Yesterday I needed to get out the door earlier than usual to get to work. We have a big order due next Monday and a couple extra hours a day will see it done with time to spare. But I do need that extra time and I don’t really want to work till seven or eight at night. Anyway, I’m rushing about trying to get ready and there’s a knock on the door.
Canvassers.
“Yeah?”
“We’re with the McCain-Pallin campaign—”
“Oh. Sorry, we’re voting for Obama.”
They were young, I’d say early twenties. She held the clipboard (which seems unusual, I think, can’t be really sure, but I see more men holding the clipboard than women, it’s like control of the tv remote in a way) and both were reasonably attractive.
Both their faces showed their disappointment.
“Is there any way we could dissuade you?” she asked.
I hesitated. Now, this isn’t fair, but I have come to never expect good language skills from Republicans. Sorry, I know that’s a blanket statement, but it’s true—“Can we talk you out of it” is more common than the use of the word “dissuade” among the Right. I think it has to do with the presumption of choice the word implies, which the Right has been having serious problems with the last couple decades.
In my moment of hesitation, he pounced.
“You realize Obama is inexperienced and has ties to Liberal—”
I held up my hand and he actually shut up.
“You just lost me,” I said.
“Why?”
“Because you led with an attack on Obama. That doesn’t work. You need to tell me what McCain would do differently than his predecessor. You don’t start off by telling me what a bad idea it is to vote for an unknown when the known is so shitty.”
They both blinked. I think at the last word I used.
‘Okay, then—” he began again, gamely.
“No, it’s too late. I knew four years ago I wouldn’t vote for a Republican this time.”
“That’s kind of short-sighted,” he said.
“Looking ahead four years is short-sighted.”
“Well, look what your choices are now. Did you know four years ago someone with ties to domestic terrorists would be running as the Democratic nominee?”
“See, there you go again. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with Obama. We’ve been talking here now for over a minute or so and you haven’t told me one positive thing about McCain.”
“He’ll cut taxes,” she said.
“No he won’t. He’ll delay them. How do you think the deficit Bush has run up will be paid off? Somewhere, somehow, it will come from taxes, but both of them will wait till they’re out of office and it’s someone else’s problem.”
“With lower taxes the economy will grow.”
“Taxes were higher under Clinton and the economy grew faster and was more stable. You’re not making points on taxes. Try something else.”
“McCain won’t negotiate with states that sponsor terrorism.” This from him.
“Then he’s an idiot and we’ll pay for it. Next?”
“You must be a hardcore liberal,” he said.
“Did you vote in the last election?”
“Sure.”
“That’s a liberal idea, universal sufferage.” I looked at her. “Do you know when women got the vote in this country?”
She blinked. “The vote has always been ours…”
“1920. Before that it was thought women were too stupid to vote. Do you know when blacks were allowed to vote in this country?”
She looked uncertain.
“It started in 1964, with the Voting Rights Act. Liberal idea. There are probably still some counties where the local white bigots keep blacks from voting. Like, maybe, Florida in 2000?”
He was frowning. “Thank you for your time, we should—”
I still addressed her. “Are you married?”
“No.”
“Planning to be?”
“Someday…”
“Imagine you’re married to this guy and tells you how to vote or what books to read or who to talk to. Would you want to be able to divorce him if it got bad enough?”
“I don’t—”
“Think about it. Because the problem with the Republican Party right now is this thing called the Religious Right and among other things they’d certainly like to take away your right to divorce an asshole—which is a liberal idea.”
“Thank you—” he said again.
“Next time you bash liberals, read a history book. Everything that makes this country a nice place to live was originally a liberal idea. Social Security is a liberal idea. Unemployment insurance is a liberal idea. Open access to courts is a liberal idea. The forty-hour work week, liberal idea. Child labor laws, liberal idea. Both of which, by the way, the conservatives of the day thought would destroy the economy. Public education is a liberal idea. Public libraries, liberal idea. Laws against monopolies, liberal idea. The list goes on. All I hear from the Rush Limbaugh crowd is how all these liberal ideas have destroyed the country or are destroying the country, but the fact that he can shoot his fat mouth off on a public medium is itself a liberal idea. Look it up, it’s called the First Amendment.”
“There’s no need to get angry,” she said.
