This past Thursday the Democratic debate unfolded pretty much as most had expected it to. There was neither fizzle nor bang. Just a steady drum beat of the stands that we had heard from the candidates before. During the debate, while some candidates tried to distinguish themselves from the others on issues by a margin, the thickness of a piece of onion paper, my mind started to wonder as the points that already had been made were being hammer on for the benefit of the metrics that were going to be measured by the polls and commentators and sadly to the detriment of the audience.
I understand that the candidates need to follow their talking points and the advice of the experts whom they have hired and how difficult the dynamics of a debate is and on top insert all of that on the fly. Some do it gracefully and effortlessly while others look as if they are trying to swim through gelatin. Then there is the ever present moment to have a moment, moment in the debate were a slogan is born or the outrageous idea that is so out there that the other candidates, as much as they try, couldn’t but let out a laugh. You also have the gotcha moments where suddenly a candidate gains a few point, just enough to get out of the rut at the expense of another. All of these happened and more in this debate. While all of this was happening my mind wondered unto the yet to come debate with Trump. I have to admit that it caught me by surprise. I know my mind and it is as predictable as sunrise and sunset, so when it presented me with the juxtaposition of each of the candidates I was watching in a match against Donnie, I began to worry. How would each of these fair against the master of twitterdom? Better yet, against the regular recipients of the master, whose attention span and comprehension are measure by less than 140 characters. (Some would dismiss this block of voters but may I remind them that because of that dismissal, we lost bigly this last time and now are suffering through the modern dark ages.) Well, except for a handful (and I mean less than one hand has fingers minus a thumb) the rest of the candidates would perish in the oblivion of Washington D.C.’s time frame.
Then there are also the unmentionables: impeachment, the inverted yield curve and the impending recession that it forewarns. Why did no one talked about these? That is a mystery to be solved. I won’t even try to find the logic for the absence. However, I will argue that the main factors that have unseated more incumbent presidents have been impeachments and recessions than opposing candidates. Not to mention that is a chance lost.
I will finish my observations by book ending them with two modern time perspectives that are as opposites as can be, even though they are only a bit older than half a century apart.
The first is from Edward R. Murrow in a speech regarding the medium of television he gave at an event in his honor circa 1955:
………..I began by saying that our history will be what we make it. If we go on as we are, then history will take its revenge and retribution, will not lent in catching up with us. Just once in a while let us exult the importance of ideas and information. Let us dream to the extend, to the extreme of saying that on a given Sunday night, the time normally occupied by Ed Sullivan is given over to a clinical survey on the state of American education. And a week or two later the time normally used by Steve Allan is devoted to a thorough going on study of American policy in the Middle East. Will the corporate image of the respective sponsors will be damage. Will the shareholders rise up in their wrath and complain. Will anything happen? Other than a few million people would have received a little Illumination on subjects that may well determine the future of this country and therefore the future of the corporations. For those who say that people wouldn’t look, they wouldn’t be interested, they’re too complacent indifferent and insulated. I can only reply, there is in one’s reporter opinion, considerable evidence against that contention but even if they are right. What they’ve got to lose? Because if they are right and this instrument is good for nothing but entertain, amuse and insulate. Then the tube is flickering now and we will soon see that the whole struggle is lost. This instrument can teach, it can illuminate and yes it can even inspire but it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it towards to those ends. Otherwise it is merely wires and lights in a box. Good night and good luck!
The Second is the first few minutes of the movie Vice as it explains how an unknown became one of the most powerful man in America:
…Dick Cheney saw something else that no one else did. He saw an opportunity. As the world becomes more and more confusing, we tend to focus on the things that are right there in front of us; while ignoring the massive forces that actually change and shape our lives. And with people working longer and longer hours, the less and less, when we do have free time, the last thing we want is complicated analysis of our government, lobbying and national trade agreements and tax bills. So it’s no surprise that when a monotone bureaucratic Vice President came to power, we hardly noticed. As he achieved a position of authority that very few leaders in the history of America, ever have forever changing the course of history for millions and millions of lives. And he did it like a ghost with most people having no idea who he is or where he came from.
What would Murrow say today? What is it that he is screaming from the grave as he sees the unfolding of the present?
Good night and good luck!