Re: Goodbye, Cruel Ballot Box
While I certainly agree with the spirit of Josh's commentary, I think that in some regards it does miss the mark. Admittedly, I have not been political for very long. After September 11th, 2001 I realized that I could no long remain cynical and indifferent while others decided the events of the world. In 2004 I registered to vote, but still not really understanding the process didn't begin the follow the election until early Fall (i.e. after it was too late to make much of a difference).
Not wanting to make the same mistakes again this time around, I paid more attention to debates, bought and read books written by the candidates, subscribed to mailing lists, spent hours a day pouring over political blogs and watching clips on YouTube, etc.
I say all this because I want to make it clear that for all my best intentions, I accept that I'm still very much wet behind the ears. I accept that the shenanigans, spin, and such might just be business as usual and at some point I'm going to have to grow up and learn to live with it.
But while I am still just a little wide-eyed and hopeful, I do want to believe that conduct matters. That *how* one shows up to the game could be in some ways more important than whether that person wins or loses. That the good guy can win.
I know that Hillary's policies are very similar to Barack's; it's been pointed out several times. And if I were voting for policies rather than leadership, it would be much easier for me to feel comfortable going to the ballot box and casting a vote for Hillary Clintion in November, should she win the nomination. But I don't think I am voting for ink on paper. I support Barack Obama because he represents a break from "politics as usual" (boy, I sure drank the Kool-Aid on that tag line).
My concern is that a vote for Hillary is a slap in the face of the platform Barack has run on and the movement that my fellow citizens and I have helped to foster. A vote for Hillary reaffirms that "politics as usual" wins elections. And for those of us that dared to invest ourselves in this process in the hopes of creating something better, we fear that such a victory might be more than what we can bear.
Thank you for reading
Not wanting to make the same mistakes again this time around, I paid more attention to debates, bought and read books written by the candidates, subscribed to mailing lists, spent hours a day pouring over political blogs and watching clips on YouTube, etc.
I say all this because I want to make it clear that for all my best intentions, I accept that I'm still very much wet behind the ears. I accept that the shenanigans, spin, and such might just be business as usual and at some point I'm going to have to grow up and learn to live with it.
But while I am still just a little wide-eyed and hopeful, I do want to believe that conduct matters. That *how* one shows up to the game could be in some ways more important than whether that person wins or loses. That the good guy can win.
I know that Hillary's policies are very similar to Barack's; it's been pointed out several times. And if I were voting for policies rather than leadership, it would be much easier for me to feel comfortable going to the ballot box and casting a vote for Hillary Clintion in November, should she win the nomination. But I don't think I am voting for ink on paper. I support Barack Obama because he represents a break from "politics as usual" (boy, I sure drank the Kool-Aid on that tag line).
My concern is that a vote for Hillary is a slap in the face of the platform Barack has run on and the movement that my fellow citizens and I have helped to foster. A vote for Hillary reaffirms that "politics as usual" wins elections. And for those of us that dared to invest ourselves in this process in the hopes of creating something better, we fear that such a victory might be more than what we can bear.
Thank you for reading
Advertisement
Hillary Clinton vs John McCain. The lesser of two evils.
March 22, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
And a vote for McCain is what?
Come on, can we please dispense with this nonsense?
I voted for Obama and think he will ultimately be the nominee; but am getting real sick of this line of reasoning, as it is really not reasoning at all.
Supreme Court justices serve for life.
March 22, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with you BOTH, actually.
From my reading of various comments on various blogs, I've come to conclude that the "Bye Cruel Ballot Boxer" comments tend to fall into two basic camps:
1. The first camp, and where I think Josh's critique is valid -- are those who tend to begin their manifestos with "You people" or "you fill-in-the-generalization-here," and then extrapolate that the worst, most juvenile bloggers and posters are somehow typical of that candidates supports at large, and then by extension, a reflection on the candidate. The reasoning goes like this:
Premise A: SOME Clinton/Obama supporters who post on the blogs are mean and nasty
which somehow gets turned into
Conclusion A: ALL Clinton/Obama supporters who post on the blogs are mean and nasty
Premise B: People who post to blogs are typical of the general electorate
Conclusion B: ALL Clinton/Obama supporters are mean and nasty
therefore
Conclusion C: Clinton/Obama is therefore a seriously flawed candidate
From my own experience, I can only say that Premise A is actually true -- SOME people who post to the blogs or find voice in other forums are indeed mean and nasty -- but the other premises and conclusions are flawed. Generalizations and stereotypes abound in this society -- Rev. Wright doesn't have a monopoly on that -- but if we've learned anything, it's that vitriol toward total strangers really persuades no one. When someone says "you Clinton/Obama supporters are so rude, I just can't bring myself to vote for your candidate" that IS a self-indulgent, childish kind of nyah-nyah-nyah where personal ego and "need to be right" trumps the good of the whole.