“Really? You’re canvassing for a politician who wants to run this country according to some notion of free enterprise which has resulted in a gigantic financial meltdown, appoint a couple of supreme court justices that will vote to take your personal choice away, and probably continue the policy of military internment of civilians without charge. The Republicans have gutted our educational system to such an extent that you came out of college not knowing when women got the right to vote and I’m not supposed to be angry? Instead of telling me how good McCain is, you just want to accuse his opponent of hanging around with someone who was connected to a radical group that was gone before you were born, a group that was pissed at the United States because it wouldn’t stop bombing babies in thatch-roofed villages. And now we’re back at it again in another part of the world, all because the turnip in the White House now thought it would be a good idea to have soldiers in the geographic neighborhood where a bunch of Islamic Mafiosi are hiding and maybe if we’re lucky a bomb might fall on them. Of course, their actual hiding place is a thousand miles away from where we invaded, but it’s only an inch or so on the globe he’s got in the oval office. I’m pissed because the party you’re working for thinks being tough is a viable substitute for using your brains and then turns around and telling us we’re all gonna do fine because taxes will soon be gone and everyone will have a job! Because everybody knows taxes are bad for business! But so is shipping jobs out of the country and allowing corporations to hide their profits in off-shore accounts. Oh, and by the way, since Government is really the problem, we’re gonna spend as much as we can in order to bankrupt it, so there won’t be any government in a few years for lack of money. Which means Exxon Mobile will be writing legislation from now on and KBR will be billing us privately for maintaining infrastructure, ADM will be policing itself to guarantee food safety, and after we give all our money to them AIG will take over for the Treasury. I’m not supposed to be angry? You two knock on my door to try to convince me to vote for someone that you can’t think of single good thing to say about. All you can do is try to scare me about a young black man and you don’t even know the history of voting rights in this country. I’m angry because you swallowed all that rightwing crap without a second look and think because some 72-year-old white man who got shot down because he was bad pilot in a war you probably don’t even know the history of is qualified to lead me into a future he thinks will look like 1956! So no, I guess I shouldn’t get upset. I’m late for work and you have just given me the final justification for voting for Obama. Have a nice day!”
I slammed the door then.
It probably wasn’t quite as smooth as that, but I was gratified by the look of utter dumbfoundedness on their faces. I watched out the window afterward and saw them actually leave the neighborhood.
Probably didn’t do them a bit of good, but I felt a whole lot better.
Republicans. Yeesh!
Mark: Well done.
Now I wish some of McCain's canvassers would knock on my door.
I've had the same experience with McCain supporters in informal conversations. Nothing positive to say except that McCain would be best for "terrorism" and that McCain would "cut taxes." Such a vapid program, for the reasons you suggest.
We've recently seen how badly the conservatives run the economy. I would add that Conservatives get an "F" on national security. http://dangerousintersection.org/2008/09/14/conse…
Anti-spam word: calm 😀
You should send this to SNL, they might like that and turn it into a sketch.
that -> it
That was beautiful. If I had been standing nearby and overheard that, I would've started a slow-clap.
Andrew Sullivan characterizes both McCain and the rhetoric of his canvassers:
Anne Applebaum and Joe Klein, like countless others, cannot support McCain because of his repulsive, vicious, negative, McCarthyite campaign and his unvetted spur-of-the-moment decision to pick Sarah Palin, an unhinged, know-nothing, delusional religious fanatic, as his veep.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_d…
pure awesome!
Aaaaaand bookmarked for future reference.
Woah dude.
I know canvassers are, by their very nature, annoying, but it sounds like you had an especially polite pack of McCain-Palin drones, and your reaction was just as futile an exercise as their silly little door-knocking. I'm sorry, but I just don't agree with the way you handled the situation.
I also don't agree with the way that my roommate scares away the Obama canvassers by identifying himself as a PUMA (Party Unity My Ass- a hardcore Hillary supporter). These people think they are doing the right thing- they are giving up hours of their time, most likely without pay, with the intent of bettering their world. And attempting to correct them, even if such an attempt fails, beats out approaching them with vitriol in my book.
Yes, they are misguided. Yes, they have facts confused, they are ignorant about basic historical events, and they presented a large annoyance to you. But I think an attempt at political involvement, especially an attempt at respectful involvement, deserves some minor degree of respect. I can't know for sure what went down, but it sounds like you totally ranted on them. I don't think that helps anyone.
Well done!
Wow… this was referred to me, and it is a fun read.
Mark and Erica above are both right to a degree. I understand Erica's distaste for ranting, and I appreciate Mark's burst of anti-republicanism. Taking a grownup stand against an immature ideology is hard when you know deep down inside they need (more than anything) to just be taken to the woodshed, because that is all they really understand.
