We have this notion that most politicians are fake. That notion is mostly based on, well, facts. It is true that who we refer to as “mainstream” or “establishment” politicians mostly say what they have to say to get elected, and then do what they have to do to keep their donors happy. And the irony is, for a long time, that was called being a good politician. Manipulating your constituents and donors was the bedrock of our political system. It was as American as burgers or freedom or irresponsible gun ownership. For a long time, we took politicians at face value. Obama said that he was going to transform the entire system, and we believed him. George W. Bush said he was all about compassionate conservatism, and we believed him. Bill Clinton said that he would break the Washington stalemate by reforming campaign finance, and we believed him. We believed our politicians. We don’t anymore.
Being a politician, especially running for President, was always difficult. Building a vision based on extremely detailed policy proposals, and then trying to explain those extremely detailed proposals in a simple yet inspiring way is no easy task. But the 2016 election added a new job description for politicians: being “real”. Hillary Clinton was the most qualified person to run for the Presidency. Yet, but she seemed fake. She seemed corrupt. Maybe she was, maybe she wasn’t. But that doesn’t change the fact that she was by far the better candidate. Donald Trump was the exact opposite. He was, in all means, a terrible nominee. But he seemed authentic. And look who got elected.
The emphasis on authenticity is even more significant in the 2020 election, with progressives setting countless litmus tests -check out The Young Turks’ pledge– and saying that anyone who isn’t pure in their progressivism, anyone who bases their ideas on getting voters or donors, anyone who hires fancy consultants, anyone who has ever breathed the same air as a Wall Street executive is fake and should be disqualified. This typically means that more pragmatic candidates such as Kamala Harris or Pete Buttigieg should not be trusted, and the Democrats have to go with an ideology candidate like Bernie or Warren.
Don’t get me wrong, authenticity is important. It signals that a candidate will not back down when he or she is President. But isn’t eliminating candidates simply because they’re trying to calculate a winning strategy a bit extreme? Can’t someone care both about accomplishing great things as President, but also building a successful campaign? I don’t know the answer to that, but I do know that we have to be way more open minded.
Politics is Stupid. 