Skip to main content

Contested Convention Is Exactly What the Democratic Party Needs; Sanders Would Be Trump's Worst Nightmare - Two Views

Bernie Sanders will go to Philadelphia with more pledged delegates than any insurgent in modern history. Here's what he could do with them. Donald Trump is more dangerous than ever. Hillary Clinton is perhaps the worst possible Democratic candidate who could ever run against Donald Trump. Trump just conceivably could beat her in the general election. Bernie Sanders, on the other hand, would give Donald Trump fits in a head-to-head match up. Let me break it down.

Bernie Sanders campaigning in 2015 for a $15 minimum wage, a fight he is expected to lead at the Democratic convention.,
 
By John Nichols
 
May 4, 2016
 

Joe Biden understands something about the Democratic Party and its future that his fellow partisans would do well to consider. “I don’t think any Democrat’s ever won saying, ‘We can’t think that big—we ought to really downsize here because it’s not realistic,’” the vice president told The New York Times in April. “C’mon man, this is the Democratic Party! I’m not part of the party that says, ‘Well, we can’t do it.’” Mocking Hillary Clinton’s criticism ofBernie Sanders for proposing bold reforms, Biden dismissed the politics of lowered expectations. “I like the idea of saying, ‘We can do much more,’ because we can,” he declared, leading the Times to observe that, while Biden wasn’t making an endorsement, “He’ll take Mr. Sanders’s aspirational approach over Mrs. Clinton’s caution any day.”

What Sanders is proposing is a necessary quest—and a realistic one. Already, he is better positioned than any recent insurgent challenger to engage in rules and platform debates, as well as in dialogues about everything from the vice-presidential nomination to the character of the fall campaign. As veteran political analyst Rhodes Cook noted in a survey prepared for The Atlantic, by mid-April, Sanders had exceeded the overall vote totals and percentages of Howard Dean in 2004, Jesse Jackson in 1988, Gary Hart in 1984, and Ted Kennedy in 1980, among others. (While Barack Obama’s 2008 challenge to Clinton began as something of an insurgency, he eventually ran with the solid support of key party leaders like Kennedy.) By the time the District of Columbia votes on June 14, Sanders will have more pledged delegates than any challenger seeking to influence a national convention and its nominee since the party began to democratize its nominating process following the disastrous, boss-dominated convention of 1968.

This new reality has Clinton supporters fretting about the prospect of a chaotic convention that could expose divisions within the party when it should be uniting for what increasing looks like a fall fight against Donald Trump. But a muscular appearance by Sanders and his delegates at the convention doesn’t have to lead to bitterness. Historically, contested conventions—not carefully choreographed coronations—have led parties and their nominees to take more audacious positions and to excite broader electoral coalitions.

“Conventions are where we come together, but you don’t really come together if you avoid differences,” says the Rev. Jesse Jackson, who has protested, attended, or spoken at nearly a dozen Democratic national conventions (and who has not endorsed a candidate in the primary race this year). “You start by understanding that it takes two wings to fly. If you have two strong wings—a wing that has won and a wing that has lost—you don’t deny the differences; you recognize them. You debate, find common ground, find ways to start working together for immediate goals—the next election—and for long-term goals that can mean as much to the nation as to the party.”

Recent conventions have been so tightly scripted that it’s easy to forget that both parties have long histories of contested gatherings—sometimes with open combat over the party’s standard-bearer (as may erupt at this year’s Republican convention), but often with spirited competition over rules, platforms, and the very nature of the party itself. Contested conventions can open policy debates and clear the way for “significant political and social progress,” argues Fitchburg State University professor Benjamin Railton, who has analyzed the history of conventions. With 18 state wins so far and more than 1,350 delegates, Sanders is uniquely poised to push for such progress. Since Clinton will likely arrive at the convention with a majority of the pledged delegates and a lead in the popular vote, she’ll have every right to argue, as she did in April, that “I am winning. And I’m winning because of what I stand for and what I’ve done.” Front-runners rarely invite input from insurgent challengers, and if Clinton chooses to wall Sanders off, she’ll have the upper hand in Philadelphia. In January, Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman Schultzappointed a pair of Clinton allies, Connecticut Governor Dannel Malloy and former Atlanta mayor Shirley Franklin, to head the platform committee. And an ardent Clinton supporter and noted Sanders antagonist, former congressman Barney Frank, will cochair the rules committee.

 “You start by understanding that it takes two wings to fly.” —Jesse Jackson

But Clinton’s decision to adopt what was initially Sanders’s position on a host of issues, from wages to climate change to trade policy, shows that her campaign recognizes that a substantial portion of the party’s base—as well as its potential base—is attracted to Sanders’s more aspirational message. And the pressure to make that recognition a part of the Democratic platform will grow as the committees expand before the convention and Sanders aides urge the DNC to deliver on the promise made by spokesman Luis Miranda: that the party is “committed to an open, inclusive and representative process” for drawing up the platform, and that “both of our campaigns will be represented on the drafting committee.”

