Thread by @PeteDDavis

We should judge 2020 candidates on 3 criteria:

(1) VISION: do we like their vision for the future of the country?

(2) INTEGRITY: Have they ever demonstrated actual courage in fighting for that vision?

(3) CAPACITY: Are they capable of building a winning coalition?

<1/12>

When politicians disappoint us, it is often because either: their vision was lacking; they lacked the courage to advance their vision (or lied about having that vision in the first place); or they didn’t have the skills or personality necessary to advance their vision.

<2/12>

A healthy election season should primarily be a contest of visions for the future of country — and when visions are similar, it should secondarily be a comparison of each candidate’s integrity and capacity. <3/12>

We have HUGE questions to answer about the future of our country. To name just ten:

(1) What do we do about the decline of unionized manufacturing jobs and the rise of precarious retail, home healthcare, fast food and platform (ex. Uber) jobs?

<4/12>

(2) What do we do about the sharp rise in class segregation in American life?
(3) What do we do about America’s persistent racial wealth gap?
(4) How do we reform Congress to better — and more quickly — respond to the will of the people?

<5/12>

(5) How do we solve for the steep decline in social capital (community bonds and trust) over the past decades?
(6) What role should America play in the security and development of other nations?

<6/12>

(7) How should we respond to the recent IPCC reports on our impending climate catastrophe?
(8) What can we do to better link the financial sector to investment in the real economy?
(9) How can we increase free time for the sake of strengthening family and civic bonds?

<7/12>

(10) How can we build on the progress of feminism over the past decades?

That’s just a few questions we need direction on. There’s a lot more — we have a lot to talk about this election season!

<8/12>

So, instead of describing, for example, Bernie vs. Beto as some psychodrama, journalists and pundits should help citizens think through these questions: what is Bernie’s and Beto’s (and Kamala’s and Joe’s, etc.) answers to questions such as these?

<9/12>

And when the candidates answer, journalists and pundits should help citizens dig into each candidate’s past to see if they have ever demonstrated courage in the direction of those answers — they should help us see if candidates actually believe their own messages. <10/12>

And if any candidates do, then journalists and pundits should help us think about which candidates have the skills and personality to achieve a winning coalition for their agenda. <11/12>

Whereas two years of political psychodrama would be deadening, this alternative — forcing candidates to answer big questions, discussing what courage means, and figuring out what coalitions are fertile for building majorities to advance our agenda — could be enriching! <12/12>