Yes, this.
This is the most important point, in the debate about whether to nominate a progressive or a conservative ("moderate") democrat for President.
We have a long-term struggle ahead of us. So many HYuge, complicated, only-partly-understood problems to tackle.
An election is about winning, yes. But it is much more than that, especially in a time such as ours. The problems we face _require_ us to nominate a candidate and propose a platform that will, above all, stimulate examination of those problems.
The first step is to ask the important questions. Discussion, debate, struggle - we're a long way from fixing what needs to be fixed and solving what needs solving.
Bernie has already changed the discussion and debate over healthcare. Of course, discussion is never enough. But it's always necessary.
Read what Albert Einstein had to say about socialism 70 years ago:
https://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism/
1
I'm a Sanders supporter. I'm also a realist. If Democrats had nominated him four years ago he'd be president right now. Well, they didn't, and he isn't. Trump, like it or not, has half the country on his warped side, while the Democrats continue to nitpick each other. Sanders doesn't stand a chance, just like McGovern didn't stand a chance against Nixon. Is Sanders right? Yes. Is he the right man for the times? No. Without a center candidate, the Democrats have no chance this time. Bernie was great and perfect for 2016, but nobody listened. He's wrong now. Please listen.
2
Nominate Bernie and you're basically gift-wrapping a second term for Trump. Warren is the progressive warrior that the Bernie-bots have deluded themselves into thinking their decrepit savior is and I think they didn't rally behind her because of misogyny.
1
Why are a wide swath of voters — or is it just the mainstream media — so much more fearful of a democratic socialist than an authoritarian fascist? There are aspects of socialism already baked into our institutions and economy and, while nothing’s perfect, they seem to have had the desired effect — reducing poverty and extending healthcare to an aged and/or indigent population. Our and others’ experience with authoritarian fascism can’t be claimed to have ANY positive features. Maybe it’s time the media did a little more homework instead of reflexively reporting the unfounded fears of some in the establishment.
9
Mr. Kazin,
Don't order the coffin before the corpse lies on the table!
Yes, Bernie can and will win, not unlike the Kansas City Chiefs in the second half of the Superbowl.
Bernie will win because so many of us are starved for a candidate who can transform our rotted-out system of health care, work to lessen income inequality. make a college education affordable, keep us out of forever wars, and restore international respect for America along with our soft power.
Furthermore, we desperately want a president of unassailable integrity.
That's Bernie Sanders. Go Bernie!
3
I just hope Sanders will continue to fund the Space Force.
1
Gen X, Millennials & Gen Z will cast the majority of votes in the 2020 general election. There just aren't enough Boomers and Silents left to outvote them. Skeptical? Please review the 2016 and 2018 voter turnout charts from the Pew Research Center below.
In 2016, Gen X + Millennial + Gen Z vote totals surpassed vote totals for Boomers + Silents. That was entirely due to demographic trends, as you can see looking at the trend lines. Four years later, that demographic trend will be increased.
On top of that, Gen X, Millennial & Gen Z turnout rates surged in 2018. They also voted for Democrats at higher rates than their elders in the midterms. (Boomers favored Dems 1.07 : 1. Gen X favored Dems 1.24 : 1. Millennials favored Dems 2.14 : 1.) This resulted in a Blue Wave for the House.
Gen X, Millennials & Gen Z might not match the turnout rates of 65+ voters in 2020, but they don't need to match them in order to make up the significant majority of votes cast. Median age doesn't vary much from state to state, so this effect will be seen all over the U.S.
2016 Turnout: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/07/31/gen-zers-millennials-and-gen-xers-outvoted-boomers-and-older-generations-in-2016-election/
2018 Turnout: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/05/29/gen-z-millennials-and-gen-x-outvoted-older-generations-in-2018-midterms/
2
?? "transforming the ideology and program of a major party." I think trump beat him on that one - republicans are now trumpettes or whatever they're calling themselves this week, ( I call them afraid...like in a cowardly way).
1
What a phony professor: "...they (democratic presidential candidates) oppose nearly every armed intervention overseas and advocate shrinking the military budget." Wow. Panama, supported. Granada, supported. Contras, silent. Afghanistan, supported. Iraq, supported. Israel's attacks on Palestinians, supported. Then there have been the recent regime changes and attempts in recent years: Honduras. Venezuela. Bolivia. Brazil. And of course, supporting the blood thirsty Saudi prince.
