Tramping around Tampa for the Republican National Convention was easy. I had an SUV with air conditioning. A beachfront suite and white sand. Drunk without a care, I waltzed through the derangement, masquerading as one of Them. When They made me sick, I did not hesitate. I puked, farted, shat, and pissed without remorse.
Such a simple dismissal eventually became liberating: Everyone there was patently insane. Stone dumb, self-serving, or profoundly evil.
Upon arrival in Charlotte, however, life becomes a bit more complicated.
I am racked by a deep malaise. Though the twisted constraints of the two-party system have long been apparent, spending two weeks in the epicenters of each party’s mangled, detached, and hypocritical heart profoundly shakes my already bleak outlook on the American future. If Tampa was Hell, Charlotte is Purgatory.
As I tumble around the so-called Wall Street of the South, a phrase from Tampa grows in volume. Upon its utterance by Senator Marco Rubio in Tampa, it rattled me. Now the resonance is haunting:
“‘Hope and Change’ has become ‘Divide and Conquer.'”
_______________________________________________________
Thursday around five o’clock, I set out towards the Convention. I’ve been to enough lunches, rallies, and speeches in the last week and a half to know the only thing worth taking away is the food. Twits, climbers, and lapdogs. Hot air, profiteers, and narcissists. I’ve had it with them all.
It’s raining, and the bike I bought off Craigslist has no brakes. With some unease I put on my rain-slick. It doesn’t look good.
But halfway down the hill I take the jacket off. Sun’s out now. It’s beautiful. Blue skies. Charlotte’s lush greens are coming to life. It was like this on Wednesday, too. But damn, Thursday is even finer. Too bad they moved Obama inside, from the football stadium to the basketball arena.
I ping pong around Uptown for a bit, arriving at the gates at 7 pm. They are locked. Hundreds standing in line, anxious, bated breath. I wait an hour for an answer. Finally it comes: we’re not getting in.
Strangely enough, I don’t really mind. Sure, there remains a chance that the Barack of old may reappear. That he might do something special. Something historic. Something transformative.
But the odds suggest otherwise. They’ve been headed that way for years.
_______________________________________________________
Eight years ago Barack Obama addressed the Democratic Convention as a state senator. His message, exquisitely delivered, was simple and profoundly affecting: within America remained a power and sensibility to transcend the trappings of partisan politics and achieve something real. Four and a half years ago, when I covered Obama’s first visit to Portland, that message had taken the shape of genuine movement—one buttressed not only with hope, but with policy to boot.
Four years ago I traveled to Denver and watched as Obama accepted his party’s nomination at Mile High Stadium. I remember feeling conflicted. Let down. Obama—this stunning communicator—seemed to be dulling his blade. As I wrote at the time, “The speech doesn’t soar in the high winds of Obama’s previous orations. It is down to earth, hacking a way through an overgrown political jungle. Although I acknowledge the pragmatism, it is not my ideal.” With fear, but still some faith, I wondered if the generational wave propelling Obama had crested or had somewhere yet to climb. “Only years from now will we really know for sure,” I wrote. “But I believe the fucker is still on the move—even if it has lost speed.”
On March 23, 2010, after months of mismanagement, President Obama signed the watered-down Affordable Care Act. By that time, the wave was dead.
In October of that same year, just before the midterm elections, I traveled to Washington to cover Jon Stewart’s “Rally to Restore Sanity” on the Capitol Mall. More than a quarter of a million people showed up. But those who did came looking for something more than calls for civility. They were refugees of Hope and Change, searching for someone to lead them, to resurrect the torch Obama had dropped. Instead they returned home empty-handed. Lacking a grand, unifying, and sustained push from the bully pulpit in the midterms, Democrats were beat to a pulp. The President’s party lost the House and a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. Nothing has gotten done since. Even worse, they’ve learned nothing from it.
At the Convention in Tampa, New York Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman attempted to explain to Charlie Rose the president’s seeming deference and loss of narrative force.
“I still wonder sometimes whether Obama understands why he was elected,” Friedman said. “I think people really believed that we needed nation building at home. And I think they really believed that [Obama] had both the vision and the ability to pull us together for that task.”
In Charlotte, speaking about his election, Obama made the following statement and I winced. “It wasn’t about me,” he said. “It was about you.”
In part, yes, Obama’s election was about us. It was about him, too. But moreover it was about an idea—the very idea on which Obama rode to power and misplaced once he got there: divisive partisan politics could be overcome. Perhaps belief in such a possibility was misguided or naïve. Nonetheless, there was no reason for Obama to retreat.
