Money isn’t everything — even in politics
It’s an election year, and as usual, there are torrents of requests for contributions. They can blend into background noise, particularly given the crisis we all face here and now.
A raging pandemic, like a “hanging in the morning”, does tend to focus the mind. But who we elect is also critical. The voters will speak in November, and how the politically active engage the public really matters.
In Arizona’s 2020 political news, the big story has been our role as a swing state for the presidential race, as well as for the U.S. Senate. These are elections that will have massive consequences for the entire country, and Arizonans have a big responsibility here. The dismay (and often, disgust) with the action or inaction of our President and the Republican Senate majority has been a big motivator for many people here, and not only for Democrats.
The antics of the President have motivated more than an anti-Trump effort; they have energized the community. Engaging in elections turns “rage against the machine” into concrete action, often starting with efforts to work with one or more down-ballot races.
How can political activists engage a community? They surely must do much more than raise funds. Yes, for political campaigns, money is required — while volunteer effort is essential, even for a grassroots campaign, there are always some costs that must be borne. But the quest for contributions can become an end to itself. The costs of extensive fundraising efforts can themselves be quite high, forming an un-virtuous cycle. And much of the time that candidates spend in pursuing donors could otherwise be spent in direct contact with the community, listening to their concerns, and promoting their interests.
The strength of a candidate must not solely be measured by the amount of money that is collected by that candidate. It is true that candidates who have a lot of campaign cash tend to win more than candidates who have very little, but this doesn’t necessarily hold, especially if the money was obtained from relatively few sources (see Bloomberg, M.). That being said, being known (and liked) by the electorate is the most critical factor in electoral success. And while media reaction to candidates can make or break a campaign, the interactions within the networks of people who know one another are essential to success in campaigns, as demonstrated recently in Wisconsin.
National organizations see swing states like Arizona as critical for this November, so we will see swarms of active fundraisers, endorsements, and consultants. But candidates cannot forget who they want to represent: their communities. For example, in one AZ congressional district, a candidate (Anita Malik) has been building trust from a network of local supporters for years. Her campaign has not gotten lost in the frantic quest for money; in fact, in the face of this pandemic, they have focused almost entirely on connecting with the community. In the current crisis, that can also mean doing whatever they can to promote the safety of the people, for instance by distributing cloth masks and providing accurate, critical information.
We’re all adjusting to connecting without face-to-face opportunities; but person-to-person connection still works. I hope that all candidates learn to develop and tap their human networks as their primary campaign methodology.
How candidates actually campaign can give us an idea of how they will represent us — will they hear us?