Applying rationale to the irrational is a frustrating affair, and after having 8 years of right wing republican crap shoved down my throat with no way to respond other than wait it out has pushed a lot of us to the pre-violent state of mind. I am betting that deep down, Mark wishes he knew of a more effective delivery too, but geez… ond can take only so much and I cannot fault him one bit.
Erica is right that the same information may be able to be conveyed in a way that does not end in attack and retreat, but my own experience is the information poisoning that these people suffer from is deep and systemic… like talking to zombies. With the zombies, you had to destroy the head and the body would die. The inclination with McCain supporters is a temptation to do the same (metaphorically speaking…)
I'm not sure if interacting with the two young people in a calmer and friendlier way would have changed anything. People make up their mind and discussions and talks are usually not for making anybody change it. In this case, in my own personal narrow-minded way, I'm even more convinced that approaching these two differently wouldn't have changed much, because it takes a little bit more than being uninformed to support someone who would choose someone as unfit as Sarah Palin for running mate. I've already said that I think anybody who supports Sarah Palin in my eyes is a moron, a very ignorant one. I'm aware that this is a very harsh verdict and while I generalize once in a while, I do not go as far as here, but I've never ever seen so much absurdity surrounding anybody, be it herself or the reasons people give why they support her. I so doubt that trying to educate them politely about politics and history would have any effect. I know I wouldn't care what else I knew about the candidate I was supporting. The moment I saw him make such an irresponsible decision I would question my choice. Those two obviously didn't.
Mark T. et al: I think the ultra conservatives are more like Moonies. Except that Moonies never raise their voices. Ultracons are more like Moonies with a bad attitude. Many of them honestly believe they are right (as in correct) and will try to "educate" you to their beliefs and quite often get into a "I am right and your wrong because I louder than you" mode. Obviously the pair that you encountered were not fully "enlightened" yet, as they actually listened to you instead of repeating the nonsensical drivel. A large part of this was because you took control of the conversation early when you did not take the bait and try to defend Obama against the lies. Their entire pitch was based on the expectation that you would try to defend Obama against these accusations, and they were prepared mentally to ignore such defense, but by direction the conversation away from the hype, you totally messed with them. And maybe you even planted a little doubt, maybe you made them think. Kudos!
It probably would be cool if I could suggest a useful alternative to lecturing them or engaging in a nice chat with them. Well, I do not have a solution. I know there are people who a very very committed to communication and never tire to engage in the most absurd arguments in order to help someone learn something new. I admire them but I don't have the patience anymore and I think it's a waste of time. I'm always afraid that with a little patience and communication I might have been able to change something, but I've now reached the conclusion that I've wasted an awful lot, a really awful lot, of time and energy on people who were just unable/unwilling to learn anything. Been there, done it, don't ask me to do it again.
Erika,
I agree with you. I tried to politely let them go, though, and let myself get sucked in. Twice, though, I pointed out that attacking Obama instead of telling me something worthwhile about McCain would lose me. I could go on and defend my actions, but the truth is, I just lost it.
However, one of the things Liberals get accused of all the time is being essentially spineless and mushy-headed. I am neither.
But, in truth, I have been building a head of steam for years now. Was a time I could have a respectable dialogue with conservatives, but those folks have been pushed aside by the moron squad. I've listened to the most unbelievable drivel from friends and a few relatives over the last few years (conservative friends and family) and I've held my piece because it was never an Appropriate Moment. There've been times I've had my head handed to me by frothing-at-the-mouth neocons with Elijah complexes and had to "be nice" because we were guests. Well.
You're right, though. This was pretty much all about me.
I was talking to two 20-something women in california last week who mentioned they had absentee voted for McCain/Palin. I asked them if they were comfortable with Palin likely being president within the next 4 years and they said that's not a problem because the president can't really do anything on his/her own because they have so many advisors around them and anyway the senate or house has to agree to anything the president does.
kind of scary.
we pay a high price for democracy.
Thanks, Mark! I wish I thought that fast on my feet. Seems to me you gave the canvassers several opportunities to depart in peace and then responded to sustained wheedle with a concise slice of (partisan) political history. Fair enough.
To borrow from pop culture for a minute, I think we can say that Obama and Biden and their supporters envision the US presidency as "West Wing," and McCain and Palin and theirs as "24."
Mark: I dig. I must confess, I was tempted to rant in the general direction of the countless voter-registration zombies that marauded my campus until a week or two ago. At this point, the election has grated on everyone, for a variety of reasons.
I'll assume that your story contains just a bit of literary license; nonetheless it's beautiful.
