The Iowa caucus was a mess because people are confused by a changing political paradigm. Old party definitions and ideologies have gone by the wayside because 21st century problems cannot be solved with 19th or 20th century solutions. Environmental chaos is disrupting patterns of human settlement that we assumed were set in stone. Artificial intelligence is altering the whole concept of work and employment. Global systems of trade have put entire groups of people on the defensive.
A new ethics-based political paradigm has emerged. Based on values such as courage, truth, and respect for diversity, it transcends previous party, national and tribal identities. Greta Thunberg comes to mind as exemplifying this new lens for understanding the events of our era.
The Paradigm Battle
Paradigms do not change without periods of confusion, disarray, and conflict. We witnessed the current struggle to embrace the new paradigm when:
- Mitt Romney voted to remove a same-party president from political office, accepting the GOP ostracism that would result
- Vulnerable Democrat Doug Jones chose to protect the US constitution regardless of this resulting in the likely loss of his senate seat
- Adam Schiff and the whole House Impeachment team eloquently and with precision presented evidence of wrong-doing by an out-of-control autocrat while knowing that power-hungry Republicans would not listen
- Yavanovitch and Vindman, both from immigrant families, were willing to sacrifice their careers to get out the truth.
Each of these persons made their sacrifice in hope that the rest of us would listen and have the courage to act on what we also know to be true.
Protectors of the old paradigm of aristocratic money and power, relics of nation-states and the colonialism of previous eras, want to keep us in confusion and disarray because that paralyzes us from taking courageous action. Wall Street and the GOP tell us that our economy is thriving when in reality 30% of all workers are in a gig economy that provides unstable income and no benefits.
The Democratic field of presidential candidates has been large, boding well for future leadership. But, having to choose between so many options can feel overwhelming. While many of these future leaders will be in a new Democratic administration, now we need to unite around one candidate so we can build momentum for the general election in which we remove the Divider-in-chief.
After watching every debate, reading political essays, seeing C-Span videos of the candidates out on the campaign trail and looking through an ethics-driven paradigm, here's my overview of our primary options. Full disclosure: I am a Warren Democrat.
New Paradigm Candidates
Any female candidate is part of a new political paradigm. This automatically makes her an outsider who is generally overlooked or ignored by old paradigm pundits.
Amy Klobachar
With a grandfather who worked on the iron range and father who was a local journalist, Amy identifies with people who work hard for a living. She is a senator for Minnesota, a diverse Mid-Western state that has been hit hard by automation. With a strong record in the senate, she advocates for moderate changes to the system – something that appeals to the large older population but doesn’t give young people a lot of hope. Her clever attacks on other candidates will make it hard for her to unite the Democratic party.
Elizabeth Warren
The daughter of an Oklahoma janitor and minimum-wage spouse, Warren worked her way through high school and a Houston public college. Her experience teaching special education, followed by attending law school in New Jersey led to a career as a law professor. Her principles drove her to research middle-class issues and to fight for a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that has now returned 12 billion dollars to citizens who were cheated by financial institutions. Her intelligence and experience are invigorated with compassion.
Single Issue New Paradigm Candidates
Tom Steyer
Issue: Saving the environment before it’s too late. His epiphany came after making billions in the fossil-fuel industry. In 2018 he helped with the blue wave by funding young people as organizers to get youth politically engaged. While climate change is a fundamental issue affecting the future of all of us and the whole planet, he has not spelled out how it intersects with all of the other issues we face.
Andrew Yang
Issue: Work as we have known it is going away. Artificial Intelligence/automation is rapidly eroding jobs. It is important that we hear this message. As he foresees this, his solution is to give every adult $1000 a month as a base income. However, he has not done the math to show us how this would be paid for and has not articulated a full vision. Or if he has, he has not articulated it in a way ordinary people can understand.
Old Paradigm Candidates
Joe Biden
The former Vice President is trying to become a new paradigm politician focused on ethics but does not know how to embed values into innovative new policies. His strong support in the African American community is a huge asset but he has so much baggage from a long career in politics that almost any adversary can find something with which to flog him. He was an early target of the orange-faced one and has not shown that he can beat him.
Michael Bloomberg
He is focused, rightly, on beating Donald Trump. As a billionaire and former three-term New York mayor who is cognizant of Trump’s bankruptcies and racist shady deals, he knows that Trump is a business failure driving the economy to greater inequities. He is spending his billions to make the rest of us aware of this. His black marks are money in politics and as a crafter of the Stop and Frisk policing that unfairly incarcerated people of color.
