The missing populists

by | Apr 14, 2014 | Campaigns, Democrats, Editor's Blog, NC Politics, US Senate | 6 comments

The N&O today highlighted the campaigns of two long shot candidates who are challenging Kay Hagan in the Democratic primary. Ernest Reeves, a retired Army officer, and Will Stewart, computer repairman, both paid their filing fees and threw their hats into the ring. They are not serious contenders but they are serious people.

Every cycle, a few people with no public profile, no money and no real chance of winning file for high-profile campaigns. The Republican Party this year has several. I’ve always wondered what motivates these people.

The article in N&O offers some evidence. They are naive but they have well-considered positions and believe, at least partially correctly, that views like theirs are not being represented. Both candidates stand to the left of Hagan and both strike a more populist tone.

Will Stewart thought his candidacy would bring attention to the plight of the working poor and he’s bewildered by the lack of press coverage he’s received. In a state where a filing fee is the only requirement to get on the ballot, Stewart is not going to get coverage just for being a candidate. He needs either money, accomplishments or a schtick to get real attention.

But he and Reeves do highlight a missing voice in the Democratic Party. Kay Hagan is a moderate, pragmatic technocrat who is committed to making sure that government operates efficiently and effectively for the greatest number of people. She fits the mold of Marc Basnight-era Democrats who dominated the state in the late 1990s and first decade of this century. It’s a profile that fits her and can win in North Carolina.

But before Hagan, the last Democrat to win a U. S. Senate seat was John Edwards, who won with a populist message that pitted average people against powerful interests. It’s a message he stuck with through his 2008 presidential bid. And it’s a message missing from the campaign dialogue right now.

Will Stewart and Ernest Reeves lack the horsepower to crank up that message, but it can work for Democrats. The success of the Moral Monday protests has shown the power of populist rhetoric and positions to fire up the base. To take it into the electoral arena, though, they need a messenger with the profile to credibly deliver it.

6 Comments

  1. Thomas Ricks

    Politics is a narrative. We’re talking about them, so they affected the narrative. For protests, that’s a lot. For protests that did not involve local law enforcement beating them to a pulp in a nationally coordinated effort by the department of homeland security, that’s huge.

  2. Mick

    I agree with all you say, Thomas, but would also like to hear your rationale as to why you believe the Moral Monday protests were a “success.” Some would argue (again, not I; I participated in them) that they have only been about soapboxing, and only led to polarization and arrests.

    • Thomas Mills

      Mick, I think they shined a light on the issues that were going on in legislature and attracted national attention. They engaged the electorate and still has the imagination of the base. That’s half the battle: Getting voters to pay attention. Now, it’s up to party and GOTV operations to turn those folks into the foot soldiers necessary to win in Novermber.

  3. Chris Telesca

    A populist message has the ability to do more than just rally the base. The people who attend Moral Mondays aren’t just our base. Many of those people are not registered as Democrats.

    But the funny thing is – when you read the HKonJ points, many if not all are ALREADY part of the Democratic Party platform.

    What I think is causing the Democratic Party to hemorrhage voters is the move away from party-centricity to candidate- and donor-centricity. If our candidates would focus on the platform that the party officers and delegates come up with through meetings, debates and votes – they would rally the base and win back UNA voters.

    We need candidates who fight to turn our party platform into public policy, not do whatever their big money donors tell them.

    • Thomas Ricks

      I, for one, will never trust a national party organization again. THOUSANDS of dollars were wasted on Obama only to have him turn around and organize the crushing of Occupy and the persecution of Edward Snowden.

      • Mick

        To Thomas Ricks Your comment re: Obama, Occupy, and Snowden just leaves me shaking my head. My view is that (a) Obama did nothing of the sort you say; that (b)Occupy, in many locations (especially at the original site in NYC) trespassed on private property, and were only removed by local law enforcement after innumerable pleas and efforts to move them peacefully; and (c) regardless of what he may have exposed re: NSA, Snowden is guilty of treason, and he put my life and those of every American at greater risk from mischievous foreign entities. So we differ widely…….

Related Posts

GET UPDATES

Get the latest posts from PoliticsNC delivered right to your inbox!

You have Successfully Subscribed!