Social Power's Role in the Eighth Democratic Debate

Bernie vs Biden

Social Power

In this blog post, I will be focusing on candidates Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden during the Democratic presidential Manchester debate in February, in order to analyze social power, which is one of the elements of cultural pragmatics. Jason L. Mast writes in The Performative Presidency that the six elements are “actors, audiences, systems of collective representation, means of symbolic production, mise-en-scene, and social power” (10). Concerning social power, he goes on to write that “Forms of power are distributed unequally, of course, and social performances are enabled and constrained accordingly. Access to the variety of forms of social power (Mann 1986, 1993) influences the size, scope, and reach of performances, but in no means determines their effectiveness” (13). In other words, Biden and Sanders will each reach some of the same but also some different crowds, yet access is not decisive for productivity. We should make note of the performative means which influence how attempts at gaining social power are perceived. For example, the audience erupting in applause signals to us that the speaker they are responding to was able to reach them and rally their emotions, at least in that moment. Defeating Trump is certainly a goal, but the candidates have differing opinions on the way in which that should be achieved.

Over the course of the debate, Senator Bernie Sanders specifically addresses the working class, the elderly, and the youth, saying in the first ten minutes that “the way we beat Trump is by having the largest voter turnout in the history of this country, and that is appealing to working class people who have given up on the political process, because we don’t believe anybody is hearing their pain, receiving their pain, feeling their pain. And we gotta bring young people in the political process.” Sanders repeats the word pain, and I would argue that most if not all of the audience has felt pain as a result of Trump’s presidency. We can be quick to brush off emotional appeals as ramblings, yet emotions are an important part of politics. While sincerity and authenticity can always be up for debate, it is undeniable that we vote with our hearts as well as our heads. In The conquest of hearts: the central role of Ottoman nostalgia within contemporary Turkish populism, Karakaya acknowledges the role of emotion as he argues that “[r]ather than existing in juxtaposition, cognitions come bundled up with emotions and are meaningful or powerful for this reason (Goodwin et al. et al. 2001, p.15)” (6). Bernie Sanders does embody a populist, but I would like to clarify that populism is not inherently negative, and although there are many harmful examples that we hear about in the media, its effect is determined by the politician employing it. Therefore, in his recognition of a universal sentiment that casts a heavy weight over this nation, Sanders is developing a reasoning behind his campaign and indirectly showcasing his ability to mobilize support, which is present when he says, in discussing insurance companies and healthcare (about twenty minutes later), that “this country belongs to all of us.” 

Joe Biden’s social power is especially grounded in his experience in government, notably as Barack Obama’s Vice-President. He references his experience throughout the debate, and inserts that Sanders does not understand how difficult it is to pass bills, in response to healthcare initiatives. In this sense, Biden portrays himself as an economic voice of reason, which is amplified by his chuckling and grinning during times when other candidates are explaining their plans. While Biden does not refer to specific sectors of the population, Biden's language as a whole does not appear to elicit the same emotional reaction as Sanders’. However, Biden does have the crowd physically participate when he asks them to stand up and clap for Colonel Vindman. He utilizes visualization and active participation again when discussing foreign policy; Biden (towards the end of the first hour) instructs, “Close your eyes everybody. Remember what you saw on television. You saw a woman up there standing up there holding her baby, Kurds saying, please don’t leave us and armed military women and men going out in Humvees with their heads down, ashamed of what they did.” Biden mobilizes emotion here in a different way than Sanders does, as he uses less of an “us” and more of a removed conceptualizing. However, when Biden talks about being a single dad, having a net worth of 0, and having to move due to his own dad not having a job, he is attempting to humanize himself and connect with the crowd. To the point of childcare and America’s education system, he sums up his point by saying, “The fact is, we have to focus on what is at stake here. These aren’t someone else’s children. They’re all our children.” This draws immense support in the form of cheering and applause from the crowd. Joe Biden’s ongoing references to numbers and statistics might paint him as legitimate in the eyes of some, and inaccessible and confusing to others, but his call for social responsibility here breaks down a wall between him and his audience. Both candidates have social power, both use it, and the more we can decode the language surrounding it, the better we will understand each candidate’s platform and supporters.

Works Cited

Hernandez, Monica. 2020 Democratic Presidential debate, parts 1-3. WMUR 9, ABC 7 Feb.       2020, Updated 8 Feb., 2020.  https://www.wmur.com/article/video-2020-democratic-     presidential-debate-part-1/30819551

Karakaya, Yagmur. 2018. The conquest of hearts: the central role of Ottoman nostalgia within             contemporary Turkish populism. University of Minnesota, 909 Social Sciences, 267 19th     Ave Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA.

Mast, Jason L. 2012. The Performative Presidency Crisis and Resurrection during the Clinton    Years. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.