When “Stronger Together” Is Just A Campaign Slogan


unknown

This morning as we all face a President Trump, Democrats across the nation are trying to understand how this happened. And who to blame.

For the past year, I have been pleading daily on social media and elsewhere – anywhere people might listen – for inclusiveness and empathy for the many struggles and experiences that were taking place. But it never happened. In fact, social dialogue moved even more deeply in the opposite direction.

You can’t fight fascism by trying to silence or diminish people. You fight fascism by listening to the people, by hearing them. The Democratic Party has a long history of not being able to read the room, of seeming incapable of feeling the temperature of the country and act accordingly.

This election, the DNC, Hillary, and many of Hillary’s most vocal supporters, chose to spend their time telling people to shut up. By painting pictures of them as deplorable or selfish, irresponsible, or simply getting in the way.

Until Democrats can recognize and comprehend their own vast role in the creation and perpetuation of Trump and Trumpism – and ultimately for this Trump presidency – we stand no chance of breaking our own destructive cycle.  Continue reading “When “Stronger Together” Is Just A Campaign Slogan”

Advertisements
When “Stronger Together” Is Just A Campaign Slogan

If Hillary loses, her most-avid supporters are already preparing to blame Millennials


maxresdefault
While it’s true that Millenials not voting for Hillary will negatively impact her chances, as well as independent voters, it is crucial to recognize that this is a prime example of why many worry about Hillary’s ability to “read the room,” as it were, and make the best choices.

 

In my opinion, Hillary is in danger of losing to Trump whose supporters are so excited and stoked that 95% of them are polled as “absolutely voting.” Hillary doesn’t come close to those numbers. Why is that? It’s pretty simple, really. Trump recognized the immense level of discontent, disenfranchisement, establishment distrust, and need for change that was out there and strategically tapped into it and chose to unequivocally represent those impassioned people, as misguided and dangerous as that was given the direction he chose to rally them.

 

Bernie Sanders invigorated and rallied a similar base, only this one made up of liberals fighting for liberal and progressive change – with an equally unstoppable level of excitement and need. Only Bernie used a message of inclusiveness and equality instead of instigating hate and bigotry, as Trump did.

 

Hillary got Bernie to endorse her. Sure, there were always going to be those who would simply never vote for Hillary. But that was always a small percentage. That rallied and excited base – with their chosen candidate now out of the race and endorsing Hillary and asking his constituents to vote for her – were all but ignored and left behind by Hillary the moment Bernie stepped out of the race.

Continue reading “If Hillary loses, her most-avid supporters are already preparing to blame Millennials”

If Hillary loses, her most-avid supporters are already preparing to blame Millennials

Idealism, Responsibility & Compunction: The Art of Constructing Our Political Narratives


third-party-candidate

I understand the thought process behind a piece like Clay Shirky’s “There’s No Such Thing As A Protest Vote”. I’d like to offer a different perspective. I chose to focus on Shirky’s piece because I believe it accurately reflects a particular perspective that is out there and the article itself is currently being shared extensively on social media and elsewhere as a school of thought some people are connecting with.

I think Shirky’s viewpoint runs the danger of functioning as a narrative for those who want to feel irreproachable in their voting decision by making any other voting choices or perspectives ineffective, irresponsible, and/or a sign of weakness. Shirky’s insistence that “Presidential voting is an exercise in distinguishing the lesser of two evils. Making that choice is all that’s asked of us, and all that’s on offer” can be seen as one example of a school of thought that indirectly (or even directly) stifles political change. It most certainly can be argued that it stifles progress.

Shirky sees only three options in voting this election (or any other):

A. I prefer Donald Trump be President, rather than Hillary Clinton.

B. I prefer Hillary Clinton be President, rather than Donald Trump.

C. Whatever everybody else decides is OK with me.

Continue reading “Idealism, Responsibility & Compunction: The Art of Constructing Our Political Narratives”

Idealism, Responsibility & Compunction: The Art of Constructing Our Political Narratives