1. Every Week Until he Stops - Vote for Bernie Sanders.
2. Sanders Makes Things Better
3. Sanders Would Beat Trump.
4. Clinton's an Unsympathetic Plaintiff
5.
6. The Debate
The criticism is super weird to me.
Clinton's going to win the nomination, right? That's the premise here, because if it's still a competitive race, there's not standing to criticize Sanders for trying to...campaign, I guess.
So, if she's going to win, there's no downside to her from this debate. Someone takes shots at Trump without the returned fire hitting Clinton. Further, there is some degree of Sanders support who may be animated against Trump based on this debate. Clinton is their only outlet to express that opposition.
I literally don't get the Clinton camp's anger.
7. For example, this ugly, ugly piece.
8. What's Education For?
9. Identity Above All at Oberlin
10.
And one more...
That's all for this time. I'll be back next time...if there is a next time...
Your pal,
Jim
2 comments
Re: Point 6 and the Clinton camp's anger. It seems obvious to me - a main message of the Sanders campaign has been that the Democratic leadership is corrupt and insufficiently principled. Why would you be surprised that the very people he has said this about don't trust him? Further, looking from the outside (and by this I mean outside the country and thus not having a dog in the fight and not being willing, for reasons of propriety, to tell anyone even if I did prefer one side or the other), lately the Sanders campaign has been sending a lot of signals as part of their negotiation for influence at the Convention that they will be willing to disrupt Clinton's general election campaign, which some are reading as a threat of a 1968 style demonstration that could potentially swing independent voters towards Trump. I'm not at all saying it's unfair for Sanders to ask for influence over the party platform - he has clearly earned some measure of that - and he may well be bluffing to improve his negotiating position, but he is clearly signalling a threat that he is willing to hurt Clinton in the general election (and thus, by proxy, help Trump). So, in light of that threat, and the fact that Trump is clearly trying to encourage Sanders to cause trouble inside the Democratic coalition and perhaps even run a third party bid, the Clinton camp is clearly wary of any joint Sanders-Trump initiatives like this proposed debate.
Long story short - they don't trust the guy who is clearly not a team player to act like a team player, and that informs their perception of everything he does.
Assuming that's an accurate perception of the views of HRC supporters, I'd offer they're bonkers.
Even were they not to trust Sanders a debate against Trump is not a vehicle through which Sanders could be untrustworthy. The thought would be what, that in the middle of the debate Sanders is going to endorse Trump? Any HRC supporter who is of the actual belief that there is some type of Sanders/Trump alignment is failing to understand both the career and the message of Sanders in profound ways. There just isn't any room in an analysis of Sanders' record to see an alignment with Trump, and Sanders current language doesn't conflict with that.
Now, were they to think he was using this to launch a third party run, then their reaction makes more sense. But there's just no indication of that (Sanders can't afford it, he would be turning a strong position within the Democratic Party into virtually nothing, his fighting over the platform is actually a sign he's looking to move the party to the left as opposed to going it alone, and everything he's said in the campaign indicates a lack of intent to oppose Clinton in the fall).
So, they might actually believe that stuff.
But they're bonkers. The Clinton folks are counting on the Sanders voters becoming Clinton voters; here is Sanders saying "I will turn my guns on Trump in a debate". It is the thing that they want to happen, and given the previous two paragraphs of discussion of the other possibilities, I'd argue this one seems like the most likely result.
(unless they don't really feel like the primary is over, in which case they don't have an objection, since the objection is predicated on the primary being over)
How it comes off to the Sanders supporters who they need in November is that it feeds the narrative that Clinton believes she deserves it. She's put in her time, she should have gotten it in '08, it's her turn, and every vote cast for Sanders is seen as a personal affront. How dare someone challenge her. How dare he.
Imperiousness is probably not the vibe you want in an election year with populist anger.
How it comes off to me is centrist democrats love to punch the left. In my life, centrist Democrats have used Democratic losses to say "well, the problem is we were too far left on these economic issues" from Mondale all the way to the midterm losses during the Obama Administration. You can set your watch by it. If Clinton loses in November, they're setting up the narrative that it's Sanders fault for running in the primary; it's the next slip down the slope for those who still blame Nader for the Iraq War. It's always the left.
Post a Comment