Posted on 04/24/2017 4:49:20 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
The recent release of the Clinton campaign expose Shattered is causing yet another round of introspection about what Democrats did wrong in 2016 and how to fix the problem. The Clinton campaign’s own failures of targeting and messaging are already the subject of much discussion and have been rehashed ad nauseam. Matt Taibbi’s take on the navel-gazing, operative-centric view of the pundit and consultant classes is probably the best of the book’s reviews so far and well worth reading. A large number of powerful people still have a difficult time accepting the movements that coalesced behind Sanders on the left and Trump on the right as legitimate, authentic populist forces rather than a group of discontents mesmerized by cults of personality around Pied Piper candidates. They often cannot concede that there would still have been a massive movement of anti-establishment anger even had Sanders and Trump never run at all.
Which leads us to one of the least discussed failures of the establishment that helped lead us to this juncture: the effort to clear the field for Hillary Clinton. Sanders and Clinton supporters are still furious with one another to this day, as can be seen from the often hostile reactions on both sides to the unity tour currently ongoing between Tom Perez and Senator Sanders. Clinton backers accuse Sanders supporters of being racist and sexist fifth column betrayers of the party, while Sanders’ fans accuse Clinton’s of abandoning core economic principles and depressing youth turnout. Wildly unfair attacks are levied on both sides.
But the ongoing hostility isn’t the fault of either camp’s supporters. It’s the fault of the establishment that tried to clear the field for Clinton.
It is widely acknowledged that Democrats in positions of authority, including but not limited to President Obama himself, worked to clear the field of significant opposition to Clinton. President Obama directly pushed Vice President Biden out of the running, and other potential contenders from Elizabeth Warren to Cory Booker were discouraged from making a run. They did this under the misguided theory that a primary free of contention would give Democrats an advantage over a divided GOP field.
But this was a gigantic mistake born of a failure to gauge the mood of the electorate, and of a failure to understand that sometimes these intra-family arguments can lead to more good than harm. It is not at all clear that contested primaries in presidential elections are a bad thing. In the end, Democratic leadership was relieved that only candidates as supposedly marginal as Sanders and O’Malley ended up running in opposition to Clinton, as it was felt that neither would pose a significant threat to her nomination. We all know how that turned out.
Just as the Republican electorate strongly wanted a candidate who diverged from GOP laissez-faire orthodoxy on jobs and trade while more openly proclaiming his bigotries, so too did many Democrats–especially younger activists and angry marginal voters–yearn for a candidate to the left of careful Democratic center-left economic positions. Someone was going to fill that vacuum, whether it be Sanders, O’Malley or someone else. It was also clear that in the face of a more openly racist GOP and with the rise of Black Lives Matter and similar movements, identity issues were going to be in play for Democratic voters as never before.
Instead of a big, comparatively healthy primary like Republicans had in 2016 and Democrats had in both 2008 and 2004, Democrats last year got a shriveled mockery of one. The establishment ensured that economic populists were pitted one-on-one against the first woman candidate with strong loyalty from older Democrats of color, and that identity-conscious voters got boxed by Wall Street-friendly forces into falsely calling the emergent socialist consensus among young activists of all genders and colors the province of racists and sexists. It was almost perfectly designed to create maximum hatred and chaos within the liberal and progressive ranks.
Imagine an alternative universe in which Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders had all run for president. This supposed nightmare scenario of the DC consultant class would have been remarkably salutary. First, Warren would likely have won, uniting both the economic populist and feminist identity factions of the party, and she would likely have defeated Trump. Second, the presence of multiple economic perspectives and multiple identities would have made it much more difficult for a misleading economic populist vs. identity politics dynamic to arise. Booker and Clinton would have split the base of older people of color, while Sanders and Warren would have split the younger, rural white and economic progressive base. Biden would have taken some from all factions. As various candidates fell out and endorsed one another in complex ways, the multi-factional aspect of the conflict would have significantly reduced the partisan resentment. It would also have reduced the incentive for the DNC establishment to put its thumb on the scale on behalf of any one of the candidates, and it would have given the eventual winner far more legitimacy in the eyes of the electorate.
