One thing that lets me sleep at night is the fact that demographics have shifted in the US and they do not favour Donald Trump. Still, I felt rattled after the second presidential debate, when a man from Georgia called CSPAN to say he had voted for Bill Clinton and nothing changed. He believed it was time to try something new. Something different.
I had heard this before — right before millions of Filipinos voted for Rodrigo Duterte. I went over the demographics again, like rosary beads.
Much has been made about how Republicans had initially benefited from the 'birther' campaign and the Tea Party. It suited them to have proxies undermine the executive branch. In Congress, they twice engaged in brinkmanship over the debt ceiling. In other words, the political right only has itself to blame for the nihilism which now engulfs it — and potentially, the nation.
But the failures of the left also bear examination. While Clinton's current lead cannot be attributed entirely to her virtues, the polling gap between her and Trump should have been much wider, earlier. She is fronting a man with no qualifications, no scruples and no restraint.
Clinton's (post-primary) policies target those who feel let down by government. Debt-free college, a living wage, paid family and medical leave for up to 12 weeks, tax relief for small business, closing tax loopholes that serve the wealthy, campaign finance reform, dropping the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Yet these have not penetrated certain pockets of America. Why?
The answer holds relevance for other countries where a progressive, policy-based approach to solving problems has meant jack-all. At the last Philippine elections, there were presidential candidates who ran on issues rather than bombast. Grace Poe was noted for her strategic approach to poverty alleviation, as well as the calibre of her advisers. She came a far third in the tally.
In Australia, a disciplined, idea-driven campaign against the Coalition (which had wobbled through the first half of the year) did not deliver government for Labor. In fact, some of its natural constituents gave their first preferences to other parties, including the Greens and One Nation. Its primary vote was the second-lowest in 70 years.
How could the left have lost its capacity to sell a progressive vision? Because it sold out.
"The left has tended to make more concessions than the other side. It adopted the language of market and capital, and sought to appease conservative anxieties,