The prospect of aligning with Clinton supporters, especially progressive members of Congress and labor activists who will attend the convention as superdelegates, creates even greater openings for platform fights. Prospective nominees tend to favor weaker platforms; Harry Truman would have preferred milder civil-rights commitments than were made in his party’s 1948 platform, and it took steady pressure from unions, liberals, and Ted Kennedy to get Jimmy Carter to finally embrace spending on jobs programs. It will take similar pressure to get Clinton and her inner circle to accept a Democratic platform that Sanders says must include “a $15-an-hour minimum wage, an end to our disastrous trade policies, a Medicare-for-all health-care system, breaking up Wall Street financial institutions, ending fracking in our country, making public colleges and universities tuition-free, and passing a carbon tax so we can effectively address the planetary crisis of climate change.” Clinton stalwarts may want to keep things vague, but look for the Sanders team to demand specifics, such as an explicit endorsement of a national $15 minimum wage instead of the $12 proposal that Clinton initially offered, and an unequivocal rejection of the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal that President Obama supports and that Clinton once championed but now criticizes.

If you like this article, please sign up for Snapshot, Portside's daily summary.

(One summary e-mail a day, you can change anytime, and Portside is always free.)

As it happens, many of Clinton’s most passionate allies have been outspoken supporters of the fight for $15, fair-trade policies, and proposals to break up the big banks. One of them, Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown, a potential vice-presidential pick, has argued publicly that Clinton “should work with [Sanders] on the platform” in order to strengthen the party’s appeal. Other Clinton backers like Connecticut Representative Rosa DeLauro and nonaligned House members like Wisconsin’s Mark Pocan could play a critical role in steering the party toward unequivocal opposition to the TPP. There could also be room for cooperation on addressing mass incarceration, passing constitutional amendments to get big money out of politics, and guaranteeing voting rights for all.

Sanders backers want to win these platforms fights—not to make a point about their campaign, but to make a deeper point about what the Democratic Party must stand for in order to win the 2016 election and the future. “The convention can amplify what this campaign made visible—that there are millions of Americans who are hurting—and say that the Democratic Party has to respond to that pain with bigger and bolder policies,” says Working Families Party national director Dan Cantor, a veteran of the 1988 Jackson campaign who is now a Sanders backer. “Democrats who want to win a big majority in November, to take back the Congress and to move forward in the states, know that the party has to stand for something that excites young people, that excites working people. No matter who the nominee is, the party has to take a big-vision stand.” 

Copyright c 2016 The Nation. Reprinted with permission. May not be reprinted without permission. Distributed by Agence Global.

Please support our journalism. Get a digital subscription to The Nation for just $9.50! 

Bernie Sanders Would Be Donald Trump's Worst Nightmare; Hillary, Not So Much

By Shaun King
May 4, 2016
You may not like Donald Trump. Hell, you may hate his guts and think he is the worst thing to ever happen to American politics in modern history.
 
If you called him an offensive, sexist, xenophobic bigot, I'd be first in line to agree with you.
 
Yes, his skin is orange and his hair is ridiculous. He's also an incredibly formidable politician who just beat the dog crap out of more than a dozen different Republicans including the current governors from Ohio, Wisconsin and New Jersey, two widely-known multi-term governors from Florida and Texas, four current U.S. senators from Kentucky, South Carolina, Florida and Texas, a doctor and a former tech CEO.
 
One by one, they all underestimated Donald Trump, overestimated themselves and made it abundantly clear that they have no earthly idea what conservative American voters are looking for in 2016.
 
The GOP's top contenders raised more money than Donald, outspent him and out-hired him. Still, with virtually no support from the political establishment and very little ground game to speak of, he swatted them all away like flies.
 
I can't stand the man, but what he just did was strange, historic and unprecedented.
 
I've said it before, and I'll say it again - Donald Trump could very well be the next President of the United States.
 
Now that he is the presumptive Republican nominee, and appears to be attempting to moderate his tone a bit, he is more dangerous than ever.
 
Underestimate him and his candidacy at your own risk.
 
Hillary Clinton is perhaps the worst possible Democratic candidate who could ever run against Donald Trump. I sincerely believe he could beat her in the general election.
 
Bernie Sanders, on the other hand, would give Donald Trump fits in a head-to-head match up. Let me break it down.
 
