The news of this week, campaign-wise, has been the minor uprising at the Nevada Democratic party convention. The reason for this, I’m sure, is that this is the story the Clinton campaign and its supporters wanted us to be talking about. For months they have been trying to frame Bernie Sanders and his supporters as aggressive, undisciplined, even violent political loose cannons. The protest in Nevada, as it was covered on television, appeared to conform to that narrative, helped along by the strategic release of some crank calls that came in to the voicemail of a party official. So, on a week when Sanders virtually tied Clinton in Kentucky and beat her by ten points in Oregon, the take-away will be that he can’t and won’t control his people.
This smells a lot like rat-fucking to me. The Clinton operation is pretty good at it, especially when they have the DNC and the entire party establishment in their corner. Then there’s the David Brock effort, using tactics that he once focused on the Clintons themselves. But beyond the specifics of this campaign, what we’re seeing is kind of a Democratic party tradition: piss on the activist left, even when it’s likely to cost you the election. When have they ever not done this? From the marginalization of black southern voices in 1964, to shutting out antiwar voices in 1968, to undermining the McGovern campaign in 1972, the Dems always find a way to keep the lid on the progressive box.
That is, until now. It’s one thing to shut Jesse Jackson out in 1988 when he had won 11 contests (including 7 primaries) and almost 7 million votes. But the Sanders phenomenon is even more imposing, and not really centered around a candidate so much as a set of policies and ideas. It is in many ways a generational uprising, like Occupy Wall Street 2.0, emerging from the landscape unexpectedly. It is the center of energy on the Democratic side, and as far as I can see, the Clinton campaign – which is winning – is making no effort to engage this movement in any meaningful way. The fact is, they are treating the Bernie folks with the kind of contempt the Democratic establishment has traditionally reserved for the party’s left flank. That won’t wash this time.
The Clintons may really blow this election. If they don’t start making an effort to establish a productive, cooperative relationship with Sanders supporters … to meet them a bit more than halfway … they are not only going to lose, but they will also squander the future of their own party. That’s the choice. We can’t afford to pick the wrong path, people. Too much at stake.
luv u,
jp
The most disconcerting part of this likely scenario is the prospect of living through one, maybe two terms of rule by either an egotistical man-child-billionaire or a corporatist Democrat. Of course, I far prefer the latter, mostly because there is some opportunity to push Clinton from the left, but either way we are likely to see a more bellicose stance towards issues of war and peace. Either way we will be moving to the right of Obama along certain political vectors. And Obama is not even a standard progressive; he is a centrist, and very cautious at that.
If back in 2014 more of us had said “Damn the torpedoes, I am going to vote against those fuckers if it takes me all day,” Obama would have been able to send a nominee through a normal Senate review process. If we had kept the Senate out of the hands of the wrecking crew known as the GOP, we would likely have pulled the Supreme Court back from the extreme right for the first time in more than thirty years. Now that opportunity is completely up in the air. We don’t know what’s going to happen in November, but I can tell you what isn’t going to happen before then: a Supreme Court confirmation vote, that’s what.