(As a side note -- I'm saddened to see that race, religion and gender are not the only points of divisiveness in this contest -- but there are also cultural, educational, and economic divides that aren't spoken of quite so much. Rev. Wright's comments are rightfully denounced, but snide comments about "liberals" or "latte drinkers" or "boutique states," these mind-sets are more frequently allowed to hang out there.)
2. The other camp of "I won't vote for" though, are voters with more practical reasons. Those are people who have serious concerns about a candidate's platform, background or conduct. We may share the same goals, but we can be very different in how our values, our experiences, our perceptions affect our philosophy of leadership and what qualities we are looking for in a leader. Both Obama and Clinton have strengths, as Josh says, but those strengths are going to appeal to different folks for different reasons -- and similarly, both candidates have weaknesses and liabilities and I think we need to resist the temptation to trivialize and demean people who think something may be a real red flag. If you value honesty and think that one of the candidates is not honest, then that could be a compelling deal-breaker.
But ultimately, none of us have a crystal ball, none of us can really predict for sure how a candidate will perform in a very unique job with very unique demands (especially in the absence of complete information like who else will that candidate be working with, who will the advisers be, etc.) so we fall back on our personal values and get back into the predictions game. What we CAN do is to arm ourselves with as much information as possible; don't get so caught up in the blogosphere, but read all the candidate's position papers from their websites, read their books, look at the candidate from a holistic point of view and the overall pattern of that person's words and actions over time, rather than specific snapshot moments.
But I think some of the high emotion we're seeing is really a by-product of deep-down core FEAR, and the feelings of helplessness that arise from years of systematic disenfranchisement and alienation from the current "So What?" administration. That fear and anger is bubbling over to this campaign.
March 22, 2008 4:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Phoenix, Thank you for your inciteful and personal post. I will never vote for John McCain, but I believe, as you do that there are very big differences in Obama and Clinton. I agree that they have to do with method, with honesty, with approach, judgement, and other qualities.
I occasionally get so emotional that I threaten to stay home. Is it because I want things MY way, and I'm a bad sport? No. It is because there is a clear winner, and there is a clear loser, who refuses to step aside, and by pure obstinance is still being considered as the possible candidate. This is back-room stuff; it is creepy, and it makes me distrust even the part of the system that is mine: the Democratic Party. If Hillary gets the nomination it would be because she brokered a deal, and it would be because the Democratic Party failed in its duty.
The Powers-That-Be should have taken her aside a month ago and laid the facts out for her so she could see that she is only capable of keeping our party off-kilter thereby giving McCain time to appear "presidential" and above the fray. Even her ability to raise money is dwarfed by Obama, and that hasn't changed over these months. Her imprudent spending is an example of her lack of management skills; she made a huge assumption --> that she was the inevitable winner -- and that helped to doom her ability to actually and legitimately win.
The fact that she is still pretending to be a winner and not getting called on it by the media or our Party worries me. If she gets the nomination it will not be because she has actually won it, and that is why it will be hard to support our party. It will be hard, but I will do it.
Those independents and young people that came enthusiastically on board because of Obama will not feel the same. They might listen to Hillary's very words: If the Democrats don't care about your votes, I'm sure the Republicans will! With friends like Hillary, our party needs no new enemies!
March 22, 2008 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
PhoenixG,
I am as well voting for leadership, a leadership that will take us to turn a corner, rather than just policies.
I don't believe in Hillary's leadership and I have no expectations that she will follow through in reference to the policies that she now says she defends.