Pete Buttigiege
A 38-year-old smooth talker, he was mayor of South Bend, Indiana for eight years during which the number of incarcerated African Americans soared, exceeding other places in the nation. His gay orientation tempted me to place him in the new paradigm category, however he is following the old pattern of money influencing politics and is heavily supported by Wall Street. He attracts a large following, but his sexual orientation would make him a prime target for the Insulter-in-chief.
Bernie Sanders
As a self-identified Socialist, this is the candidate the Hater-in-Chief wants. Sanders’ Socialist label is made to order for rallying the red-hat base. You have to hand it to Sanders for consistency over his forty-year political career. But he is a figurehead rather than a leader. He is unable to give moral direction to his followers who do not identify with Democrats and use name-calling and underhanded tactics to criticize Democratic candidates.
Get In The Fight
The GOP makes fun of Democratic turnout for the Iowa caucus being on a par with 2016 and not 2018, but the reality is that while over 176,113 people braved cold weather and new procedures to show support for Democratic candidates, Republican turnout was only 18% of that - 31,770. Each of the three Democratic front-runners had more than their total turnout. Don't be fooled by 'supposedly' large rallies for Trump; cult followers are often bused in from elsewhere.
To defeat morally bankrupt Republicans holding on to an old ineffectual paradigm, we need you in the fight NOW. If a conservative group in Arizona can enter the new paradigm and launch the Lincoln Project to defeat Trump supporter and enabler McSally, I know you can figure out a role in the upcoming election. I got ideas by going to ElizabethWarren.com. Now I'm writing letters to the editor and have an app on my phone that allows me to canvas anywhere any time. After getting trained in a Warren campaign on-line session, I'll be tabling for the Democratic party at the Asian celebration next Sunday where I’ll be using my app!
3 comments:
Excellent overview -of the candidates. I appreciate your candid comments and truthfulness. Yes, we Dems have a huge field and lots of thinking and researching to do...but we do have one common goal: Elect a Democratic president!
Onward and Upward!
Thanks, LiDoña, for your review of candidates, etc. Most of your blogs have focused on artistic creativity, a subject that remains a mystery to me. Politics, on the other hand, is something I grew-up with. I'm a committed pragmatist and have long rejected entrenched idealism where many prefer self-righteous failure rather than “half loaf” success -- to borrow an insightful phrase from one of my personal heroes, Frances Perkins. I still shake my head over people in swing states who considered their vote for Ralph Nader in 2000 to somehow be an act of integrity.
The truth is that elected officials to high office in the US are much more likely to follow public opinion than be on the cutting edge of radical reform. Barack Obama’s belated support for gay marriage is an example of this. The true grunt work of transformation emerged from grassroots action that eventually resulted in major changes in popular opinion. When it arrived, Obama was ready to offer his symbolic power at an appropriate moment. Had he advocated early for gay marriage, which was probably more reflective of his own personal views, it may well have been sufficient to sink his presidential campaign.
Defeating Trump, in my opinion, is the essential moral issue of this election. With that in mind, my pragmatic nature in choosing a presidential candidate pays immense attention to the fact that NONE of the forty Democrats who flipped Republican districts in 2018 ran on anything close to "Medicare for All," the "Green New Deal," or other progressive causes to which many, if not most, of my close friends are very enthusiastic. So, while I'll continue with my committed engagement in grassroots actions on behalf of sustainability, environmental justice, and economic equity, etc., and will invest my life in achieving them, I will also actively support Amy Klobuchar for President (as long as she is in the running) who is an effective "moderate." Both are an embodiment of my values. I'll wear my newly acquired Klobuchar campaign button as if wearing one for FDR whose pragmatic political leadership continues to be a powerful inspiration for me every bit as much as the passion of Greta Thunberg.
Thanks to both you, Lidona, and to Terry for such insightful comments. Like many, I find it imperative to support somone with whom I share values, but who is also one who will be supported by the majority of the electorate. I was dis-heartened to hear one New Hampshire Democratic resident who was asked whom he would support, and he said "I'm trying to decide whether to go with the one who makes me happy, or to go with the right one (to win the election)." He said he was leaning toward the one who will make him "happy." Help, this kind of voting could make the Democrats lose the election if one assumes he would go for Bernie, for example!
Post a Comment