3
The subtitle says,...."he has transformed the Democratic Party"...
And the Trump Campaign is thanking him enormously....
Why start the article with the premise “Bernie may lose”. Any Democrat may lose. Bernie may be the only one who can win. As even Trump has noted, “Bernie has real followers”. Bernie can win!
3
Hey, don't count Mike out yet. He's a moderate-to left cadidate who could trounce the Don.
But Bernie has accomplished nothing (sarcasm)!
Get on board DNC. Get on Board Media.
Bernie can and will defeat Trump.
1
The democrats are ashamed of FDR. They are corporate lackeys.
Bernie hasn't won anything.
1
Ouch, truth hurts, "if successful could well lose to President Trump this fall." Yes Hillary could have run a better campaign, but if you look at the facts, remember facts matter here, Bernies followers were personally responsible for Trump being president, with a large number not voting for the final nominee. The margins in the states that Trump carried were close enough that if this stupid democratic bickering had stopped and we came together and voted for the Democratic moderate nominee we would not have the "Dear Leader" Trump. Bernie cannot win, the ones who can need the votes. Replay this after Super Tuesday and, lord help us, at the Trump reelection party.... Go moderate dems.... Trump is not the only one with "blind" followers in this country.
Pete + Amy ... 44%
Bernie + Liz ... 35%
That's all you need to know.
4
sanders is a spoiler! he's got an ego bigger than trump's . Hillary had to fight him along with everything else that was going on. the greater democratic and moderate undeclared will never vote for him. i wish he would just leave and let klobochar and buttigeig do what they have to do to get elected. Bernie go home!!!!
3
Obi Wan Bernie, you are our last hope!!!!
1
The guy (Bernie) who loves Ortega, Maduro, Castro, ..., etc! All great leaders of totalitarianism! AND he is on record for how wonderful those butchers are!
1
now if he could just transform klobuchar from being just another hillary.
1
As the old saying goes, if you're not a socialist when you're 20, you have no heart. If you're still a socialist when you're 40, you have no brain. Bernie is well over 40.
3
A Great big left handed compliment for Bernie from an increasingly out of touch publication.
1
Perhaps the senator from Vermont has transformed the D party, but no less has the current occupant of the oval office -- from the party of family values and a kinder gentler nation, to one that separates kids, including infants, from their parents, some say, now, *on purpose.* From a party of fiscal responsibility to one of an insane deficit, and for what? The benefit of rich people. From a party committed to our allies overseas, to one -- oh, god, somebody stop me -- basta.
"Robust National Security State" espoused by Republicans. Oh you mean the security is provided by the KGB and FSB. Vladimir Trumpski 2020. Da.
Read The Economist this weak on Sanders. It agues his policies of radical socialist change will not defeat Republicans but instead 'America needs repairing...' and not an 'outrage-spewing fight between Mr Trump and the most extreme candidate the Democratic Party can muster.' See https://www.economist.com/leaders/2020/02/06/the-democratic-primaries-will-be-a-contest-between-radicals-and-repairers?utm_campaign=the-economist-today&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_source=salesforce-marketing-cloud&utm_term=2020-02-10&utm_content=related-stories-1
Wowe. Yet another NYT op-ed doubting the power of the only candidate with a legitimate movement at his back? I just can't believe it! SMH. Seems to me the author makes several assumptions ("Uphill climb"...Why? In a crowded field Sanders won the most votes in both Iowa and NH. "Could well lose to" Trump....Huh? Why? Because the most-hated president ever is going to lie and mischaracterize Bernie and his positions? As if Donald Trump would be any kinder or even-handed with any other candidate!). To top it all off, the author knowingly erroneously calls Sanders a "socialist." You're either being obtuse or disingenuous--Sanders is not a socialist anymore than FDR was a socialist. Honestly, it's getting annoying continuously reading these anti-Sanders op-eds, NYT.
I like how DJT got impeached for a presidential candidate he perceived as the best chance of beating him. Now a socially included Jew (no, not Jesus), will win against this embarrassment of a president.
with friends like you - who needs enemies? your first paragraph & your malign prophesies are utterly biased.
"Winning" a primary when 75% of the vote went to other candidates is a recipe for disaster. This kind of thing will ensure democrats end up with an unpopular nominee. Meaning... Super Delegates: Part 2
https://emcphd.wordpress.com/
1
Voters no longer want to revert back to the old time, mainstream democratic policies that enabled Trump to win the Presidency in 2016 ! Trump was elected not only because of the undemocratic electoral election system, but also by the desire of many voters to discard the old and embrace the new!
