Subscribe

Campaign 2016: Is all that pizza on the road really a 'sacrifice'?

Throughout history, presidents and presidential candidates usually have invoked the notion of collective sacrifice as an attempt to unite voters. But in Campaign 2016, sacrifice is all about lost sleep and pizza. 

  • close
    Sen. Ted Cruz (R) of Texas talks about border security during a news conference near the US Border Patrol Rio Grande Valley Sector headquarters on June 9, 2015 in Edinburg, Texas. Cruz, who is seeking the Republican nomination for president, was in the area to tour the local Border Patrol headquarters before attending a fundraiser.
    Nathan Lambrecht/The Monitor/AP
    View Caption
  • About video ads
    View Caption
of

SACRIFICE: A woe-is-me claim by office-seekers who lament the hardships they’re supposedly enduring – in an entirely voluntary endeavor.

Consider Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, who recently made out his 2016 Republican presidential bid to be an act of self-sacrifice. In a fundraising e-mail, Cruz complained of time away from his wife and two young daughters, plus the financial burden it was imposing.

Cruz told of his sacrifice of “sleep with long nights and constant travel. And the pizza diet is a staple on the campaign trail.” He added, “The cost of campaigning back and forth across the country for president is increasingly expensive, but Heidi and I are willing to invest our livelihoods into this sacrifice.”

Recommended: 14 Republicans running in 2016

That last part is particularly interesting, since campaign finance reports don’t show personal contributions to his presidential campaign. Unlike, say, Donald Trump, Cruz isn’t in a financial position to personally support his own presidential campaign for even a limited period of time.

Then there are the long hours, Cruz wrote to prospective donors: “Days start before dawn and many times don’t end until early the next morning. There is almost no personal time when you run for president.”

Paul Stob, a Vanderbilt University communication studies professor who studies presidential rhetoric, said Cruz’s use of “sacrifice” invites comparisons with George Washington, who was a reluctant first chief executive. Upon taking office, Washington recalled that when he learned he had gotten the job: “No event could have filled me with greater anxieties.” He described his home at Virginia’s Mount Vernon as “a retreat which was rendered every day more necessary, as well as more dear to me, by the addition of habit to inclination and of frequent interruptions in my health to the gradual waste committed on it by time.” But, he added, he felt the obligation to lead the new nation.

“My guess is that it’s not coincidental on Cruz’s part,” Stob said of the senator’s use of the word. “It’s interesting in that Cruz turns it on himself. Washington did something close to that – not sacrificing for a larger idea, but just ‘I’m going to put myself out there.’’’

Among other candidates, much of the “sacrifice” talk also has been mostly inner-directed. Before throwing his hat in the ring this week, ex-Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) openly mused about whether he could run “where the sacrifice for my family is tolerable.” And South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham (R) often says he would be willing to give up some of his own Social Security benefits to help others in need.

Throughout history, presidents and presidential candidates usually have invoked the notion of collective sacrifice as an attempt to unite voters. John F. Kennedy, of course, implored Americans: “Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country.” Jimmy Carter, meanwhile, called on consumers to turn down their thermostats and drive less to save energy. And in 2008, John McCain repeatedly told audiences to devote themselves to “a cause larger than yourself.”

In the 2012 campaign, the perceived paucity of any similar rhetoric irked New York Times political columnist Frank Bruni. “Conditions, all in all, are ripe for a serious conversation about sacrifice,” Bruni complained. “But this presidential campaign has been noteworthy for its nonsensical insinuations or assurances that although we’re in a jam, we can emerge from it with discrete, minimal inconvenience.”

Chuck McCutcheon and David Mark write their "Speaking Politics" blog exclusively for Politics Voices.

About these ads
Sponsored Content by LockerDome
 
 
Make a Difference
Inspired? Here are some ways to make a difference on this issue.
FREE Newsletters
Get the Monitor stories you care about delivered to your inbox.
 

We want to hear, did we miss an angle we should have covered? Should we come back to this topic? Or just give us a rating for this story. We want to hear from you.

Loading...

Loading...

Loading...

Save for later

Save
Cancel

Saved ( of items)

This item has been saved to read later from any device.
Access saved items through your user name at the top of the page.

View Saved Items

OK

Failed to save

You reached the limit of 20 saved items.
Please visit following link to manage you saved items.

View Saved Items

OK

Failed to save

You have already saved this item.

View Saved Items

OK