It’s not over ‘til it’s over, but there was much to like about the surprise events on Super Tuesday. Cynic that I am, I did not see the Biden landslide coming. Blame that on me because I assumed that reason had left the building for many Bernie Bros and Warren wombats. I was wrong, and I’m glad of it. If Biden doesn’t implode in coming weeks, Trump’s worst nightmare may come true: Running against a decent, experienced candidate who would restore respect for the American presidency.
Happiness aside, there are other takeaways from Tuesday. First, the assumption that a huge block of the Democratic party electorate is more interested in receiving government benefits than in good government, was proven wrong. Even younger voters, many of whom are carrying large student loan debt and face an uncertain future, rose above their self-interest and passed on voting for Bernie or Liz. Second, Bernie appeared to rely on extraordinary turnout of young and Latinx voters. They turned out, but not in the numbers he assumed. Meanwhile he often seemed to ignore middle-class, suburban and older voters. These voters, as always, turned out. There is a lesson there that all candidates, regardless of party should remember: A broader appeal is always better than a narrow one. Third, three major Democratic candidates put the future of the country first in dropping out and endorsing their former competitor.
Special thanks go out to Amy Klobuchar and Pete Buttigieg, two strong candidates who, in acting selflessly, positioned themselves for bright political futures. Fourth, the election proved that it takes more than TV and web ads to win an election. Although there is much to like about Mike Bloomberg, arguably the most qualified candidate to run, assumptions that massive spending would translate into votes were proven wrong.
Thus, while it is too early to assume that Biden is over the line, either for the nomination or in beating Trump, my confidence in the American electorate has been strengthened. That having been said, however, there are a few things that are worth mentioning that might be described as continuing worries. First among these is something controversial. In the quest to increase voter participation, several innovations have been implemented in recent years, including voting by mail and same day or automatic voter registration.
The results on Tuesday in Colorado, where a huge percentage of the voting was by mail, provided Bernie with a win. One wonders if those voters had been forced to wait until after the South Carolina primary whether the outcome would have been different. Maximizing the information voters have before they cast their values is a good thing. And easy registration, while encouraging voting, has also resulted in something we saw on Tuesday—long lines of voters waiting in line who had not yet decided for whom to vote. To some of us, that is weird. If I could not make up my mind for whom to vote, I think I would stay home. The point here is that many of us believe that “maximizing the vote” is the highest good. Maybe promoting informed voting should be a higher priority. I confess to being cynical about someone who voted for a candidate because of a Kim Kardashian or Drake endorsement.
My nagging worries are consistent with my reputation of someone who worries about the future even when things seem to be going well. As we look forward to the next primaries, we should not assume this contentious primary season is over, but we should take a minute or two to welcome evidence that the Democratic party is not about to run itself off a cliff. Donald Trump, start packing your bags.
J.E. Dean of Oxford is a retired attorney and public affairs consultant. He is a former counsel to the House Committee on Education and Labor. For more than 30 years, he advised clients on federal education and social service policy.
Paula Reeder says
The people who waited in line in CA, TX and elsewhere did so because they wanted their vote to count – and it did. The simple fact is, the more people who go to the polls in November, the more likely it will be that the majority’s will to restore sane governance to this country will be realized this year. So, get set folks. Get out and vote and exercise your constitutional right of free choice, no matter how long you may have to wait in line to do so. YOUR VOTE COUNTS!
John Dean says
Ms. Reeder: Thank you for your comment. I agree entirely that everyone eligible should vote. I believe that voting is not only an important right, but also an important civic responsibility. In my view, voters that “do their homework” contribute more to a just and thriving America than those who don’t. I would like to schools do a better job in promoting citizenship education. I think this would encourage not only “better voting” but would increase participation rates.
Again, thanks for commenting.
Maria Wood says
Is name calling really necessary? A robust democracy is strengthened by vigorous debate and thoughtful consideration of diverse viewpoints and positions. Denigrating people who support candidates other than your own favorite seems an odd way to go about reducing inter-party bickering or promoting the unified effort it will take to defeat the current president. Your disingenuously self-deprecating “confession” to being a cynic about your fellow voters because you presume their voting decisions are made according to metrics you don’t appreciate betrays more than cynicism. Like name calling and the reckless wish that voters would stay home, it indicates disdain for your citizen compatriots and for the democratic process itself.
You can rest easy, though. Neither Drake nor Kim Kardashian appears to have endorsed a Democratic primary candidate in this election cycle. You may perhaps have been confused because the recent debate took place at Drake University in Des Moines. Maybe promoting informed editorializing should be a higher priority.
John Dean says
Ms. Wood: Thank you for reading my piece.
As you might expect, I disagree with some of your comments and regret you did not see the piece as constructive. Please note that I think you misread something to reach the conclusion that I’d like to see some voters stay home. My point is that informed voting is insufficiently promoted. I was troubled by voters waiting in line in Austin, Texas, telling a reporter that the had not yet decided for whom to vote. I’m not sure that happens to voters that see voting as a responsibility as well as a right. That having been said, I would agree with those that say voters have the right to vote as they see fit. For the sake of us all, I’d like to see more informed voting.
Regarding referencing Bernie Bros and Warren wombats, I would disagree that such rhetoric doesn’t belong in a vigorous debate. I would point out that Warren has suggested that both the government and the economy are corrupt. I saw her hyperbole as over the line and unfair, but respect her right to make the argument. Sanders is actively promoting class warfare. He and his supporters scare me. Part of bringing the Democratic Party together is working through the issues raised by both Sanders’ and Warren’s destructive campaigns and rhetoric. Sometimes voices have to be raised to be heard. Politely accepting fiscally irresponsible proposals, praise for Fidel Castro and ignoring comments implying that the Obama administration was “corrupt” hurt, rather than help the country move forward.
I don’t expect you to agree with my comments here, but I’m glad you shared yours. Please don’t call me disingenuous for saying that.
Finally, although I knew Kardashian and and Drake had not made endorsements, I will rest easier as long as they don’t.