While we’ll not be voting for either major party candidate, in part because California is solidly in the Clinton camp, veteran journalist and progressive Sam Smith offers some food for thought we’d consider if we lived in a swing state.
An excerpt from an essay at his always illuminating blog, Undernews:
As we move into the last month of this bizarre presidential election, it may be a little hard to remember that our choice is not just between two individuals but between the admittedly more boring but realistically more important issue of the politics they represent. Not voting for Hillary Clinton – her substantial faults notwithstanding – is not about refusing to select the lesser of two evils but is turning one’s back on over 80 years of progress thanks to the Democratic Party’s periodic command of the White House. It is about putting at risk decades of policies towards women, blacks, latinos, unions, the poor, and the environment, among others.
It is not that a President Clinton will do an ideal job of protecting this progress, but that she will respond to the pressure she is under and if that can be defined by those of the aforementioned ilk and interests there is no doubt that we’re in for a better four years.
This is all happening at a moment of substantial demographic shift in our politics. Consider that approximately 60% those 29 and younger support Clinton while only 30% support Trump. The latter are in their last years of influence in our politics. Trump is their last gasp.
But what will replace them?
That will depend in no small part on the skill with which progressive groups of highly varied specialties come together to define a common agenda. These organizations have increasingly restricted their interests to their primary concerns, not recognizing that the success of these concerns in no small part depends upon a broader common agenda.