Yet four years later he has turned almost completely. Today the Obama campaign banks on fracture, employing the same bitter politics of fear he once so decried. As his speech in Charlotte showed, the president, for whatever reason, is through with big ideas and done with hopes of change. His prime-time address in Charlotte was spent, largely, defending the status quo.
But surely there are issues American citizens, both Republican and Democrat, can get behind. What about mortgage relief for underwater homeowners subject to predatory loans? (Bank bailouts enflamed the Tea Party—why not turn the tables?) Or debt reduction? (Why won’t the President endorse Simpson-Bowles?) What happened to the jobs plan? (Let’s get specific!) Better yet, how about a moon shot on energy independence? (Republicans may deny global warming, but they hate expensive gas.) Perhaps even new rules for corporate governance? (Commit crimes, go to jail—no more fines.) Unquestionably there are many, many more ideas, from those much, much more qualified than I.
To be sure, President Obama paid lip service to most of these concepts in Charlotte. But what he failed to do is embrace any with a freshness, zeal, or specific enough policy detail to grow it beyond party lines and into some greater narrative.
Instead, Obama and his team plot to secure a second term by a score of 51-to-49. But what does that get them? What does winning a base election actually afford?
In the current climate, not a goddamn thing.
Without a presidential campaign that’s capable of energizing the party as well as the people, down-ticket races will suffer. More than ever, mandates are fucking important.
Blame Republican obstructionism if you like. But rather than trying to reach over it, as he once seemed so capable, Obama appears resigned. Such reticence to take a chance, especially in the face of such a deeply flawed opponent, is that much more disheartening.
Nonetheless, the most basic human levels of compassion recognize him as well meaning and relatively just, and the White House looks to be Obama’s to lose. Sadly—and without any satisfactory reason why—the path Obama has chosen in pursuit of a second term all but assures his greatest promise shall go unfulfilled.
So much for history.
Anyway, it’s the future I worry about. And should Obama win reelection without overwhelming wind in his sails, enough to propel the country from these deep waters of greed, inequality, and mistrust, we shall remain marooned in a sea of slow economic growth, high unemployment, and ballooning deficits. We’ll be watching like assholes as the world evolves around us, where, in 2016, America could fall victim to the most sinister threat of all: a political climate offering Paul Ryan a real shot at the presidency.
Great. You’ve covered both major parties’ conventions, just like everyone else.
Perhaps we can read something we won’t read elsewhere, like coverage of Gary Johnson – the guy GQ says is the “sanest man running for president” and is set to be on the ballot in all 50 states? Perhaps this “democracy-loving” country could have its eyes opened to the fact that we disallow any new voice into our elections? Perhaps some good ol’ investigative journalism could be done on how the two major parties (which are mostly the same thing at this point) dominate federal elections and work really hard to disallow other parties to get candidates onto a ballot or allow them into the debates? Perhaps we don’t need another story telling us that we’re pretty bummed about having to vote for Obama, but “have to” because Romney is such a terrible choice, even though Obamaney ISN’T the only option?
Just some thoughts.
I have a 15 year old in my house who wants you to vote. Are you registered? Yeah you have to be registered. Earlier this week, she met with other high school kids (5-it’s a start) from around PDX. They worked on their own speeches to address the senior class at their individual high schools regarding their responsibility and their opportunity to influence our future. Next, she met with and received support from the principal to arrange a time with her upperclassmen. Wow. How would you feel if a 15 year old kid was telling you to get your ass in gear? Maybe the children will lead us.
Oh, please. Obama has always been a corporate glad-hander. His “Change” campaign in 2008 was pure fraud. You’re a fool if you think this empty social-climber ever promised anything but more babysitting on behalf of the powers that be.
Good piece, unfortunately the US is an unstoppable suicidal tailspin to the right (maybe far right). Neither the media nor our political class seems remotely interested in the plight of the population, and politically active people are either wasting their time with the standard parties or some libertarian crackpot like Johnson or Ron Paul. (Yeah, gold standard and destroying the department of education, real progressive ideas there.)
Yeah the future is pretty bleak, especially if you’re not rich, white and male.
From the article: “Democrats were beat to a pulp. … Nothing has gotten done since. Even worse, they’ve learned nothing from it.”
Then, oddly, the rest of the article amply illustrates all the things Democrats HAVE learned. To wit, you can’t make common cause with people whose SINGLE GOAL IS TO DEFEAT YOU.
Looks like Tonry is the one who hasn’t learned anything since January 2009.
As a progressive/liberal independent/unaffiliated voter for about 20 years now, I voted for Obama in 2008 because I considered him the best candidate of the lot. Period.
I am voting for him again, enthusiastically, because I STILL think so. Like last time, I am not laboring under any illusion that he NEEDS my Oregon vote to win. I have often thrown my vote to an other-party candidate when this is the case (or, as when I lived in Texas, my vote meant exactly jack-shit when it came to how the electoral vote was going to go down).
