My history of shoe-leather activism is pretty thin. I have only put out effort for Democratic candidates, beyond votes and money, in the past dozen years. I canvassed for Kerry in Erie, PA, in 2004. I canvassed for Obama in the town of Corry, PA, southeast of Erie, in 2008. And now I’m back in Erie this year, canvassing for Hillary Clinton.
The areas in which I canvassed in each of these years were low-income areas. A fair number of the houses were subdivided into apartments, meaning that there was no guarantee that those listed as residents on the walking sheets were still living there, and it was often the case that the individuals listed were now gone. While some of the houses were well cared for, some were in need of much work, and some were close to collapsing. If you wanted to find the American losers in the global economy, these neighborhoods are where they live.
A canvasser knocks on doors to talk to voters already identified as likely to vote for our candidate. They were sufficiently politically engaged in the past to both vote and register as Democrats, recognizing that the Democratic Party was the one that most represented their values. In my past experiences, in 2004 and 2008, there was general enthusiasm for the top of the ticket, with only a few exceptions. Today’s canvassing, well, was quite different…
First let me say that I’m really not built for canvassing. I’m the shy, retiring type, not the sort who will start talking to strangers much less knock on their doors. But this election being as important as it is, I will go beyond my comfort zone to try to do what I can to get people to vote for Democrats. In my past experiences, the enthusiasm of the people I talked to made the activity pleasant, particularly in 2008.
Canvassing today, by comparison, was excruciating, even though I brought along my husband (who starts conversations with strangers all the time). There were a few enthusiastic Hillary voters along our route, but a surprising number of these voters either said they weren’t going to vote, or just didn’t want to talk at all.
Along our route, we passed a couple of white men in their late middle age (like us) who were working on renovating a house. They asked us what we were doing, and when we told them, they chuckled derisively. If I had been on my own, I just would have continued on my way, but because hubby likes to talk to strangers, well, we got into a rather wide-ranging conversation—actually, two of them, as hubby and I spoke with different members of the the pair, and then switched. One of the men of the pair said what motivated him in his choice of candidates was the repeal of NAFTA. He was convinced that the complete disappearance of industry in Erie was due to the migration of manufacturing jobs to Mexico and China, and that NAFTA had made this possible (okay, not so much for China). Because of this, good-paying jobs had disappeared, and as a result, Erie is shrinking (the population dropped below 100,000 this year) and mired in poverty. Because Trump wanted to revoke NAFTA, this guy was going to vote for him. I’ve never been good at arguing political points, and I was caught flat-footed. But, frankly, I had to agree with him that the decimation of the manufacturing economy in the US was at the heart of Erie’s economic problems. I offered that high-technology manufacturing could bring back the economy. He countered that the majority of potential employees weren’t smart enough(!).
This conversation brought to mind how, to a large extent, the working class has been abandoned by both parties. The Democratic Party has largely become the party of technocrats. The Republican Party has welcomed elements of the white working class by appealing to their bigotries, but never satisfying their desires or needs. The rise of Trump has been caused by the rebellion of such Republicans against their complacent party leaders. I think the poor and the working class are, to some extent, in despair over the prospect that politicians will ever address their dire situation. Unless they are rabid Trump supporters (and we passed more than a few Trump yard signs on our walk), if they vote, it will be with little hope that whoever they vote for will actually do anything for them.
I hasten to add that, of course, Clinton is the only candidate who will work to help the poor and working class, while Trump would bring only chaos. But try to convince anyone of that. Those voting for Clinton are mostly afraid of what horrors Trump might be capable of.
Anyway, that was my day’s experience. Erie being a small (and shrinking) blue spot in the upper lefthand corner of Pennsylvania, I expect it to break for Clinton. But the hope of 2008, or even of 2004, is hard to find.