Caucusing in Washington

Today, Washington's Democratic party held local caucuses, a process which, in some extremely complicated and unclear way, leads to delegates being named to the convention. There are close to 900 registered voters here in Pt. Roberts, and in the 2004 presidential election, 450 of them voted for John Kerry. So, we may conclude that there are at least 450 Democrats here who might show up at the caucus. In point of fact, about 10% of that number appeared in the Community Center on Saturday at 1 p.m. to make their will plain. As I entered, I was asked to fill out a paper that authenticated my being a registered voter and a Democrat, and that inquired of my current preference for president. Then ensued some minor bureaucratic business and general conversation among this lot sitting at a group of tables. The 'current preference' count was given, indicating about 2 to 1 for Obama, with 1 for Edwards and 2 undecideds.

Then, people stood up and talked about why they thought or believed they were voting for Clinton or Obama. It was very hard to endure. One thing I have learned about growing old is that, if I ever tolerated fools gladly, I certainly don't do it now. People stood up and announced that Obama would transform the nation, would turn us into a country that sought cooperation with other countries rather than to take its own interests as the most important interests, and would turn DC into a place where people listened to one another rather than just insisted on having their own way. People told us how inspired they were, how hopeful they were.

We were informed that 'Hillary' was opportunistic, that her time was past, that the baby boomers had not been good leaders of the country and thus we must turn things over to the next generation. One lady announced she could never forgive Hillary her vote for the war resolution and, I guess, was hoping that the rest of us would choose not to forgive her, as well. One man explained to us that Clinton had received more contributions from the defense industry than the total of all other Democrats in the congress. Such little factual information as was mentioned was likely to be just plain wrong though easy to understand.

A few people spoke of the superiority of Clinton's health plan, but for the most part, it was contentless pronouncements filled only with the feelings of the speaker: the election, it appears, was about them and how they feel, not about the country and what needs to be done in it and what needs to be undone for it. And so, if these Obama supporters are disappointed at the outcome of the nomination, they will be too sad, I fear, to do the work that will continue to need to be done. And they will have done much laying of poison on the ground.

I doubt if I can convey my own feelings of irritation at having to listen to all this twaddle. These were not people who thought about elections as being connected to policy decisions in a government that has three separate official sources of power (the executive, the legislative, the judiciary), plus two or three other semi-official ones (the press, the people, lobbyists). Rather, they spoke as if they wished to name a magician who would make all as they wished to have it be. Hillary was not the magician they had in mind, though. Obama is the magician and it is indeed interesting that progressive and liberal voters are casting an African-American as the magician who will save their dreams. We have, we progressives and liberals, done all we could think of (which may or may not have been much) to address the endless and convoluted race problem in America and, although much has improved, we know in our hearts how deep that divide still goes. Now it is up to one man to save us. If only Obama is elected, then will we--through his work and charisma--go beyond all the old problems. Lucky him to have that crown put upon him.