The Weak Shiver of an Uninspiring Democratic Process

The Weak Shiver of an Uninspiring Democratic Process June 7, 2016

 

Just a reminder that even headlines get history wrong (Wikimedia Commons, altered by Cody Ray Shafer)
Just a reminder that even headlines get history wrong (Wikimedia Commons, altered by Cody Ray Shafer)

I’ve been relatively quiet during this primary election season, mostly to stay out of the crosshairs between Sanders and Clinton supporters. I have enough respect for both candidates to still align myself with the Democratic Party (mostly) but enough differences to piss off both camps. Nevertheless, I’ve been rooting for Bernie, long before he even announced his candidacy. For years, he was a wishful-thinking kind of dream candidate. The guy who should run, but never would, and certainly would never get this far. But he did! And it’s been great to hear his platform and ideas circulated through the mainstream.

I don’t take much stock in media conspiracies, but the AP’s decision to randomly call the election the night before the California primary is deeply unsettling to me. I understand the technocratic math that led to the decision, and I understand that there’s virtually no way that Hillary won’t be the nominee. But if that’s the case, then why the rush? Why are Clinton supporters so eager to jump the gun, when they are equally certain that she’s got this in the bag?

There’s been an ongoing narrative from the admittedly small amount of Clinton supporters in my social circle that this is about party unity. In fact, one supporter posted the AP news in a largely Bernie-leaning group with the caption “We did it, Democrats!” But the response was not quite what he had in mind; there was resentment, especially at the idea that “we” did anything.

Call it populism, or naiveté, but actually voting for a leader is still a value held by many progressives, despite all the polling and math, despite all the projected outcomes and algorithms. Is the AP now going to call the November election for Hillary on Halloween, when Nate Silver’s numbers prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that she will win? Why not? Even though I’d be fine with the outcome, especially in a race between Hillary and Trump, that’s not the way it works. Polls are not elections, to say nothing of the potential to dampen voter turnout when races are called too soon. Like I said, I don’t tend to accept conspiracy theories, but the AP’s move last night could very easily be interpreted as precisely this kind of strategy.

People still like to believe in long shots. They happen. And though I understand why Hillary supporters are trying their best to unite despite party factions, it is not so easy for a good portion of the left who aren’t comfortable giving up until every last vote is counted, and who are increasingly uncomfortable supporting a candidate who is likely to be indicted. If Hillary does win, this form of democracy, the kind that encourages fealty over action, is an uninspiring start for her presidency. And yet, even if Sanders’ campaign is over, it is merely the beginning of a completely new force in American politics, and I’m just not sure Hillary Clinton is interested in making that kind of impact.


Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!