Editorial: Let candidates know you deserve better

Unless you’ve been living in a sensory deprivation tank, you know that steadily rising cacophony of angry voices means presidential primary season is near.

The business of electing a new president of the United States gets underway next week with the Iowa caucus, followed by the Feb. 9 New Hampshire mixed primary and our state’s first-in-the-South Republican primary Feb. 20. S.C.’s Democratic primary is a week later.

And, they’re off!

Well, more like “on” if you’ve been following the run-up the past few months, all the while with the volume turned up to 11. It’s not just broadcast media – with this level of vitriol, even the printed words of most candidates roar off the page and slap you upside the head.

It’s tempting to tune out, but in our form of government, you should want to tune in. Although it took us well into the first quarter of the 20th century before women got the right to vote and decades more before federal laws protected and enforced the voting rights of African-Americans and other disenfranchised minorities, we are now all supposed to participate in choosing our president and the elected representatives on down the line.

Too few do, however, and there are probably a number of reasons. Chief among them nowadays could be the toxic atmosphere that envelopes the process once candidates find the right combination of buzzwords and talking points they see resonating with their party’s base. Then they crank up the volume and hit those same notes over and over. Not just in stump speeches and debates, but in interviews. Put on the Sunday morning talk shows sometime and you’ll realize if you’ve seen one, there’s no reason to watch another if the same candidate is a guest.

Instead of a thoughtful discussion of issues and – Heaven forbid! – a presentation of facts, you get 15-minute commercials. Although the hollering is mostly kept to a minimum on the TV news shows, that’s far from satisfactory.

Last week, we celebrated the life and memory of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. He may not have been a politician in the sense we typically think of one, but he was political and he did successfully lead one of the pivotal campaigns in our country’s history. It’s difficult to imagine much of the country galvanizing around civil rights without his civil approach to speech and debate.

A contemporary who also crusaded for civil rights, Malcolm X, delivered hate-filled rants, not unlike some we hear today, before he ultimately renounced violence. King and Malcolm X worked for the same goals and both, sadly, were assassinated. But we don’t have a Malcolm X Day holiday.

What we yearn to see is a campaign season in which candidates rediscover civility and turn down the rhetoric in favor of substantive debate. Candidates will often disagree and that’s fine, but they should back up their arguments with calmly delivered facts rather than demonizing or demeaning their opponent. And please, can they stop using the word “compromise” as if it’s an expletive? The representative form of government our democracy, our republic (note the root words of “Republican” and “Democrat”) depends on was designed for compromise.

Without compromise, doesn’t that mean those who didn’t vote for the candidate or party in power is effectively unrepresented? Remember, winning candidates are elected to represent all of us, not just those who voted for them. The Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines “compromise” – in the context of this topic – this way:

▪ A: settlement of differences by arbitration or by consent reached by mutual concessions

▪ B: something intermediate between or blending qualities of two different things

Yes, another definition of the word is the abandonment of principles or integrity (“she compromised her beliefs to get ahead” or, “the stability of the hull was compromised after it struck the iceberg”) but that’s not the one we’re talking about here.

Let us work toward a different way. We’re not saying candidates and their supporters shouldn’t argue. As in most relationships, the occasional argument could be healthy – if it’s done in a healthy way. What we’ve seen the past 10 years is the polar opposite.

If you agree, if you want a more civil campaign season, then let the candidates know. It’s you they are targeting with frothing rants because it’s what they believe you want. Let them know they’re wrong, that you’re better than that and deserve more.

Otherwise, better get back in that sensory deprivation tank – or invest in a good pair of noise-canceling headphones.

This story was originally published January 24, 2016 at 11:26 PM with the headline "Editorial: Let candidates know you deserve better."