Had Clinton survived such a crowded field of Democratic stars, she would have come out much stronger for it and probably beaten Trump. Had she succumbed in the primary, a different nominee less prone to Clinton’s weaknesses as a candidate would likely not have overlooked the Rust Belt and underperformed with the Obama coalition in the general.
The present animosity between the Clinton and Sanders camps isn’t really the fault of either side’s supporters. Both have some legitimate grievances. It’s the fault of the foolish attempt to clear the field for Clinton and avoid the sort of healthy, long-overdue conversation about the party’s principles that primary elections are supposed to foster.
That Democrats are still forced to have these conversations now, in the midst of a Trump presidency, is unfortunate. But the party’s leadership, consultant and pundit classes have no one to blame but themselves.
I'm sure if they use the same playbook in 2020, and simply tweak it a bit, it'll all work out just fine.
lol
In no universe, even Marvel’s, does Hiawatha win a general election.
If the Dems did NOT clear the field for HRC, she would have destroyed many of them individually and collectively. I think of Mrs. Danvers in Hitchcock’s “Rebecca” (Spoiler alert). Rather than let a new Mrs. De Winter preside over Manderlay, she crazily burns the whole place down.
If I’m reading this correctly, it seems that the Dems’ mistake in this election is the mistake the GOPs have made so often — running someone because it’s “his (her) turn”. It didn’t work for Dole, McCain, etc., on our side. It didn’t work for Clinton on their side.
But I’m glad they “cleared the field” for the old hag bag; it worked for US!
Didn’t she barely win her Senate seat?
I am sure nominating the most hated woman in America had nothing to do with it...
*rolls eyes*
“calling us racist brought in even more votes”
And don’t forget “deplorable and irredeemable”! That’s it... insult voters.
If impeding justice, covering up underhanded deals, and ignoring her criminal actions is considering clearing the way for Hillary then yes the Democrats messed up. Like the king’s men trying to put Humpty Dumpty back together again the Democrats took a corrupt tired old hag and tried to sell her as a worthy candidate both failed
If impeding justice, covering up underhanded deals, and ignoring her criminal actions is considering clearing the way for Hillary then yes the Democrats messed up. Like the king’s men trying to put Humpty Dumpty back together again the Democrats took a corrupt tired old hag and tried to sell her as a worthy candidate both failed
Thank you...I keep seeing people say Warren would win...but can’t believe it myself.
i live in the great Seattle area.
It is amazing how many times i still hear the Basket of Deplorable insult (they not knowing i am conservative). So called costal elites dont care about regular folks
Their biggest mistakes were underestimating Trump and marginalizing ‘Fly-Over’ America.
That pretty much covers it!
You would think so, but the democrats keep adding excuses, so my list keeps growing. I didn't think of anything on the list except the last paragraph. The rest is taken from their professional analysis in their own words.
That sounds like Jeb Bush. The more ads he ran, the lower his poll numbers got. Campaign rallies had the same effect.
I am not convinced Warren would have won. Clinton got enough votes, but just not in the right places. One would have to argue that Warren would have fared better in WI PA OH MI than Clinton. Clinton did shoot herself in the foot with her coal comments, so maybe there is an argument there. But Warren is heavy on ideology and his version of facts, which seem to bore the electorate. As much as Clinton is hated by half, she is loved by the other half.
The Dems don't have a clue even now. They're still debating gear ratios on a bicycle that has two flat tires. Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders? Throw out the Jersey pol and you have a white-bread geriatric ward that gums its supper while reminiscing about the Good Old Days burning campus down in '68. Best of luck with all that.
I do agree with the author in one respect: the establishment machine greased the skids for Hillary and hoped that it could grease the skids for Yeb!, et al, in a similar manner. Offer us Tweedledum and Tweedledumber and let the voters scream over irrelevancies. How much of that rotten game just ended up in the political dumpster is still evidently not apparent to the Powers That Be, who are combing that dumpster for the Next Big Thing and are coming up with...Chelsea. Dear God.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.