Electability

What does electability mean? Electability is defined as,”capable of being elected (as to public office).” But that definition leaves a lot to be desired. Capable does not tell us anything about probability. It does not tell us what makes one candidate more likely to be elected than another candidate. It does not answer the question of what the voters want.  Polls asking questions about issues do not tell us what the voters want either because the Republicans gained control of both the house and the senate even when all of the polls showed that a majority of the voters disagreed with Republicans on most of the issues. Yet here we have a large number of pundits insisting that we think about electability and guard against going too far to the left. But what is too far left and who should define that for us. Obviously the people who most want to define far left are people on the far right. Then there are the so called moderates who are far too inclined to let the far right right define what is far left and then wring their hands over people accepting that definition.

What should now be obvious to everyone in this age of Trump is the undisputed fact that normal has failed. Moderation did not prevent globalization from turning blue collar workers into economic road kill. So now angry, destructive, and ignorant are the rule rather than the exception. The question is what are we going to do about it? I will submit to you that we cannot give these angry people more of the same. We cannot tell them we will take a bipartisan approach to governing when everyone knows we cannot achieve that because of the intractability of a Republican Party that appeals to its nihilistic base by obstructing everything positive and by threatening to blow up the government? In other words, candidates running as unifiers who say they will work across the aisle strain credulity regardless of how much people say they want to end the gridlock in Washington. The bottom line is that in an era of extremes moderates are too wishy washy and timid to bring about the bold changes we need to make.

The best advice I have heard given to prospective candidates is to be yourself. It is now time for the Democratic Party to be itself. Franklin Roosevelt made the Democratic Party the party that comes up with bold solutions and fixes seemingly impossible problems. Yes I know people are frightened by change, but when you are drowning you know you cannot stay where you are even if the idea of moving scares you.  And too many people are under water right now, both figuratively and literally. The problems we face are greatly exacerbated by a corrupt, incompetent, and compromised President, but he is not the root cause of those problems. Thus while we must remove him from office in order to deal with our problems, his removal alone will not solve those problems. Bernie and Elizabeth Warren are correct when they talk about the need to make big systemic changes. It is going to take a bold and sustained effort to save the middle class and keep good, hard working people from becoming homeless and hungry. Of course the Republicans will scream socialism and will froth at the mouth over the alleged destruction of capitalism. It is also certain that the Republicans will be aided and abetted by pundits who are already asking Bernie, Elizabeth and others if they are capitalists.

When John Hickenlooper was first asked if he was a capitalist he refused to answer, saying he did not like labels. I remember thinking at the time that I agreed with him about labels but that his answer was going to bite him in the butt. My answer to that question would have been: “It depends on how you define capitalism. If you mean the sort of social Darwinism that destroys competition in the market place, exploits workers, and charges what the market will bear for shoddy and often unsafe products my answer is no. If you mean a capitalistic system that has regulations protecting and promoting fair competition, labor, and consumers my answer is yes.” But I have to say that Bernie also had a good reply to that question. He said: "Do I not consider myself part of the casino capitalist process by which so few have so much and so many have so little, by which Wall Street's greed and recklessness wrecked this economy? No, I don't." Now that is how you answer the Capitalism question. To put it in sound bite form you can say, “I am a capitalist by any reasonable definition of the term.”

I should add here that any progressive candidate other then Bernie, who openly calls himself a socialist, can also turn accusations of socialism against Republicans. Remember they called both Roosevelts socialists even though Teddy was a Republican. They also called Harry Truman, John F. Kennedy and virtually every labor leader a socialist. Furthermore what Republicans oppose as socialistic programs are such things as Social Security, Medicare, Unemployment insurance, the Minimum Wage, and every other progressive program benefiting anyone who is not a billionaire. As an aside I have to say I admire Bernie's courage for calling himself a socialist and defending the label by pointing out that socialism as he uses it does not mean nationalizing everything.


If you are wondering whether I would vote for a moderate Democrat if one is nominated the answer is yes. I would vote for anyone other than Trump, but I really believe it would be a mistake to nominate a moderate. You cannot excite the base by running as Republican lite, and most of the democrats who did well in the mid-term elections did not run as Republican lite. Sorry Joe, but if the moderates had not failed we would not have President Donald Trump. We have to be who we are at our best. We have to think big. We have to be bold and kick ass for the good of this country and its citizens!