The midterm election exemplified what the voters demand; progressive proposals and changes ! Sanders is the one !
Remember the Blue Wave !
1
He has destroyed the Democratic Party. he has not transformed it. In the short run. His dramatic loss to Trump in 2020 will hopefully help democrats get back on track to take back power.
2
Bernie might have won with his ideas, but I very much fear that Trump won't have to defeat Bernie, The establishment Democrats will do that for him.
The biggest problem for Sanders is not Trump or his supporters, but the fact that centrists and self-styled 'moderates' will also line up against him.
Just look at how the centrist Democrats voted for Trumps legislative agenda, (gave him an EXTRA $131B to bomb other countries into 'democracy', expanded his spying powers, fast tracked his judges, funded his border wall, gave him a trade victory to campaign on, etc.) and cheered and clapped widly when Trump brought Guaidó to State of the Union speech.
The New Hampshire primary confirmed that Bernie Sanders is the only candidate certain to make it to the Democratic convention in July, but our ruling class and their stenographers in the media have already picked their winner.
Direct rule by the billionaires is our future.
Klobuchar and Buttigieg are there to prop up the anti-Sanders vote until a brokered convention, where we'll be told who our real nominee is by our betters: racist Republican billionaire Bloomberg.
Bernie or Bloomberg? It's kinda academic at the moment, but let me ask this:
Do you want unfettered capitalism to control the government, or, government to control unfettered capitalism?
It will be the first POTUS that was essentially purchased as an off-the-shelf item with the candidate's own money as a tax dodge.
SAD.
4
Bernie Sanders' voting record in the Senate is not extreme. His stated policies aren't so different from other candidates, especially when one factors in how difficult it is to make even small changes in Washington.
I wish he would stop calling himself a socialist. The so-called Democratic Party is one of special interest groups who banned together for power (some would say it's now "balkanized"). It's difficult enough to hold Democratic voters together. Why use terms that have a historical meaning that frightens voters or turns people off?
I’m also old enough to remember Ralph Nader's remark that there was "no difference between George W. Bush and Al Gore". Two wars later, I hope Nader sees that he was wrong.
Bernie may very well be the candidate. So I wish he would start bringing people together now instead of feeding conspiracy theories. If he is not the candidate, his voters still must be encouraged to turn our to vote for a different Democratic Presidential Candidate and for Democratic Senators and Congressmen. If they stay home, we will lost the presidency and the Senate.
5
Yet, the same people that are saying Trump could never win are now saying someone as left wing as Bernie can never defeat him.
Lessons haven't been learned by the centrists.
Bernie Sanders is the only candidate that will convince enough independents to vote for him to beat Trump.
6
Sanders underperformed in New Hampshire. Everyone knows it.
A point and a half victory in a neighboring state; one in which he won the 2016 primary by 22% is hardly impressive. Add that Liz got less than 10% of the vote and that Buttigieg, Klobachar, and Biden (moderate vote) got 15% more of the vote together than Sanders and Warren (leftist vote) and it is clear that Sanders, at this point, should not be the nominee.
In South Carolina, Joe Biden (who seems to be losing his mind, i.e. lying dog faced pony solider) has twice the percentage Bernie does. In fact, Bernie is running neck and neck with Tom Steyer. Steyer is actually adding to the carbon footprint by lighting his money on fire.
Few Americans want to "completely transform"(Bernie's speech last night) a country which is the beacon of democracy and freedom to the world. Americans have lower unemployment, faster rising wages, and increasing wealth to an extent that I challenge anyone to tell me an era that was better.
Who would vote to get rid of their health insurance so they can have government run insurance run the way the Iowa caucuses were run? Bernie has 3 houses, more than any candidate except Bloomberg, and he accuses others of being housing speculators? The world is full of villains who can do no right (pharma, Israel) and victims who can do no wrong (Hamas).
The only way Trump doesn't wipe the floor with a nominee Sanders is if he has another heart attack and has to drop out of the race.
1
@jkemp
I guess you missed the part about a crowded field? The voters did not chose between two candidates this time. They had over a half dozen. Yes, that does mean the slices of pie are going to be smaller. Simple, but obviously not simple enough.