1. Like Donald's other fallen foes, Hillary Clinton represents the political establishment.
 
This narrative is strong and served as the primary crutch of Donald's strategy to defeat an enormous, well-funded Republican field. Americans are incredibly frustrated with our government and Donald used this very real sentiment to position himself as the anti-establishment candidate. Call it nonsensical, but this position, which Donald will hold against Hillary, is what President Obama used to defeat her in 2008, is what George W. Bush used to defeat Al Gore in 2000, and was even what Bill Clinton used to defeat George H.W. Bush in 1992.
 
Hillary Clinton is as establishment as establishment gets. The machine is behind her. Her campaign against Bernie Sanders has only advanced this sentiment.
 
Donald Trump simply could not use this angle against Bernie Sanders.
 
2. Hillary's millions of dollars worth of paid speeches to banks, lobbyists and billionaires cede a certain moral high ground to Donald Trump.
 
Donald Trump is a filthy rich fat cat. He's gaudy and cartoonish with his wealth. He openly admits that he hires foreign workers for cheap jobs and abuses tax loopholes. He is the poster child for everything that Bernie Sanders has railed against - not just in this campaign, but for his entire life in public service.
 
Hillary Clinton will not really be able to say much about this, though, because Donald's biggest liability is also an enormous liability for her. What's worse, being Scrooge McDuck, or getting paid to speak to a room full of Scrooge McDucks over and over and over again and refusing to release the transcripts of what you said to them? She and Bill rented a home in the Hamptons for $50,000 per week. They've made $230 million since Bill left office. Hillary made more money in 12 speeches to big banks than most American's will make in their lifetime.
 
Bernie Sanders is a career public servant and will be so until the day he dies. His entire life stands in stark contrast to the outrageous opulence of both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. The thought that this angle will basically be off the table if the campaign is between Donald and Hillary is simply dumb.
 
3. Independent and new voters are flocking to Bernie Sanders and even to Donald Trump, but not to Hillary Clinton.
 
Bernie Sanders is the longest standing Independent in the history of the United States Congress. Consequently, independent voters have flocked to his campaign en masse. When they are allowed to vote in primaries, like they did on Tuesday in Indiana, he wins. They have been absolutely essential to his wins in 18 different states thus far. With only 29% of Americans identifying as Democrats and 26% as Republicans, the largest voting bloc is independents.
 
Those voters make-up a large spectrum of political views and demographics, but they are all united in their frustrations with the government, the status quo and lobbyists.
 
I believe many independent voters will stay at home if Bernie Sanders isn't a candidate. It will be up to Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party to win them over, but they've expressed very little interest in such a thing thus far. Many more conservative independents will indeed vote for Trump.
 
4. Hillary's reliance on millions of dollars from Super PACs is a real problem.
 
Zero percent of Bernie's campaign funds come from Super PACs. Four percent of Donald's campaign funds come from Super PACs.
 
Hillary? More than seven times that amount. An astounding 30% of her campaign funds come from Super PACs. Donald Trump could feasibly decide he isn't taking a dime from them and put Hillary in a position to defend her reliance on them.
 
This would never be an issue for Bernie Sanders. It is his rejection of Super PAC money that has actually won over millions of his voters. For them, this issue is everything. The idea of supporting the candidate who relies so heavily on this type of money nauseates many. Donald Trump will be able to get on the mic and tell supporters that he just isn't influenced by outside money and they'll believe him.
 
5. Young voters are crazy about Bernie Sanders and just don't care for Hillary Clinton.
 
By young, we don't just mean teenagers. Voters under 25, voters under 35, even voters under 45 all support Bernie Sanders over Hillary Clinton. The younger the voter, the bigger the margin. In some age groups he's beating her by 85%-15%.
 
These young voters were the lifeblood and energy of Barack Obama's campaign and they have virtually rejected Clinton altogether in this campaign. They are incredibly loyal to Bernie. They trust him and believe in him. They won't simply or easily transfer over to another campaign. This is a real problem for Clinton and will show immediately in a general election.
 
Hating Trump is not the same thing as supporting Hillary Clinton and young voters know this. While Donald Trump doesn't have a youth movement of any kind to talk about, it just matters a heck of a lot less if it's Clinton he's going against.
 
Bernie has consistently said that he does better in every poll in a head to head match up against Donald Trump than Hillary does. The non-partisan fact-checkers at Politifact found this claim to be accurate.
 
In one new poll, Trump actually leads by 2 points in a race against Hillary. In another, she's just up by 3 points against Trump. Bernie beats Trump in every poll and by larger margins.
 
This race isn't new anymore. People know enough about Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton to make an informed decision. I believe these polls are accurate. The team at FiveThirtyEight stated that they believe the polls between Trump and Clinton will continue to narrow.
 
We can all agree that Trump must be stopped, but this much is clear - Hillary Clinton is not the best opponent to stop him.