage the wrong evil lizard can cause.
Come Election Day I'll accept the need, if it arises, to vote mostly against the wrong evil lizard. But it's dismaying to see an amped-up version Evil Lizard Theory being applied so early.
Evil Lizard Theory on steroids goes like this: In the earlier stages of the process, perhaps even before the first primary ballot is cast, we must find that person seen as most likely to defeat the wrong evil lizard in the November 2016 election. Yep - electability.
According to this theory, the merits of a candidate's positions don't matter - just the predicted perception of the candidate 18 months hence.
A much remarked and egregious recent example was Senator Claire McCaskill hitting Senator Bernie Sanders with this:
I very rarely read in any coverage of Bernie that he’s a socialist.
While this was widely (and accurately) portrayed this as a surrogate attack on Senator Sanders, here's what McCaskill is really saying: Others will call Sanders names like "Socialist" and that will make him unelectable.
If you look carefully at the attacks on Sanders from the Democratic side, there is nothing of substance about his positions - one way or another they are veiled jobs at the electability question.
This "electability" idea is such hogwash.
We can start with the realization that we can't possibly know at this moment who would be most electable. At this point in the 1992 cycle, Bill Clinton didn't stand a chance. If any of us could predict the future, we would be tending our growing stock market holdings rather than writing on Daily Kos.
But even more important is the idea that now and only now in the cycle is the actual opportunity to choose the person who would be the best President. On merit. On positions. On capability.
My plea to everyone, whether on Daily Kos or anywhere else, is to completely throw out and ignore the bogus concept of electability and focus on what matters.
If you support Sanders - great! Say why - on substance.
If you support Clinton - great! Say why - on substance.
No matter who wins the primaries, that process - voting on actual merit - will give us a better candidate and a better future president.
I'm looking forward to voting in November 2016 for the the Democratic candidate who has won the Primary process by demonstrating the best vision and plans for our future as a country. We can help make that happen.
James R. Wells is the author of The Great Symmetry, a science fiction novel is set 300 years in the future, but is definitely about our world here and now.
In an asteroid in the Aurora star system, exoarcheologist Evan McElroy has made a discovery about the Versari, a long-departed alien race. He doesn't realize that his findings will reawaken the long-buried struggle of the Infoterrorists, who believe that all knowledge screams to be free, against those who maintain the True Story that holds all of civilization together. |
|