Primary concerns

Last updated on: May 4, 2019 at 11:55 am by Fred Clark

Primary concerns 2019-05-04T11:55:53-04:00 Fred Clark

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.

The first primary caucuses and elections for 2020 are still 10 months away. The very first debates among the candidates are still two months away. But the silly season of primary contention has begun.

This long campaign promises to be exciting because the field of Democratic contenders is both very large and very impressive, including many I’d be very pleased to vote for and to see elected president. As these candidates introduce their vision and their policy ideas, I’m finding a lot to get excited about.

In theory and in the abstract, I appreciate the notion that hard-fought primary campaigns can be a net positive for the eventual nominee. They can help to hone that candidate’s message, to vet out potential pitfalls and responses to them. That is less likely to be true, though, when primary contestants choose to run whatever-it-takes, scorched-earth campaigns that encourage their followers to despise every other candidate and their supporters — something we’ve seen happen in recent years with first the “PUMAs” and then the Bernie Bros (or, at least, the Bernie Bots).

In the hotly contested 2008 primary, I expressed a wish that the leading candidates — Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton — would do more to acknowledge the historic nature of one another’s campaigns, and of what each was therefore having to overcome. Specifically, I wanted to see Obama state, explicitly, that “If you’re supporting me against Clinton because you don’t want to vote for a woman, then I don’t want your vote.” And I wanted to see Clinton state, explicitly, that “If you’re supporting me against Obama because you don’t want to vote for a black candidate, then I don’t want your vote.”

This was, I was told at the time, impractically idealistic. In such a closely fought campaign, some thought, every potential advantage had to be exploited — even the unseemly ones repackaged under the pseudo-respectable umbrella of “electability.” (That was then, and still is, mostly a gross euphemism for “realistically” acknowledging that much of the electorate is racist and/or misogynist, treating that fact as an implacably static reality, and then shrugging and saying, hey, whatchagonnado?)

I still think such statements would have been important and eminently practical — good politics as well as morally obligatory. I think they would have been a demonstration of leadership — the kind of leadership that just might persuade some to follow and to try to be better than they might otherwise have been left to their own prejudices.

I was, of course, disappointed in this wish back in 2008. And I was disappointed yet again in 2016 not to hear similar statements during the heated contest between Clinton and Bernie Sanders.

So here is one thing I’m looking for from the field of 2020 contenders. Yes, they’re running against one another. Fine. But I still want to see them explicitly endorse and model the solidarity that their party and their country requires. So I want to hear each of them state, flatly and without reservation, that if you’re inclined to support them over another candidate because that candidate is a woman, or a person of color, or is Jewish, or gay, then you can keep your damn vote to yourself thankyouverymuch.

Beyond that, I’d like to see the various candidates endorsing and supporting the best ideas coming from their competitors. Back in 2008, there was much dispute over the competing health-care reform ideas embraced by Obama and Clinton, with much discussion over whether the candidates were “stealing” ideas from one another (or from John Edwards).

I think that’s the absolutely wrong way to look at it. Steal away, I say.

I’d like to see this primary campaign play out like a “scramble” in golf. (I am the rare middle-aged white American male who has somehow avoided the cult of golf, so I’m a bit cautious in using a golf analogy and I may have this terminology wrong.) The idea of a scramble is that everybody takes their tee shot, but then everybody plays from the point of the best ball after that, and then from the best ball after that, etc., on every hole. The final score is the product of all those best shots.

One candidate comes out with a terrific statement on, say, the student-debt crisis. Mark that spot and everybody move to within a club-length of that location. Then everybody takes another swing at the next issue. Take the best idea and move on from there.

This is not, I recognize, politics as usual. Politics as usual says that in a crowded field like this one, candidates should be working to differentiate themselves, to put daylight between themselves and the rest of the pack. I get that. But I think we’re at a point where politics as usual ain’t gonna cut it. And I also think, again, that candidates can demonstrate leadership by being willing to follow good ideas, even when those good ideas come from one’s “opponent.” When Kamala Harris rolls out a plan to raise pay for teachers, or Elizabeth Warren rolls out a whole raft of Baileyite prescriptions to rein in Old Man Potter, then I think the best and most responsible course of action for the other candidates is to commend and endorse those ideas (and the people advancing them).

Would this “work”? What would happen if, say, Corey Booker spent most of the first debate deferring and endorsing the signature ideas proposed by the other candidates? Would he “look weak” or would he, perhaps, look stronger for it? I don’t know. I’m not any kind of expert at hard-nosed political campaigning and I have no idea whether such a thing would ultimately be good or bad for any single candidate.

But I think it would be good for the country. And I think it might even be necessary for the country.

When however many of the candidates take to the stage in late June for the first debate, I’m hoping to see something that discourages the kind of brawling we got last time around. I don’t know exactly what that would look like, but I imagine it’d be something like this — one of my favorite things — a “songwriters circle” concert from a few years back in the UK.

Concert organizers invited Neil Finn, Roddy Frame, and Graham Gouldman to come and share some of their favorite songs. Why? Because they’re all really good songwriters. The artists didn’t have much of a chance to rehearse together, but they were able to join in on several of the others’ songs because they knew and admired each others’ work and wanted to see the best of one another showcased well.

I don’t think Frame and Gouldman come across as diminished by chiming in to support Neil Finn here. Quite the opposite.

I’ve watched every video from this concert several times and enjoyed every performance. That’s partly because each of the songwriters here is also enjoying every performance by the others. Roddy and Graham are awestruck and envious of “Don’t Dream It’s Over.” Neil and Roddy seem stoked that they’re getting to sing “I’m Not in Love” with the guy who wrote it. Neil seems like he can’t wait to hear Roddy’s guitar joining in on his songs.

This mutual admiration is endearing not just because it’s generous, but because it’s accurate — because it’s deserved.

Come late June, we’ll have the chance to tune in and see Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Corey Booker, Julian Castro, Mayor Pete, Beto, Gillibrand and more take to the same stage. That’s not exciting only because of any single one of them, but because of all of them. If they don’t recognize and acknowledge that, too, then something important and necessary will be missing.

Uncategorized

Trump

Previous Post

April 24, 2019

No one is innocently 'fooled' by blackface trolls

Next Post

April 26, 2019 LBCF, No. 233: 'Do I love you, do I?'

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category class warfare evangelicals Iraq Left Behind Mammon music Uncategorized

Select a Month November 2026 October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 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 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 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 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What Christian tradition requires confession to a priest for forgiveness of sins?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Baptist Roman Catholic Methodist Quaker