Packed into an overcrowded primary field, lower-tier 2020 Democrats have realized that the best way to catch the nation’s attention is simpler than it seems: they’re returning to the grassroots.
Among twenty-plus candidates, no one Democrat stands out, especially given that they each tout the same platform with minor differences and appeal to the same constituencies.
In a way, the system is rigged against them. The Democratic National Committee enforces certain rules on polling and donor thresholds to thin the Democratic field. For example, to secure a place on the first and second primary debate stage, candidates were required to get 65,000 individual donors, with at least 200 from 20 different states, or to poll higher than 1% in three approved primary polls.
The result is an inordinate emphasis on impersonal campaign tactics, like digital fundraising on social media platforms, at the expense of traditional campaigning among the actual voters.
“When they effectively say you’ve got to have 130,000 donors, they’re telling candidates, ‘Don’t hire people in Iowa, spend money on Facebook ads,’” said former Maryland Rep. John Delaney, who was the first Democrat to announce his candidacy.
The candidates unable to meet the DNC’s standards are changing their tactics, and the result is a return to grass roots engagement and a good ground campaign. This change is good for voters, but it must involve more than just bottom-of-the-barrel candidates.
High profile candidates are primarily concerned with big money and attention from national special interest groups. It’s hard to blame them: that’s how elections are won. But as a result, they often neglect the communities they claim to represent. It’s a disastrous cycle that creates discontent.
Political campaigns depend on networks, which depend on communities, which depend on individuals. By creating impossible standards, the DNC is feeding into that cycle and discouraging candidates from plugging into community institutions and meeting constituents face-to-face.
This is, in large part, why Donald Trump swept the electoral field in 2016. He engaged with individuals who felt and still feel neglected by the political class. Another part of Trump’s win was the inability of voters, even Democratic voters, to relate to Hillary Clinton.
The DNC for years has reduced its candidates to commodities, stripping them of value and making it impossible for voters outside coastal cities to connect with and understand them. Democrats run the risk of repeating the 2016 mistake if they continue to tow the DNC’s line.
Lower-tier candidates seem to understand this. The result of their outreach has been new voices, ideas, and approaches from people plugged into local communities. Campaigns built on this — the idea that people still matter, even in a representative democracy — leave a lasting appeal, even if they don’t win. There’s a reason candidates like Barry Goldwater aren’t easily forgotten.
A presidential campaign can and should be about more than just the next primary debate or fundraising event. Ironically, by prioritizing those very things — money and prominence — the DNC is reminding candidates that there’s more at stake than poll results. Voters want to be heard, and if you treat them like more than just data points, they might just listen, too.
