Lowering the temperature of our political climate will take raising the bar on the kind of rhetoric we reward.
Courtesy of The Architect of the Capitol
“We should have a great debate, Rob. We owe it to everyone.” This was the statement President Jed Barlet of The West Wing left his rival before they embarked on their respective campaigns against one another in seasons three and four of the acclaimed television serial. While the show is fictional, those words have perhaps never been truer than today.
The two major candidates of the 2024 election cycle, Vice President Kamala Harris and former president Donald Trump, are criss-crossing the country for the next week making their closing arguments to voters why they should be chosen for the nation’s highest office. Employing a tactic not uncommon to presidential contests, both are attempting largely to disqualify the other rather than make the case for their election. In a town hall with CNN, Harris affirmed her belief that Trump is a fascist and represents a threat to democracy. Trump at rallies has repeatedly labeled his opponent both a fascist and communist. Aside from misinforming voters of accurate representations of these ideologies, these kinds of wanton declarations only serve to dilute the public’s focus from actual pressing issues the US faces.
From a national debt approaching $36 trillion to stubbornly high levels of inflation, the victor on November 5 is going to have to contend with the other major party likely mounting all-out resistance to any initiatives a new administration puts forward. The solution to this conundrum does not lie with the leaders who will inhabit Washington after election season, regardless of their party affiliation. It rests firmly in the hands of an American public that has the freedom and power to change the incentive structure and reward politicians who deal honestly with their colleagues and level with their constituents.
And while there exist many potential ways for this modern renaissance to take shape, a revaluation of the rhetoric of campaigns and governance is a sure starting point. That is at least the opinion of The Dignity Index, a scorecard that rates speeches and copy coming out of political operations based on the level of contempt or dignity they exhibit towards political adversaries. Founded by Tim Shriver, Chairman of Special Olympics International, The Dignity Index is predicated on the idea that “America’s divisions are not caused by disagreement, but by contempt.” The vitriol that can be daily seen on the political stage of America is often mistaken for passionate policy impasses, however, when considering the ongoing party realignment, where the Republican Party has shifted its positions to appeal to working-class voters and the Democratic Party has done so to court voters with college degrees, this explanation for the bitter mood of the electorate fades. Rather, the inability of the personalities who dominate these parties to coexist, buttressed by a cable news industry that relies on supercharged audiences to survive, feeds the cycle of discord.
As Shriver’s organization is doing, spotlighting this self-destructive cycle allows citizens to choose for themselves what kind of rhetoric they will lend their support to, and in turn what kind of government will represent them. Even in an era of hyperbole and personal attack, candidates will respond when voters make it known that they do not buy efforts to try to play them against one another. It may not be either Harris or Trump, or 2024, but it just takes one to break the doom loop.
Former president George W. Bush provided a glimpse into that future when, at the 2016 funeral of five fallen Dallas police officers, he remarked, “Too often, we judge other groups by their worst examples - while judging ourselves by our best intentions.” It is time to return leaders to office who seek to advance America by bringing out the best in Americans.
Related Posts
