So far, multiple states have already had caucuses and primaries, all of which have been highly publicized and extremely competitive. Iowa's caucus saw Pete Buttigieg performing exceptionally well, polling in front of all the other candidates and neck-in-neck with Bernie Sanders, one of the biggest names in the race. Buttigieg also did well in New Hampshire, coming in at a close second behind Sanders, potentially proving to many that he was a strong candidate. His performance was astounding, and something that surely caught the casual voter's eye. However, this effect wore off, as Buttigieg placed third in Nevada and fourth in South Carolina. Following South Carolina's primary, Buttigieg announced he would be ending his presidential campaign and is set to endorse Joe Biden. Another candidate who left the race was Amy Klobuchar, who had a consistently and comparably slow campaign, placing fifth or below in 75% of the caucuses and primaries conducted thus far. Klobuchar is also likely to endorse Biden, as she and Buttigieg both have spoken out against Sanders.
So what went wrong? Buttigieg is young, he has experience in politics, and he had the support as well as the funding to secure an excellent position for himself in Iowa. To an outside eye, it would seem crazy for him to drop out right before Super Tuesday. However, some of the cracks had begun to show in his campaign. For starters, he polled abysmally among voters of color, especially when compared against Sanders and Biden who poll extremely well among Latinx and black voters, respectively. This issue has more significance than mere electability, as "his poor performance with black Democrats signaled an inability to build a broad coalition of voters." Another problem is the intense competition between the Democratic candidates for the nomination, especially the candidates in opposition to Sanders. Buttigieg and Biden both have expressed concern with Sanders and his ideas, but having the two of the split the votes makes it easier for Sanders to sweep the states. A New York Times article states, "the party's moderate candidates [are] cannibalizing the center-left vote and making it impossible to coalesce and challenge Mr. Sanders."
With Super Tuesday fast approaching(tomorrow!), it will be interesting to see how candidates like Elizabeth Warren do, now that they are faced with less opposition. Sanders and Biden will likely remain the top candidates, but as Buttigieg himself proved, not every prediction is always accurate. So, some final questions:
- How do things like race and ethnicity impact both candidates and voters? Should it have an impact at all?
- Do you think the drop-outs benefit Sanders, Biden, or the smaller candidates more? How do you think the other candidates will try to secure voters that are now without a candidate?
- What's more important, unifying voters or having better policy?
2 comments:
I think race and ethnicity are both huge factors for both candidate and voters. In the history of American presidency, we have only had one black president, and the rest have been white men. This isn't very representative of our country, and so people get excited by candidates who aren't white because they have a chance to elect someone who IS more representative. And race and ethnicity do affect a candidate's ideas and priorities, so they may attract certain groups of voters rather than others based off that. Of course, some voters want to see more diversity within our government, but the race and ethnicity of a candidate's supporters is also important; it can affect how a candidate is seen by the public, especially if they are supported by one group specifically.
I personally wish race didn't have as big of an impact as it does within politics, but it is impossible to ignore because racism is a thing, unfortunately. I think the racial aspect of government is important because people are treated differently based on the color of the skin, and having different racial groups in government will help fix these problems and establish more racial equity.
I think the drop-outs will probably benefit Biden more than anything, especially because Buttigieg and Klobuchar are endorsing him. I think of it as them passing on the votes they would have received, but that won't be the case for every voter, of course.
I think the other candidates don't have enough time to do anything to secure more voters; they can't expand their policy ideas or institute more priorities, because that would look like last minute lassoing, which seems pretty fake and desperate.
I think it is more important to have a unified group of voters rather than having better policy, because the latter isn't achievable without a unified group of people.
Even though Super Tuesday is over, a lot has happened since! Biden and Sanders are the only front-runners left (with Tulsi Gabbard on the side - don't exactly know why she's hanging around). In regards to other candidates securing votes of candidates that have ended their campaigns, I think that when other candidates endorse ones that are still running, those voters might have new people to vote for. Also, people who do not follow this idea might just go to their alternative or "next best candidate on the list." I think it is really interesting how multiple ex-candidates have endorsed Biden and not Sanders - is it because they perceive Sanders being a "socialist?" Maybe? Not sure.
Post a Comment