6
What I find interesting in these comments are the number of people who FEAR that Bernie might win, not because they disagree with his policies but that he will not be "electable" or able to get policies passed to which I say "Pshaw!"
First, if you keep believing he is unelectable and act that way, he will be unelectable. This is basically a self-fulfilling belief. If you start out believing you will lose, you will. But if you start out thinking you might win, you might.
Secondly, you don't get what you want by proposing middle-of-the-road solutions that are already compromised. No doubt Republicans will (and have) negotiate down from the middle to barely helpful policies. Always ask for more than you want because you just might get it. And if you don't, at least you will get what you originally wanted because you can make "concessions" so the person across the table thinks they are also "winning."
Just this week, I negotiated a business deal where we asked for way more than we wanted. When the other party asked for a discount, we gave it to them: the actual amount they paid us was the amount we wanted in the first place but it made them feel better that they also got something.
Finally, I think people are so beaten down by life and politics that they are afraid to hope. Much like victims of domestic violence or traumatic event who see a foreshortened future, regardless of the actual situation.
9
Bernie not only fights Trump and the Republicans but a large portion of the Democrats as well. It is impossible to predict how this election will play out. Given Biden's track record at running for President (three times now) he appears to be a much more risky choice. Regardless of who gets the nomination I think it will be close in November. Trump is not going down easy for anyone. I admire Mr. Sanders consistency of positions and tenacity. I think he would be good for America. Go Bernie.
8
There is nothing in Bernie's politics that is outside the historic mainstream of the Democratic party.
Not to mention that what he proposes means more democracy, not less.
Not to mention that he is middle-of-the-road -- moderate -- if judged by the left-right spectrum of other developed countries. (Candidates like Biden and Klobuchar are conservative, not moderate.)
It is the American parties that have lurched rightwards over the last 30 years -- extreme right in the Republican case. And yes, the Democratic party jumped to the right particularly in the 90s, to accommodate the continuing tide of Reaganism.
(Whether that was a good or a bad thing is a bit beside the point now. It was both good and bad, but it should be seen as a temporary expediency.)
4
I doubt if Sanders would have run for president if there had not been the Occupy Wall Street movement. It is a little too early to tell if Sanders has transformed the Democratic Party but the economic crash of 2008 turned out to be transformative. I would say it led to the Occupy Wall Street movement which made many people on the left begin to accept new ideas and think about how things could be changed for the better. Just about all of Sanders ideas run up against the reality of higher taxes for almost everybody. It isn't yet clear whether Americans are going to take the plunge and accept higher taxes as a trade off for what might be called socialist programs to better distribute the wealth.
4
This article downplays the threat that Trump poses to our democracy. It would be much better to have a William Howard Taft who wins the election but does nothing, then a William Jennings Bryan or Jesse Jackson who loses the election and leaves Trump in office for four more years, in the hopes that maybe a few decades down the line their ideas will come to fruition. If Trump is in office for four more years, the ranks of the federal government from the Supreme Court down to the lowliest bureaucrats will all be Trump hires who will be doing the actual governing of our country for a generation.
4
There are three articles trashing Bernie on the front page of the New York Times today, another one extolling Bloomberg as the savior who will deliver Dems from the horrors of Sanders and this.
It seems fair to say that the Dem establish is in full meltdown freakout mode.
One thing that becomes quite clear when one reads all of these panic stricken pieces is that while they often claim to be concerned that Bernie won't be able to beat Trump that in fact their real fear is that he will and that in so doing he will wrest the apparatus of their party from the hands of the corporate and financial interests that have controlled it for as long as I can remember and in the process END THEIR GRIFT.
Because, frankly, that is what the Dem establishment has been running for decades. They have never really been interested in governing as much as in getting paid to play the role of an opposition party in a system with no real opposition. When, in 2008 they found themselves in unexpected possession of the White House and both Houses of Congress, it was like a game of hot potato. They wanted nothing more than for the midterms to come to take it away from them so they wouldn't have to actually fulfill any of their substantive promises.
Electing Bernie will only be the first step in what will likely be a protracted and tumultuous process of dismantling this racket and replacing it with a real progressive opposition party. But its a step we need to take.
15
Bernie Sanders promised to stop fracking on his first day in office.
That day is in January, when it's quite cold. What you can do is burn the furniture, and then the wood floor, in the fireplace, if you have one, or build a camp fire in the middle of the living room, which is unfortunately more smoky, if you don't.
