A politics of fear, not hope

Last updated on: June 8, 2016 at 2:40 pm by Justin Whitaker

A politics of fear, not hope 2016-06-08T14:40:43-06:00 Justin Whitaker

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Editors’ Note: This article is part of the Patheos Public Square on Faith and the Election. Read other perspectives here.

Politicians, more than anyone else, have the power to appeal either to our fears or our better natures.

This year there are still three major politicians in the race for the US Presidency: Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and Donald Trump. I was an early (early) supporter of Clinton, who, from the very start was “anointed” by Democratic party insiders. She served faithfully under Obama, who beat her in 2008. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Clinton’s former campaign co-chair, had ascended to the top of the Democratic National Committee. Over 400 super-delegates – about 1/5 of the total delegates needed for the nomination – pledged to support her before a single citizen voted.

But Clinton has not been well-received by the “left” part of the Democratic party. As early as 2014, groups began organizing and petitions began circulating to “Draft” Bernie Sanders (and Elizabeth Warren, separately). Both grassroots movements hoped to put forth a liberal alternative to Hillary Clinton.

Then, in May of 2015, Bernie Sanders entered the race. His message was simple: economic populism. We should and can spread the enormous wealth of our nation in a way that benefits the poorest and those in the middle.

Crazy. Socialist. Will not be taken seriously. Those were the pundit reviews, and, by them and many others, he was mostly ignored. As I wrote in September:

Bernie Sanders appeals to white Progressives. That much is obvious.

But not all Progressives are lining up behind him. Notably, those fighting for racial justice under the #BlackLivesMatter banner have targeted him and he finds himself far behind Clinton and even trailing yet-to-be-running Biden in South Carolina, where 55 percent of the voters are black.

In a recent column in the New York Times, Charles M. Blow explores Sanders’ lack of appeal with black voters. There he writes that “An August Gallup Poll found that Hillary Clinton’s favorability among African-Americans was 80 percent, while Sanders’s was 23 percent.” And even more disturbing, “Two-thirds of blacks were unfamiliar with Sanders.”

As I drove two weeks ago from my home in Helena, MT to Missoula where I teach, I listened to an NPR story about the potential candidacy of Joe Biden. There, Rachel Martin and Mara Liasson discuss the “antiestablishment fever that’s been sweeping the Democratic Party base” while failing to mention the person at the vanguard of that fever. Liasson even, quite gallingly, says of a potential Biden candidacy that, “There are many Democrats who think it would be good for Hillary Clinton because she’d have a serious opponent, and it would help her become a better candidate.”

Really, no serious opponent? But my jaw didn’t really drop until I heard her next line: “Right now, she’s basically running against herself and her problems.”

If NPR, a supposed bastion of left-leaning thought, can have a nearly 5-minute discussion of the Democratic presidential race without so much as mentioning Sanders, we have a problem.

And, in the media at least, that problem never really went away.

However, for many people (myself included) he did become the liberal alternative that we were searching for. One of the “Draft Elizabeth Warren” groups formally endorsed Sanders last June. In January, MoveOn, another large liberal group, also endorsed Sanders, writing, “In our endorsement vote exit poll, one of the words MoveOn members most frequently used to describe him was ‘integrity.'”

Integrity is a fair word to use for Sanders, who according to Politifact, is the most honest candidate still running (over Clinton and big liar Trump).

Hope is another good word for Sanders’ campaign, so much so that he began to sound an awful lot like Obama in 2008 (minus all of the charisma).

And hope – and with it aspiration, ambition, and forward-thinking, is what I would like to see moving forward in the next few months. With California going to Clinton (at the time of this writing only 36% of votes are reported, but Clinton has a wide lead) and Clinton already “clinching” the presumptive nomination on the 6th, I think Sanders will rightly drop out and extend his support to her. He pushed on this far, making sure every voter – even us in Montana – feel valued and counted, which I deeply appreciate, but pushing on to the convention would do little good.

There are those who suggest that Sanders has harmed Clinton. But I don’t buy it, nor does Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, who endorsed Clinton but said on NPR tonight that the Sanders campaign strengthened Clinton’s. The vigorous exchanges of ideas has been great for Clinton, who will hopefully adopt at least a few further-left policies in an effort to align herself more closely to Sanders’ supporters and win the election in November.

Hope didn’t get Sanders the nomination, it’s true. His message didn’t even get him noticed much until it was all but too late for voters to “get to know him” in many states. Trump’s messages of fear (Mexicans, Muslims, Chinese, the media, etc) did get attention, and, unfortunately, votes. Clinton weaved and bobbed, one day a “progressive” the next a “centrist,” molding herself to the needs of the crowd before her. She has good credentials though, minus, my friends tell me, some serious issues with Libya and Syria. And she’s well-known and, by US standards, left of center.

But she hasn’t said much about “hope.”

Even in her much-hailed foreign policy speech last week, she pitted herself against Trump as a “choice between a fearful America, that’s less secure and less engaged with the world, and a strong, confident America, that leads to keep our country safe and our economy growing.” She then went on to attack Trump, quite successfully, as the potential Commander in Chief who we really should fear.

Clinton’s speech tonight, however, did dwell in hope, noting particularly how Sanders’ arguments had been very good for the Democratic party and for America. She even borrowed several of his talking points before moving on to again attack Trump. But it is the hopeful message that I dearly hope will stick with Clinton and with voters in the months to come, one that sees that not all is right with America, but that we have at our fingertips the resources to fix it – if only we have the will. And let us not forget that Clinton, like any politician, will have the will of the wealthy and corrupt pulling her strongly in one direction. It is up to us to push, pull, and prod her in the direction of the people, of peace, of social welfare and global sustainability.

Buddhism

Previous Post

June 7, 2016

Slipping Support for Sanders, Buddhists turn to Trump, Stein, and Johnson in latest reader poll

Next Post

June 10, 2016 A glimpse of Buddhism in Obama's endorsement of Hillary Clinton

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Academia Activism American Buddhism Art Book review Buddhism Buddhism Today Buddhist Ethics Burma/Myanmar China Christianity Commodification Environment Gender Happiness Health Humor India Interfaith Islam Japanese Buddhism Kant Media / News Meditation mindfulness Photography Poetry Politics quicktakes Running Teaching Technology Thailand Theism/Atheism Theravada Tibet Tibetan Buddhism Travels Uncategorized Unitarian Universalism video Western Philosophy Zen

Select a Month June 2021 January 2021 November 2020 August 2020 July 2020 March 2020 January 2020 October 2019 August 2019 June 2019 May 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 November 2004 September 2004 August 2004

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz