This morning, my wife and I became first-time caucusers — and given our impending move to Michigan, possibly the last time in a while. She wanted to get a feel for the rigamarole (“pageantry” was her more diplomatic term). I’ve been engaged enough in the process, but not so far devoted to one or the other candidate to do more than fill out my preference sheet and listen to my neighbors.
The first candidate advocate laid out an argument for Clinton fairly close to my own: Barack Obama has been the best president of his lifetime (and mine), taking on the leadership of the country at a time of extreme need (indeed, the harshest test for nearly 50 years) and making substantial progress on international policy and economic growth in the face of extreme resistance from the opposing party (indeed, a congressional majority enamored with anti-governance). The speaker argued that Clinton was well prepared and positioned to carry on the progress of the previous administration. He received a mix of approving and polite applause, interrupted by only one heckler (“Obama isn’t running!”).
Other speakers presented reasonably well for Bernie (“the best approach to the most important issues of environmental change” or “not beholden to corporate interests”) and for Hillary (“a long history of working for children and women’s rights“). The final tally was fairly close to the first (Clinton 40, Sanders 52, Undecided 5 — who later split evenly), and pretty much met my expectations. I believe our two candidates have managed to draw a consistent contrast with the Republican Party on matters of health care, environment, civil rights, and support for the less wealthy that will give the American public a meaningful choice come November, no matter the outcome of the primary. I’m not sure I’ll see another election as dire as 2008 anytime too soon, but that shouldn’t minimize the challenges now (particularly with respect to climate change). I choose to support Clinton because I believe the message of her policies are superior, on the subject of humanitarian intervention overseas, building on the Affordable Care Act towards universal health care, or ensuring ongoing progress on civil rights. Nevertheless, I’m happy to have taken part in a caucus that included Bernie Sanders (even as he came out the winner) because the discussions of money in politics and income inequality must happen in this country.
But I want to revisit the heckler from paragraph 2. He was, in fact, the first of my neighbors to speak in support of Bernie Sanders, with a preamble that he didn’t “want to go too negative.” He proceeded to state that Clinton was 1. As conservative as any republican. 2. A neocon. 3. Bought and paid for by Wall Street.
...many of these statements are not, in fact, subjective. We have a concrete measure of Hillary Clinton’s alignment from her time as a senator, and those measure place her solidly within the liberal center of her party (or, by some measures, somewhat farther to the left still). We know that her advocacy for women’s rights, children, and more liberal health care policy are lifelong endeavors that predate the primary, paid speeches, and her Senatorial tenure. We also know that any progress made with our future president comes with a set of party allies (let alone partisan enemies) who are demonstrably to the right of her on any legitimate political scale.
I do believe that politicians are, fallibly, a measure of their supporters. In Clinton, I see much of my family. In Sanders, I see many of my friends. Either candidate will have to do a better job than the heckler from paragraph 2 in defining those few of American society who must inevitably be considered our enemies.
Peace.