No, he is not as liberal as I am (as Steve Earl put it when he was in town a few years back, “No, Obama is not a Socialist…I’M a socialist! But he IS a damn fine man and President who has MY vote.” (I may be paraphrasing the last bit some, but that was the gist).
To wit: he is FAR AND AWAY better than the ONLY OTHER VIABLE ALTERNATIVE. And it is not simply a case of “divide and conquer”…he has managed, in the face of unprecedented OBSTRUCTION, to accomplish a HELL of a lot and move us steadily towards goals most on the left (or in the middle) share.
Yes, he’s a moderate pragmatist who knows how to get things done in Washington, not the flaming leftist the Right makes him out to be…what? Did you BELIEVE them and think Obama was lying about who and what he was? He wasn’t.
The reality is that at this point in American politics, it is NOT YET POSSIBLE to elect a 3rd party candidate to the Presidency. We have a long way to go with opeing up the process, reforming the way we fund campaigns, reclaiming our media, and educating people. In the meantime, we must make it a point to elect candidates who at LEAST won’t actively work against every one of those goals!
All the whining about how he “hasn’t done enough”, often from those who DIDN’T VOTE in the mid-terms and allowed a Republican/Tea Bagger controlled Congress to emerge and BLOCK damn near everything he has TRIED to do.
So go ahead and throw a tantrum over not getting EVERYTHING you want RIGHT NOW and don’t vote for him or vote for some other-party candidate with zero chance of being elected. Either way, your “protest” will be a de facto vote for Romney/Ryan and the same Neo-Con team that drove this nation off a cliff and can’t WAIT to un-do everything Obama has done and take us backwards.
OR re-elect the man, give him a Congress willing to work WITH him instead of committed to obstructing and undermining him (and the economy) at all costs, and watch what happens. The fact is, you have the opportunity to vote for a VIABLE, ELECTABLE candidate who has gone on record as supporting a constitutional ammendment to overturn Citizens United.
Pretty cool.
That’s the whole political charade these days – pretend to be different. Divert attentions by arguing over grossly inflamed social issues while governing the same on matters of money and imperialism.
And by the way Ardennes, is reverting back to a gold standard crazier than the privately controlled Fed announcing its intent to print open ended amounts of money for an open ended amount of time? And who could imagine a our Country without the Department of Education, that bedrock agency that’s done so much for our nations school system since its creation in ….. 1980.
Yeah, going back to the gold standard is nuts when you have an expanding population, you need a fiat currency if gold mining can’t keep up with population growth.
Also, he wants to get rid of much more than the department of education (who cares if it only 30 years old) and wants to raise taxes on the non-rich even more. Hell, Gary Johnson wants a “fair tax” which more or less is a 23% ! sales tax on top of state and local taxes. Great, thats really going to help struggling families.
Libertarians are basically super-republicans that like to smoke weed, thats about it.
In the spirit of Prof. Boghossian, someone needs to call Tonry out on his bullshit. He claims that there’s things that Pres. Obama can be doing right now to work with Republicans while also bashing the Affordable Care Act as watered down. Obama tried his damnest to get Republicans to agree to a plan that they themselves proposed 20 years prior, but they wouldn’t. He watered it down to make it palatable to the conservative members of his own party, but mostly in failed attempt to get 3 moderate Republican Senators to vote in favor. So somehow the lesson he was suppose to learn is to work with Republicans?
Really, though, does Tonry know anything about politics?
I ask that because his summary about the kind of campaign he wishes Obama would run must be a whip-it induced fantasy. First off, Obama is doing EXACTLY what he said he would, or trying. His eloquence was always, always, always backed up by practicality. (He’s not against all wars, just dumb ones. Or one of his favorite MLK quotes, “the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice.”) But also, if he could win the election by inspiring hordes of people, he’d do it. Guaran-fucking-teed. It’s just not possible. The Democrats know that. That’s why his speech at the convention was so relatively boring. It’s more important for him to win than anything.
Finally, winning is winning. It doesn’t matter if he wins by 1 electoral college vote or all of them. He’s still the motherfucking President. He’ll have the exact same power either way. Congress, all 535 members of it, will still be there. All nine member of the Supreme Court will still exist.
Go read 90days90reasons.com. Maybe you’ll learn something.
“Such a simple dismissal eventually became liberating: Everyone there was patently insane. Stone dumb, self-serving, or profoundly evil”
Such simple dismissal shows a lack of understanding of almost half of Americans, and also reflects a poor quality of writing and understanding of our political system.
And, no, I am certainly not a Republican either.