Is it safe?
Well, of course not. It never has been, has it?
We now have less than a year to go till the next Super Bowl of Capitalist Democracy. Before the day in November 2012 when we, not they, are supposed to decide what we want to do with our government. How we want to spend our money--and whether we want to use that money to pay ourselves to do work that pays our bills and benefits us all or trust corporations to decide whether hiring us will raise their profits.
I do understand, thanks to my father and brother, why talking heads in the media as well as regular folk spend the two weeks before the Super Bowl yapping about who’s going to win. I even understand why we spend three months guessing eagerly and hopelessly about who will be playing the game. It’s fun, it’s harmless, and the speculation is appropriate because the outcome is beyond our control.
But this is different. We are the ones who will be acting on the big day. And so this loud and persistent speculation, rather than building excitement for the event, has the opposite effect: it limits our choices, dampens our interest, and makes us so sick of the whole charade that most of us never bother to play.
Which is just what they want.
With a month to go before the first official caucus voting, five different Republican candidates have been described as the “front-runner,” which is of course nonsensical. The nominating process is all about winning delegates in primaries and caucuses. Once citizens in those states vote, candidates begin to acquire pledged delegates. At that pointy someone has the most pledged delegates and can accurately be called the “front-runner”—or leader—for that party’s nomination. Until then, the term is meaningless. People who almost never get mentioned, people like Jon Huntsman, Rick Santorum, Ron Paul have the same standing as those constantly referred to as favorites, a distinction based on poll questions asked to people who may or may not vote in their primaries six months from now. This year, Herman Cain has provided the best example—and entertainment. When he surprised the “experts” by winning a nonbinding poll they did not expect him to, they at first described it as a Rick Perry loss and barely mentioned Cain’s name. When Cain then continued to show up in those almost daily polls that provide the narrative script for campaign coverage, he became the flavor of the month until done in by—what else?—sex. Now comes Newt Gingrich’s turn in the game of whack-a-mole.
But the question remains: Why the rush? Why are the political experts, including the media, so intent on narrowing the field? What’s the harm in having citizens in Kentucky voting next March have a full slate of candidates to choose from? Or at least a field of candidates who have decided on the basis of actual results that they will not attract enough delegates to win?
The answer became surprisingly obvious in the brief public courtship of New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, when commentators spoke openly about “the donor class.” Gentlemen, place your bets. God forbid there be a candidate left standing in the final round of the playoffs who has not been thoroughly vetted by the monied interests, talked to and paid for. The only candidates allowed to compete in the finals will be those few who have attracted enough money, not votes, to represent the interests of that money, not the interests of voters. Nobody is asking why these donors are not spending their money to create jobs. TV networks will never ask too loudly about the unseemly sums of moneys pent on campaigns simply because so much of it goes to them. (Another Super Bowl parallel. In this case the ad rates may not be as high but the buying season lasts, now, a full year.
So what can we do? Ignore the noise. Get ready for your turn. Read up on the positions of the candidates—all the remaining candidates, not just the ones mentioned every day. (This includes other “minor” parties that may hold primaries or nominating conventions, and whose candidates, quiet as its kept, are usually still on the ballot in November.) Determine which of those candidates advocates positions closest to your own. Pay no attention to the notion of “electability,” which by definition presupposes that someone else is making the decision for you. And when the moment comes, do what you think is best, for you, your family, and your community. But whatever you do, don’t give up.
Delphine Davis