I could never vote for McCain; if Hillary wins the nomination by coup, I would find it nearly impossible to vote for her.
Part of that decision would have to do with having my voice heard; I don't want a middle of the road Government anymore.
As I understand it, Josh says in the last paragraph to his post that the only reason people wouldn't vote for either of the two Democratic candidates would be that they are not truly interested in public policy and governance.
I beg to differ. Our understanding of interest in public policy and governance may not be the same. That doesn’t make his more valuable than mine.
Josh might believe that the usual route is efficient to affect public policy and governance. I don't necessarily believe that; and this belief has nothing to do with my "ego-investment in [my] candidate".
I don’t believe that the American voters are “children” whose votes need to be corrected by their “parents” and I don’t think I want to stand behind and accommodate to a coup of the Powerful.
Here is Josh's paragraph I am referring to:
"But to threaten either to sit the election or vote for McCain or vote for Nader if your candidate doesn't win the nomination shows as clearly as anything that one's ego-investment in one's candidate far outstrips one's interest in public policy and governance. If this really is one's position after calm second-thought, I see no other way to describe it."
PS: If Hillary Clinton wins by right, surmounting the emotional disappointment wouldn't be as difficult; not because I would magically believe she will accomplish, but because of the Supreme Court... I would then be encouraged to continue working for the change I believe in while waiting for the next election.
March 22, 2008 4:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
"But to threaten either to sit the election or vote for McCain or vote for Nader if your candidate doesn't win the nomination shows as clearly as anything that one's ego-investment in one's candidate far outstrips one's interest in public policy and governance. If this really is one's position after calm second-thought, I see no other way to describe it."
Dear Josh, this one's for you.
I am one of your older posters, and I'll confess that I've for many years now felt that, next to tabloid stars, polititians are persons with the biggest ego-investments of all. As a woman I'm somewhat aware of the ego Hillary Clinton must need to run for president in a country that has never elected a female to its highest office and whose percentage of elected women in politics pales in the face of many European nations. I imagine that Obama's ego must be equally swollen, to think himself important enough to be the first minority president in a nation with little minority representation as well. Good for them both.
So now on to voter ego investment.
It seems that some classes of persons (perhaps those for whom opportunity routinely knocks, history favors and who are represented disproportionately in government and other management positions) may find an easier time of rising above "ego investment." But for those of us that Obama refers to in his speech (you know, we who are feeling anger at years of underrepresentation) may have a harder time putting our "interest in public policy" ahead of our egos.
My point is that you should not underestimate the personal nature of this election between a woman candidate and a minority candidate. For many women (like me) who have waited a lifetime to see a female head of state, it's personal and even emotional. I am sure for many minorities who have waited a lifetime to see a black head of state, it's personal and emotional as well.
Without sounding too politically incorrect or outlandishly selfish, I will venture to say I believe most of us are driven by "ego investment" and not by public policy (what is that anyway?)
So I support a voter's right to sit out of an election at any time, if they simply don't feel they've been respected as part of the process. If something goes wrong in November, and McCain is elected, I won't blame the voters -- I'd blame the Democratic strategists for not realizing the depth of personal investment (i.e. ego?) in our candidates.
(I'd hope at least to go vote for local ticket, though.)
March 22, 2008 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
In all fairness, Chris, I never said anything about voting for McCain.
I changed my party affiliation for the purposes of being able to vote in my state's closed primary, however I am very much an Independent. I am not beholden in any way, shape, or form to the Democratic party.
I stated my case and you swooped down to poo-poo on it, which is your right. But I'm afraid that you don't get to just dismiss it out of hand and expect anyone to take that seriously just because you say so.
Considering McCain's moderate record, what makes you think that his Supreme Court Justice selection will be any better or any worse than Hillary's? For that matter, what makes you think Hillary's will be any better than McCain's? They're both bought and paid for so the idea that one is going to be significantly different than the other in that regard is stretch for me.
Thanks for reading.
March 22, 2008 9:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Phoenix,
And in all fairness, I never said that you "said anything about voting for McCain."
You said:
"My concern is that a vote for Hillary is a slap in the face of the platform Barack has run on and the movement that my fellow citizens and I have helped to foster."
I said: "And a vote for McCain is what?"
March 23, 2008 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink