Thinking about what my party needs, I asked myself: what would the ideal
Democratic Congressman, Senator, President look like?
Of course, images of some amalgam of Obama, JFK, Gloria Steinem ran through my mind, and then I realized, I am thinking backwards when I should be thinking forward.
It is easier, sometimes, to think of what you do not want:
1/ We should not want someone who parses every sentence so as not to offend any group: #MeToo, people of color, labor, police, mothers, gays, any of the whole coalition which Hillary tried to harness and not offend. There is simply no way for anyone to speak this carefully and still manage to connect to the critical citizens out there who know when they are being played. These are groups we hope embrace Democrats because they know the Republicans will hurt them, but no Democrat should play to any group.
2/ We ought to reject someone who is afraid to offend, who would never question the orthodoxy of "liberal thought" like questioning whether policy aimed at gun sales is likely to be effective, given the number of guns already out there.
3/ And we ought to take a hard look at any Democrat who has been entrenched too long, who was in power, guiding the party when it exploded and sank on November 8, 2016. When Pearl Harbor happens, basically, anyone who was in command gets fired. On the national stage, Debbie Wasserman Schultz was a head who needed to roll, but what about here in New Hampshire?
I have not yet heard all 8 candidates who have declared for Congress, and the adult in me says I should listen, consider all options.
But it is nice to know there is at least one candidate, thus far, Terence O'Rourke, who does not fall into any of these unappetizing categories, someone who is unencumbered by past defeats, who speaks his mind knowing some of what he advocates--a national health system--will not today have the support of the average citizen but who has faith someday voters might come to embrace this idea.
His basic virtue is an openness to new ideas and a love of ideas.
This is what was so appealing about Clinton--he was a policy wonk. He went to the workers at shoe factories in Maine and told them he could not save their jobs, that bigger forces than even government were at work sending their jobs overseas, but that he would work to find them a new jobs. Clinton observed this country will not be majority white in fifty years and when he said that, he sounded neither mournful nor joyful--he was simply stating a fact he thought we all ought to deal with. His willingness to think dispassionately about such a potentially emotional shift made him seem both honest and brave.
In the face of Trump, we look for the opposite. Trump cannot speak from a fund of knowledge on any topic. He is a salesman, a con artist. He knows only punch lines. So it's refreshing to hear from a lawyer who knows law, who knows the Constitution does not need to be amended to change the composition of the Supreme Court before Trump's appointees die.
Trump had heel spurs, so we look for someone who has had the experience of having a bullet fired in anger at him.
Obama was one of the finest writers of his generation. Trump can only deal tweets. The pendulum should swing to someone who can marshal a few facts to support an argument, who can think, not just bellow, on his feet.
O'Rourke may not be the only one out there to offer something new.
But it's nice to know, there is at least one Democrat who can allow us to hope.
The thing is, we once had a Democrat who gave me hope, and he was Barney Frank.
Where is the Barney Frank among our current candidates?
When some alt right lunatic calls Obama the leader of a Nazi agenda Frank asks, in his faux polite way, "Excuse me, Ma'm, but on what planet do you spend the majority of your time?"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxgLXDupHaI
He noted that some Republican had said he was determined to enact his radical gay agenda which, Frank admitted, was exactly what he hoped to do, and it included being able to be free of violent acts motivated by bigotry, the right to fight for his country and the right to be married.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JR1iS_38is
Maybe the New Democrat I'm looking for is simply an old one.
Of course, images of some amalgam of Obama, JFK, Gloria Steinem ran through my mind, and then I realized, I am thinking backwards when I should be thinking forward.
 |
| Cump |
It is easier, sometimes, to think of what you do not want:
1/ We should not want someone who parses every sentence so as not to offend any group: #MeToo, people of color, labor, police, mothers, gays, any of the whole coalition which Hillary tried to harness and not offend. There is simply no way for anyone to speak this carefully and still manage to connect to the critical citizens out there who know when they are being played. These are groups we hope embrace Democrats because they know the Republicans will hurt them, but no Democrat should play to any group.
2/ We ought to reject someone who is afraid to offend, who would never question the orthodoxy of "liberal thought" like questioning whether policy aimed at gun sales is likely to be effective, given the number of guns already out there.
3/ And we ought to take a hard look at any Democrat who has been entrenched too long, who was in power, guiding the party when it exploded and sank on November 8, 2016. When Pearl Harbor happens, basically, anyone who was in command gets fired. On the national stage, Debbie Wasserman Schultz was a head who needed to roll, but what about here in New Hampshire?
 |
| O'Rourke |
I have not yet heard all 8 candidates who have declared for Congress, and the adult in me says I should listen, consider all options.
But it is nice to know there is at least one candidate, thus far, Terence O'Rourke, who does not fall into any of these unappetizing categories, someone who is unencumbered by past defeats, who speaks his mind knowing some of what he advocates--a national health system--will not today have the support of the average citizen but who has faith someday voters might come to embrace this idea.
His basic virtue is an openness to new ideas and a love of ideas.
This is what was so appealing about Clinton--he was a policy wonk. He went to the workers at shoe factories in Maine and told them he could not save their jobs, that bigger forces than even government were at work sending their jobs overseas, but that he would work to find them a new jobs. Clinton observed this country will not be majority white in fifty years and when he said that, he sounded neither mournful nor joyful--he was simply stating a fact he thought we all ought to deal with. His willingness to think dispassionately about such a potentially emotional shift made him seem both honest and brave.
 |
| Understated |
In the face of Trump, we look for the opposite. Trump cannot speak from a fund of knowledge on any topic. He is a salesman, a con artist. He knows only punch lines. So it's refreshing to hear from a lawyer who knows law, who knows the Constitution does not need to be amended to change the composition of the Supreme Court before Trump's appointees die.
Trump had heel spurs, so we look for someone who has had the experience of having a bullet fired in anger at him.
Obama was one of the finest writers of his generation. Trump can only deal tweets. The pendulum should swing to someone who can marshal a few facts to support an argument, who can think, not just bellow, on his feet.
O'Rourke may not be the only one out there to offer something new.
But it's nice to know, there is at least one Democrat who can allow us to hope.
The thing is, we once had a Democrat who gave me hope, and he was Barney Frank.
Where is the Barney Frank among our current candidates?
When some alt right lunatic calls Obama the leader of a Nazi agenda Frank asks, in his faux polite way, "Excuse me, Ma'm, but on what planet do you spend the majority of your time?"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxgLXDupHaI
He noted that some Republican had said he was determined to enact his radical gay agenda which, Frank admitted, was exactly what he hoped to do, and it included being able to be free of violent acts motivated by bigotry, the right to fight for his country and the right to be married.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JR1iS_38is
Maybe the New Democrat I'm looking for is simply an old one.
No comments:
Post a Comment