See, if every American were taught such survival skills for when Bernie takes office, people would entrust their future to him, and vote for him.
2
Bernie Sanders is the next President of the United States. It took me a while to get here but he will wipe the floor with Trump.
You can come back in November and “like” this comment.
114
@Full Name (required),
Thank you for a comment that made me smile.
Also, I liked it now to get a jump on the millions that will return to like your comment in November.
15
@Full Name (required)
Well, I won't be coming back since he won't be nominated to be the Dem nominee.
Will you still support Mike Bloomberg when he is our nominee or will you and the other Bernie Bros vote Green or just not vote?
11
According to the $2000 medical bill I just got, no he has not already won.
3
I am rooting for Sanders to get the nomination. He will be slaughtered in the election, his big baby bros will go away and cry "rigged", and the man who ruined the Democratic party (without being a member) will finally go way. We will have to endure Trump, but maybe Dems will finally learn what the public is willing to vote for.
2
@Mike Ferrell
You have perfectly stated the position of the "moderates" who would gladly see Trump re-elected than see their privileges reduced one iota.
3
A professor of history should be a lot more careful. Throwing William Jennings Bryan, Barry Goldwater, George McGovern, and Jesse Jackson into the blender and whirring up big Bernie Sanders conclusions is professional malpractice. It just encourage the vapors and the Bernie folks are already hyperventilating.
2
Yeah @David, Nixon turned out be so much a better choice than McGovern.
If Sanders is our nominee, I will contribute to, work for, and vote as many times as possible for him. Then, on November 4, I will be as hung over as I was the day after Trump was first elected because, we’re going to lose again.
27
@J
For all the shouting and prognostication no one knows who will win against Trump. One thing in the article is important to note, the candidates considered outsiders were not supported by the moderates, which caused the loss. That is happening now.
Moderates of the DNC/allies/media wing are loudly proclaiming they will not vote for Sanders. In short they are having an infantile and self-defeating hissy-fit. Generally, this is accompanied by snark about Sanders supporters not voting for Hillary, which is an untrue smear. As noted in more objective media, like the Guardian, it was African Americans who sat out 2016, not voting for Hillary. Her campaign spent most of that year claiming that they were her firewall. So much for that!
The establishment might want to calm down and realize who the real enemy is: Trump and the GOP.
Stop the divisiveness. Act like adults who realize they cannot always get their own way. That is Trump-like behavior. Join Sanders supporters in saying we will ALL Vote Blue, No Matter Who.
15
Many commenters complain that other commenters say they will never vote for Sanders. Pot meet kettle.
There have been as many Sanders supporters vowing to never vote for any Democrat if the nomination is “stolen” from Sanders again in the articles I have read. Sorry, but getting 3 million more votes that another candidate when you add up the primary vote (as Clinton did) was not “stealing” the nomination. It’s called winning it.
If Sanders does as well in the primaries this year, he’ll get the nomination. So far he is squeaking by with a percentage or two plurality (not majority) of the vote with voter turnout only running equal to or below 4 or 8 years ago.
I’ll vote for Sanders if he gets the nomination, but it is not because I like a sizable percentage of his followers who mean spiritedly boo opponents and have been a black hole of negativity for the last four years. Worry more about defeating Trump and less about how to destroy the Democratic Party that has been responsible for passing every expansion of voting rights, as well as social and economic equality for the last 100 years.
8
@J
I’m getting drunk either way.
5
What is wrong with this guy? Sanders is NOT a Democrat. He is a Socialist, and he will lead to the collapse of the Democratic Party if - God forbid - he is nominated. It will make Goldwater's loss look tame by comparison.
5
What a total debacle for this once great party. Hopefully they retool after the beat down they get in November and become relevant again.
5
Bernie Sanders has succeeded in convincing 25 percent of the Democratic Party that they have the right to scorn anyone who doesn't agree with them, and to equate compromise with selling out.
Anyone who believes that New Democrats such as AOC and Tlaib are the face of a politics that can unify this country and move it forward is insane.
11
@A mind of my own I support Sanders, Ocasio-Cortez, and Tlaib. However, I don't scorn anyone who does not agree with their ideas. I try to educate people to understand where they (and I) are coming from and the benefits the poor, working and middle class will receive by supporting them, too.
