This post is addressed to those on the left half of the political spectrum. Maybe even a few of those slightly right of center, depending on what you call the center these days. I'm somewhat concerned with what I've been reading in the wake of the first debate of the potential Democratic presidential candidates.
Overall, I came away from the debate with a fairly positive reaction to the positions the candidates took, and I was delighted that they all (even the couple I found somewhat disappointing for one reason or another) came across as civil, decent people engaged in a discussion of (mostly) serious issues. After the “debates” among the Republican candidates, I found it remarkably refreshing.
And then the post debate “analysis” and reaction started, and it has me worried. Hillary's supporters are loudly declaiming that she won the debate and “towered over” the others. Bernie's supporters likewise insist that their candidate won. I'm not sure what it means to “win” such a debate. I don't think trying to decide a winner at this point benefits anyone.*
At present, it looks as though the choice for the Democratic nominee is probably going to come down to Clinton or Sanders. I doubt either one changed very many minds. Those who liked either or both of them before the debate probably still do. Those who disliked either or both of them before probably still do. There may be some people who hadn't formed an opinion before who were swayed one way or the other, but I suspect those were rather few. Those waiting to make up their minds are probably going to continue to wait a while longer.
Partisans of either Clinton or Sanders aren't going to change anyone's mind by insisting that their candidate won the debate. Think about it. You're a supporter of candidate X. You think your candidate did pretty well in the debate. You're psyched up. X just laid it it out and showed everyone why s/he should be the next president. Well, maybe there was that one point or two that was a little awkward, or could've been said better, but basically, X rocked! Then a supporter of candidate Y comes along and says “Nah, Y totally won. X looked like nothing next to Y. Anybody with any brains should support Y.” Does that make you want to change your mind and support Y instead of X? Probably not. It's more apt to leave you with a negative reaction. Depending on how badly that person puts X down (or puts you down for supporting X) it's apt to leave you feeling that Y's followers aren't very nice. It might even make you less interested in supporting Y if it turns out that s/he wins the nomination.
And if you weren't a supporter of X or Y prior to the debates? Watching X supporters and Y supporters go at one another is probably going to have you feeling that it's all more of the same political bickering, that Democrats are just as divisive and divided as Republicans.
Note that I am not saying that therefore there should be no debate, no exchange of ideas, no attempt to persuade others of the strengths of one's preferred candidate. Tell everyone about the great ideas Bernie has for rebuilding the infrastructure of our country and strengthening the working and middle classes. Spread the word about Hillary's experience as Secretary of State, and her championship of human rights. Tout O'Malley's plan to reduce carbon emissions.
Each of the candidates has strengths. Each has weaknesses. None is perfect. But so far they've been doing a fairly good job of not running negative campaigns. Let's try to emulate that. Because I want whoever emerges as the Democratic candidate to win the election a year from now. Not because I'm such a party loyalist—I'm not—but because I've seen who's vying for the Republican nomination and feel I must do everything I can to prevent any of those from taking the White House.
I would love to be able to extend the “focus on the positive aspects” concept to the nominees of all parties, but I cannot. While I'd rather focus on what the eventual Democratic nominee will do for the country, I have to admit I'm also largely motivated by fear of what the eventual Republican nominee and a Republican Congress could do to it. The Republican party appears to be imploding (Witness the inability to find a Speaker to replace Boehner. Witness the inability to field a single viable presidential candidate.) But their self-destruction could end up taking the country with them. We need to make certain that we can present a reasonable alternative. We don't do that by tearing one another apart.
Democrats win when Democrats come out to vote. Stay as psyched as you can for your favorite presidential candidate, but don't rule out the others, and work for the best electable candidates in your area for Congress**. We have to hope that whoever the Dem's nominee turns out to be, we can generate enough enthusiasm and long enough coat-tails to give that nominee a Congress s/he can work with. We don't do that by bashing one another.
*In a sense, for me, personally, the “winner” was Martin O'Malley. I knew less of his positions that I did either of the front runners, and I liked what he had to say. That was about the only real change in my personal mindset: I went from basically neutral on O'Malley to positive.
**In overwhelmingly Republican locales, this may mean focusing on Republican primaries—trying to get a sane Republican (some do still exist!) nominated may be easier in some places than trying to get any Democrat elected.
anxious
relaxed
