Politics as usual

 

I don’t know about you and your political affiliation, but I suspect what I’m experiencing is true of you too. I guess it’s because I support liberal candidates financially, either when I’m feeling a bit flush or in some moment of political concern like the Dobbs decision, but I am deluged these days as the midterms approach with appeals for money.

Some are desperate: “We’re packing it in, giving up.” Others are bullying, “If so-and-so doesn’t win, the [other party] will be in control.” Strange how many contests, especially for the Senate, depend on just one seat. Lots of appeals cite “one-time matches” and yet I see them more than one time.

And the inconsistency: one day they’re ready to pack it up, but the next they are triumphantly reporting that their candidate is “surging,” or “gaining two points,” or even “leading by two points.” Of course, it’s too early to put much faith in polls, so I ignore these. And then I get emails that say, “We’re crying tears of joy,” or “Trump bawled when he read this.” You just must take everything with several large grains of salt.

I am leery of PACS and seldom respond to the emails, which often have blaring, boldface warnings and dire predictions with lots of exclamation points. What bothers me is that a few of them may really be doing good work, but they hide it behind the flamboyant, demanding presentation. Those are also the ones that often make you feel guilty: “We haven’t had your response!” or “Does Judy Alter not want to support so-and-so.” Katie Porter of California is one of six legislators who does not accept PAC money, and I support her.

The mailings I most dislike: polls. They want to ask your opinion on a certain topic, and I am always glad to share that. But say it’s a question about environmental concerns, you answer, even choose the dots for one or two opinions, and then the email becomes a series of such dumb questions, the answer so obvious that no one, but no one, needs a survey. And of course, finally, you find yourself confronted with a screen demanding to know if you want to give monthly (I never do, because I’ve known the bookkeeping to screw up) or a one-time gift. If I give, it’s always a one-time gift.

For years I thought I’d just wait and donate closer to the election, when who needed the most support was obvious. But lately I’ve been impressed by ads that include a reminder that giving now does much more good than the week before the election.

So I’ve settled into my routine, which is pretty unorganized. I give sporadically to a group of candidates that I think I want to support. Lately my list includes Val Demings in Florida, John Fetterman in Pennsylvania (love that he won’t wear a suit), Raphael Warnock in Georgia (can anyone in their right mind vote for Herschel Walker who gives all the signs of brain damage from too many hits in the head), Mark Kelly in Arizona (thought his emails are for some reasons particularly annoying), Michael Franken, the U. S. Navy retired admiral running to defeat the aged and infirm Chuck Grassley.

I have to remind myself that federal elections are not all that matters and to pay attention to local races, especially in Texas. Who controls our state legislatures matters a lot in daily life, and in Texas, we sure need new blood.

I’ve read lately about the divisions in both our major parties. I could not care less if Republicans fight among themselves—oh, okay, maybe I do care because it’s a sign that some are moving away from blind loyalty to trump. But I am concerned about divisions in the Democratic party at a time when solidarity seems most important.  The big concern to me is whether Joe Biden should run again. A good friend said to me tonight that after all, he is 84 and would be close to 90 at the close of his second term. I think that’s a common misconception—he is 79. No spring chicken to be sure, but he has accomplished so much for this country, that I am leery of abandoning him unless he himself decides to step down, which he had said he would do when he ran.

I think Biden has a magnificent vision for this country, one that would restore us in the way that FDR’s New Deal did in the thirties, restores the middle class, give every American a chance, not just the one percent. But he’s been stymied by a Republican congress and one recalcitrant Democrat—Joe Manchin. Biden has faced a looming economic recession, a pandemic, our destroyed international reputation, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, a near crisis in the environment, domestic terrorism, a rogue Supreme Court and the destructive Dobbs decision, and he’s dealt effectively with each of them. His rising employment numbers have kept us out of recession, his diplomacy has managed to restore out international reputation left in shatters by the former guy, and to contain the Russian invasion by assembling European nations as allies.

I also think that Biden’s own low-key personality betrays him. He hasn’t been as forceful in the public eye as even Obama. He makes me think of a guy who goes quietly and efficiently about his work, ignoring criticisms. But he ought to get before the public more, and I think he’s beginning to do that.

Before we succumb to the stereotype of ageism, let us look long and hard at the individual and his accomplishments, not his age, and make a rational decision.

And my question: who would the nominee be if not Biden? It’s time for Democrats to stop bad-mouthing their leader and pull together.

Oops. I’ve preached far too long.