A few weeks ago two women were canvassing the neighborhood where I live. It's a fairly nice neighborhood and I had been working outside raking leaves, mowing the lawn, etc., so I was very grubby and probably looked more like hired help than a resident. One of the women introduced herself as a candidate for local office.
"What is your party affiliation?" I asked.
"I'm a Democrat," she said proudly.
"That's good," I said, "Because I will never vote for another Republican as long as I live. Any party that would allow some of its members to do what the Bush Administration has done to this country doesn't deserve my vote — ever."
The look of astonishment on her face was priceless. We spent the next fifteen minutes pleasantly yet passionately chatting about pretty much everything you said in your rant, plus a few others. After we finished, I asked her if I turned out to be "what she expected" when she first approached me. She answered that I definitely was not, that most of the people in the neighborhood are pitifully uninformed.
"It's so nice to speak with a true liberal," she said.
"Oh, I'm not a liberal," I answered. "I'm a moderate who used to be a traditional conservative. But right now the liberals are making a lot more sense than the conservatives."
Edgar,
As I said, it probably wasn't nearly as smooth as I wrote, so yes, a bit of literary license (as an exercise once at Clarion, Samuel Delany had us all try to transcribe a conversation verbatim just to see how it worked as dialogue—most enlightening), but I do occasionally have the ability to rant lucidly when I get into a certain groove. I should post the story of my most devlish encounter with a pair of Jehovah's Witnesses when I was 21. That was a performance.
Mark, I think it's OK to be passionate once in a while. I enjoyed Edgar's story too. Hats off to the "annoying canvassers", "voter registration zombies", and all who volunteer their time because they know democracy is not a spectator sport.
I would really love to see the "Liberals" in this country figure out how to enlighten the population and convince them that "liberal" is not a dirty word. One of the most effective political ploys the Republican Party has deployed in the last 40 years has been to demonize the Democratic Party by accusing them of being anti-family, pro big-spending government, immoral, athiest, liberals bent on destroying the American way of life. It would be interesting to see a public service add on television showing a liberal idea (freedom of religion for example) with the conservative reaction to that idea right next to it. Maybe then people would finally see that liberal means open to new ideas and conservative means opposed to change. Or is that just asking too much?
Mark, I agreed initially with an earlier post about literary license, only because I have the opposite experience thinking so clearly on my feet. I am the type to flame initially, then two hours later have burst of clarity, insight, and prose… it occurs to me what I SHOULD have said… If your response to them was anywhere close to the written, I am sure it was just plain overwhelming for the little Repugs.
I am comforted by the sort of sync of contained rage most posters feel in this. After eight years of utter assault by the worst infants our culture has to offer has left those of us at least TRYING to act like responsible adults and act on our COURAGE and not fear, I too feel sometimes at the end of the rope.
I too rattle a little when called a liberal, just because I really am NOT. I see myself as a member of the big fat middle of the bell curve, the reasonable intelligent and educated who generally proceeds pragmatically with compassion. But when the political culture gets shifted so far to the right, EVERYTHING else IS left of them, including honesty, common sense, and decency.
Marc,
I have these moments….
Actually, many years ago, Erich and I attended a study group together and he had opportunity once or twice to see me "go off" on someone who had made a particularly obtuse statement. It's been years, but perhaps he could vouch for my ability….?
The literary license extends to eiliminating the "ums" and "huhs" and occasional incoherent sentences inevitable in any conversation, but the encounter went down pretty much as described.
Some good points, some talking points, as the resident libertarian and admitted laughing stock, I have one question to ask my liberal friends;
When the question of deficits and taxes comes up, why is the option of shrinking Government and entitlements never brought up. The solution to every problem seems to be Raise taxes on those who can afford it, and many that can't and add to an already obscenely bloated federal Gov't.
further enslaving people and snuffing out individual liberties like so many candles. Both parties are to blame for the mess we are in, going back to woodrow wilson, heck, even Lincoln… Why hand your executioner the axe???? As George Bernard Shaw once said, " If you are planning to rob Peter to pay Paul, you can generally count on Paul's support" Thanks, God Bless
Joe: You are unfairly painting all "liberals" as simplistic and identical regarding their attitude toward government size and spending. I support spending tax money only on government programs that clearly work well, by benefiting the public at large. I am not for spending for the sake of spending, which your comment implies.
So, yes, I support tax money being spent on libraries, roads, and the amount of military spending that we really need to defend the country. There are numerous programs that should not, in my opinion, be supported by tax dollars.
I'm for wise and frugal spending of tax dollars, where an important objective won't be accomplished in the absence of that government spending. How does that differ significantly from your attitude as a libertarian?