Sounds like to me you are the one scorning Bernie et al and can't seem to wrap your head around the fact he speaks for millions of us who are fed up with the status quo and want a government that will work for everyone and not just the donor class. If you want the rich to keep getting a bigger and bigger share of the pie, vote for Trump. He most definitely cares about his donors at the expense of working people. If you care about all humanity, you will vote for Bernie or any D who becomes the eventual nominee.
10
I find this piece to be nothing more than an attempt to downplay any positive momentum Bernie and his supporters have achieved so far. Thanks but no thanks... We're coming and cleaning house! (White)
60
@Saite
Go ahead and clean house. You can also clean my house if you want to.
If Sanders is the nominee don't expect many of us to vote for him.
You refuse to support the Dem candidate ( 2016, 2020) so why should we support the Socialist one?
4
@Saite
I'm not seeing it that way:
"All these partisan rebels had something in common besides their prophetic influence. Each stirred great enthusiasm among voters but also met stiff resistance within their parties, a major reason none came close to taking the White House."
Mr. Kazin is offering the Democratic party the opportunity to do what it hasn't done before - embrace the prophetic influence. If Bernie is the nominee (without the roadblocks they have previously put in his way), forget the resistance. Charge full speed ahead to get him elected.
5
@Saite Sanders will be crushed by Trump. You’ll feel good, and the country will lose.
2
Please. Bernie Sanders is no George McGovern.
2
I doubt you could find even one right wing party in a country that has universal healthcare running on privatizing the system. And you would be hard pressed to find anyone on the right running on increasing tuition in countries such as German where universities are free and of the highest quality. Bernie is not extreme compared to virtually every country in the world. Why do we keep having this irrational conversation that sees Bernie as the left equivalent of the far right? This is ahistorical and inaccurate but it seems like an unquestioned assumption.
11
@matthias
Hear! Hear!
Even as many European countries, like the US and some Latin-American countries, now have growing far-right movements, there is NO such country where anyone wants to give up universal healthcare, social security, long legal vacation periods, and all the rest -- as a right.
Even the most extreme-right National Front voter in France wouldn't dream of giving up their "acquired rights" (which is how they refer to the gains of mass struggle over the decades).
The far-right in Europe is anti-immigrant and reactionary, proto-fascist. But they still want their social protections.
Pushing for rights that benefit the working class is the way to win elections. Trump made such arguments, but vacuously -- just lies. Bernie is the one to counter that nonsense.
Bernie is right to promote healthcare explicitly *as a right*. If you convince people that we all have a right to healthcare then how to pay for that will take care of itself. As long as it's looked at as something that I have but you don't have, it will be defended only parochially (you don't want to lose your cadillac health insurance).
I don't understand how Senator Sanders, not registered as a member of the Democratic Party, can run in all these Democratic primaries.
6
@Elizabeth
I am a member of a four-generation long family of democrats. We have worked for and contributed to the Democratic Party for the past hundred years. An uncle was an elected local official. I have no problem with Sanders as a Democratic candidate. This party used to be a Big Tent. It has become an exclusive private club.
2
Here it is, as much as I dislike the Donald, I will never vote for a Socialist.
3
@Jason A.
Perhaps you should do a bit of research into what democratic socialism actually is. It has a long and deep history and has been responsible for a lot of important political changes around the world and in the United States. Look into the organizing that happened after the catastrophic triangle shirtwaist fire in your own city for example. The key fight in the US for the 40 hour work week and living wages. There is a very good reason why those in power in this country, the economic elite have created this fear around the term socialism. Look to countries such as Germany who have wonderfully socialized higher education and healthcare as well as childcare and maternity leave. These things are not barbaric they are human rights. Why should do many people suffer so much from the unprecedented debt and poverty in this country?
6
@Jason A.
Bernie Sanders' socialism is what we have here in Canada -- health care for all, for instance. And what's so bad about that? As far as most Western democracies go, Sanders is really a centrist.
Trump, on the other hand, is using the Attorney General to get back at people he feels have wronged him. He is abusing his office for his own personal gains. He does not believe that the laws of your country apply to him. And your country is already heavily run by rich white men.
You're headed for an autocracy, and you would willingly vote for it?
13
@Jason A. You don't drive on roads, right? You didn't go to a public school or library or send your kids to one, I hope. No township, county, state or national parks for you. Oh, and be sure to hand back your social security, medicare or medicaid and don't call the police, fire, or EMS.
