This week a presidential candidates' town-hall meeting was hosted in Philadelphia by the Sheet Metal Workers International Association to expose viewers to seven democratic candidates for president. The seven included Joseph Lieberman (U.S. senator from Connecticut); Richard Gephardt (U.S. representative from Missouri); the Reverend Al Sharpton (of New York); John Kerry (senator from Massachusetts); Howard Dean (former governor of Vermont); Carole Moseley Braun (former senator from Illinois); and Dennis Kucinick (representative from Ohio). Democratic presidential candidates missing were John Edwards (senator from North Carolina) and Bob Graham (senator from Florida).

The common themes among the candidates were the plight of middle-class Americans as an abandoned economic group under George W. Bush's watch; the loss of political identity relative to the Democratic Party; and the lack of leadership in the Democratic party, especially in light of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. As Sharpton noted, "For the next eight months, I am going to slap the donkey all the way from Iowa to the last primary in America." Sharpton contends that Democrats have been behaving like Republicans so as to not appear weak on national security. He accused the Bush administration of lying to the American public about the real threat posed by Iraq, and most of the other candidates agreed with his position. Dean listed four areas of deliberate deception by the administration, including Iraq's purchases of uranium; Iraq's advanced nuclear capability; our military's knowledge of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction; and Iraq's partnership with al-Qaeda, all of which proved to be false.

By supporting the war with Iraq to avoid appearing weak or divisive, Democrats compromised their political credibility. The inevitable withdrawal of this support only serves to highlight the party's instability. Acknowledging this political crisis, the seven candidates are demanding that Democrats get back to their purpose: the advancement of the working class through equal rights; fair taxation, representation, and services (i.e., universal health care); and homeland security that protects our lives without eroding our rights ... blah blah blah.

The political oration is no different than it has ever been; it's all about what's wrong followed by what could be if he or she is elected. There is little analysis of why things are wrong, or much discussion about how he or she would make corrections. Worst of all, the candidates are uninspiring. This is not to say that their positions don't have merit; it's that these individuals can't sell it.

That said, there does seem to be a positive political shift afoot in this country. Perhaps the 247 candidates for California governor suggest that citizens are shaking off the lethargy that keeps 50 percent of our nation's eligible voters from participating in our elections. Democrats are at least recognizing that they must tap into this pool of disenfranchised voters if they hope to regain control of the legislature. The Republican party's worst nightmare for the next election would be the mobilization of individual voters to the polls who have traditionally neglected to vote.

The numbers, combined with the demographics of voters who consistently participate in elections, support the notion that the "haves" vote, while the "have-nots" don't. Logic would dictate that if the have-nots hope to improve the situation, the first step would be to vote. More people voting would automatically cause more diverse issues and causes to be addressed by candidates, which in turn would create more interest in the citizenry, which would generate more high-caliber candidates, generating a political structure that more closely reflects the will of the people.

With local elections on the horizon, the public should watch for candidates whose positions on issues have their basis in what is best for the community versus their own political futures. Those candidates who favor issues because they will ensure their re-election are unfit to serve. The difference can often be discerned through a candidate's willingness to disclose information, knowledge of issues, passion for the outcome, and advocacy for public input and participation, and to identify the real beneficiaries of policies supported or rejected.

Support the River Cities' Reader

Get 12 Reader issues mailed monthly for $48/year.

Old School Subscription for Your Support

Get the printed Reader edition mailed to you (or anyone you want) first-class for 12 months for $48.
$24 goes to postage and handling, $24 goes to keeping the doors open!

Click this link to Old School Subscribe now.



Help Keep the Reader Alive and Free Since '93!

 

"We're the River Cities' Reader, and we've kept the Quad Cities' only independently owned newspaper alive and free since 1993.

So please help the Reader keep going with your one-time, monthly, or annual support. With your financial support the Reader can continue providing uncensored, non-scripted, and independent journalism alongside the Quad Cities' area's most comprehensive cultural coverage." - Todd McGreevy, Publisher