The first political contribution I ever made was in the late 1970s to a candidate for president. I did it because I liked what he said. He was outspoken, but in a reasonably polite way, and it sounded pretty much like you could take him or leave him as far as he was concerned. He said what he believed, and never mind the fallout. He started out as a long shot, but after a while it looked like he might actually have a decent chance, and that’s when he made his big mistake; he hired campaign consultants who told him now that things were serious, he had to watch what he said. So they wrote scripts for him, which he parroted to the nation and began to sound like every other candidate and that’s when I wanted my money back.
These days people ask me why so many people like Donald Trump, and, on the other side Bernie Sanders. I think it’s pretty simple – they don’t fit the cautious candidate mold. They are outspoken – Trump more than he needs to be – and the public likes that. They liked that in Independent candidate Ross Perot, too, enough to give the election to Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996. And they liked it in Green Party candidate Ralph Nader enough, at least in Florida, to give the election to George W. Bush in 2000.
But Trump and Sanders are running in a party primary after which, if either one of them actually wins, which seems improbable, they are supposed to tone things down, move to the center and act as if you could actually trust them to govern. I doubt that either would make that move, but then, I don’t think they will have the opportunity. We like outspoken candidates, maybe because there are so few of them, but we don’t wind up electing them.
Presidential primary elections are decided by the “true believers” of each party. In the Republican primary the far right makes the decision, in the Democratic the far left, and it is those groups that the candidates pander to. However, in the general election the primary nominees are faced with winning over those voters who are more middle of the road and those who have no party affiliation. The candidate then faces the interesting task of convincing the middle ground that they are not as rightist/leftist as they have been telling their primary voters for the past year, honest. Maybe it’s like a religious conversion, they see the light the minute they got nominated and recant, somewhat, their pre-nomination beliefs.
To be frank, I think the current nominating process is a bad joke on the American voter. It requires huge amounts of money to get through a primary, it takes a lot of energy, and it takes a lot of double talk. So what we wind up with are candidates who are energetic fundraisers who will say anything to win. Well, almost anything. The smoke filled room had the advantage of party leaders being able to pick someone who would – or could – win the election. It was not a democratic process, but at least it was efficient.
But, here we are again, smack dab in the middle of another primary season with all its attendant bluster, accusations, half-truths, quarter truths, and annoying ads. But this one will be different, I think. This one will be fun, or at least not boring, and we have Donald Trump to thank for that.
Jim Elliott
Trout Creek