1
This article made me laugh out loud -
Way to grab me early with this sentence...
"Bernie Sanders still faces an uphill climb to win the Democratic nomination and if successful could well lose to President Trump this fall. "
This is true for Every Democratic Nominee today.
Keep the hit pieces coming NYTIMES - Your 50+ age demographic loves em!!
11
Please God help all Democrats to choose someone who can defeat Trump, and, through your omniscience and omnipresent power, open the hearts and souls of all Democrats to the common sense realization that a moderate, strong candidate like Klobuchar is are only hope.
You know, sort of like Princess Lea telling Obi-Wan Kenobi that he was her only hope. Yes indeed, Trump is a real life Sheev Palpatine.
1
I really resent this take on Bernie. It's like Bernie has served his purpose in reminding the DNC what it's true platform is. But he's not respected enough to elect president? I don't trust the DNC.
No. President Bernard Sanders will be the next President. Our first Jewish President.
And he WILL beat trump. And you know it.
17
@Hazel
All you have to do is read some of the comments about Sanders to realize that many centrist voters are terrified of "socialism" and will therefore vote for Trump instead.
1
@LauraF
And we should just continue pandering to this irrationalism rather than educating people about what democratic socialism actually is? What is this the middle ages? I'm getting a little tire of the general defeatist attitude.
11
National emergency. Sanders will NOT beat Trump. He won’t. Trump would LOVE to run against him.
3
So the average Democrat can ask "with friends like this who needs enemies"?
The party never should have allowed Bernie to run in our primaries as long as he refused to register as a Democrat.
He is the pied piper of disaster and IF he emerges the nominee, we will lose the presidency to four more years of the most corrupt person ever to hold the office AND both the House and Senate - so imagine what a catastrophe that will be for our nation and the world. Not feeling the Bern in any positive way other than feeling burned by his unhinged, unfundable, unworkable, and unpassable policy agenda.
3
Joe, I don’t think you have read Bernie’s issues. It can all be done. Berniesanders.com/issues
'In 1972, Senator George McGovern suffered a landslide drubbing in his attempt to persuade voters who detested the war in Vietnam to unseat Richard Nixon. Yet since then, most activist Democrats have effectively echoed McGovern’s plea to “Come Home, America.” Like him, they oppose nearly every armed intervention overseas and advocate shrinking the military budget.'
WHAT? You mean Trump, surely not 'activist Democrats'? The Dems are broadly known as bloodthirsty peacekeepers, always ready to teach other nations democracy and such through the power of military; they're no sheep by any stretch of imagination. DT at least gurgle something on returning army home from variety of god-forsaken places on the planet, but his word on this is worth nothing, no coherence or much sense.
In every other country Bernie views are human and caring. In America he is considered extreme socialist. This country is way more corrupt than one can imagine.
16
Amir, I totally agree with you. America has not been doing its reading, and we don’t even know world history and geography.
5
A shade condescending whether or not intentional. Let's play this history game. Let's say the plantation owners beat back Lincoln or Robber Barrons beat Teddy or, and this one's the doozy, what if Wall Street was given trillions during the Great Depression, relieved of any accountability, no Glass-Steagall act, and allowed to play casino in their own sandbox with a never ending lifeline to the Fed? What might that world produce? Hmmm....
4
If Bernie is the Democrats nominee America has a disaster in the making.
Bernie proposes Medicare for all which Americans with good healthcare plans neither want nor trust. He proposes no tuition at public universities and colleges which are run by the states therefore he has no authority over their financial policies.
Bernie is a huckster and a carnival barker. He thinks if he shouts the loudest and waves his arms in the air his naive followers will vote him to victory. Well if they do he will be a fraudulent and socialist disaster.
Let’s hope we do not have to choose in November between the con man on the right, Trump, and the con man on the left, Bernie.
2
I detest Bernie Sanders, and I don't think there's any way he'll be our next President. He'll do exactly what he did in 2016: hang in until the bitter end, bringing his angry supporters to the DNC convention, where they'll throw another immature and divisive tantrum.
The DNC needs to shut him down in the (likely) contested convention. If Bernie's not the nominee, his supporters will stay home and Trump will be elected, but the Democrats at least stand a chance of holding their House majority together, and denying Trump the power of undivided government. If Bernie IS the nominee, then he'll go down to a staggering defeat, and take the House with him, and Trump will be able to pass whatever horrible legislation he wants.
Go ahead, Bernie: prove me wrong. Declare a moral victory (for "transforming the Democratic Party," I guess), and use your magic wand to cleave your supporters to a candidate with a real chance of beating Trump.
4
Both the Democrats AND the Republicans are a joke punchline. The punchline goes: “I’m from the government and I’m here to help.” (Yeah, your check is in the mail and you’ll also respect me (her) in the morning).
I’m a fan of Michael Kazin and his historical narrative concerning the Democratic Party may be correct, but it nevertheless ignores much of the history of political economy (Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill, e.g.) regarding the role of the state. The right-wing has appropriated what was a healthy skepticism associated with the progressive-wing regarding the state and turned it into a mantra accusing “big government” of creating our major social problems.
What does the right-wing propose? You bet. They propose that they should (and do) control the government and that they’re here to help us. The Democrats appear on the verge of subscribing to the same narrative, already controlled by a decidedly non-conservative right-wing—that castle-in-the-sky that they claim we should “get back to” identifies the right-wing as reactionary.
Sanders has bought into this narrative ever since the Dodgers moved to LA..... what might have been if only they hadn’t left. Sanders reactionary? You betcha....
1
The idea of Universal health care or medicare-for-all has been kicked about since Bill Clinton's election in 1992. The fact that we do not have such a thing in the USA should indicate that it is not going to happen even if Bernie Sanders is elected.
My take is that Sanders may permanently brand the party as Socialist even though as a liberal party, Democrats have always supported social programs.
But the majority of Americans are not looking to make the country into a socialist society especially when such a transformation will require more taxes than voters are willing to pay.
Although most people do not really understand what Socialism is and that we already have many socialistic programs (Medicare, Social Security), the Republicans and Trump are already demonizing Sanders and his followers.
Do you really think Sanders can beat Trump?
1
First off, Bernie is not a socialist, he's a Democratic socialist, please do some reading. Second, I and millions of others feel he can beat Trump. He is the only candidate that inspires passion. Trump was unelectable right up until he was elected and he transformed the GOP, I'm hoping Bernie can do the same for the Democrats.
4
Moving the U.S. toward a system more in line with that of our European and Canadian allies is the only way to go. The U.S. is a laggard in all measures of education, knowledge, critical thinking, healthcare, retirement, pay, the environment, human rights and happiness.
The U.S. has a huge military, which was to protect the U.S. and our allies from foreign aggression. Trump has made U.S. enemies--Russia, North Korea, Brazil under Bolsonaro, Saudi Arabia, Turkey--into his friends. He detests traditional American allies. It's not clear which countries the U.S. military is to serve.
Regarding Sanders, a huge military-industrial complex isn't necessary. It uses over half the U.S. budget, while healthcare, social security, education, salaries, the environment are decimated.
Trump and elected Republicans' desire to serve the rich has resulted in an impoverished culture--more cruel, more desperate.
Countries like those in the E.U. do not suffer in this way, and it is time to align the U.S. with them.
5
Really?
I don't find this to be true at all, without you including all the progressives. There was a time when Warren was considered to be the most progressive and she was far more aggressive in pursuing banks during the financial collapse.
Then you have AOC, who yes, supports Sanders, but is now her own force to be reckoned with.
I'd also say Pete Buttigieg has been transformative to the party, no not with the years, but in fact with the impact inside of the short period of time.
There's no doubt Sanders has had his impact, the largest being with Clinton, imo, in 2016. 2020 to me has yet to be seen. I don't think Iowa or New Hampshire say anything anymore, except by the press who wants to hype hype hype their importance.
Wait for Super Tuesday. Until then, there's nothing to be said.
Bernie Sanders is winning. But the establishment can't get over it. They are doing their best to down play his wins, and still working on getting their guy in, which since Biden didn't work, they chose Pete, the mayor..much easier to write than his real name. I fear they will do what they did the last time, preferring Trump over Sanders..what a mess. Sanders outpolls Trump easily. What are you afraid of? losing your power and money? like the elite did when Roosevelt won?
7
As Sarah Silverman said last time, “You can still be a rich (....) in a Sanders administration. It’s just that your neighbors won’t have to eat cat food.”
1
If Sanders is such a great candidate, then why is Vermont losing population after his 37 years as an elected official there.
1
@Dan M
Correlation does not equal causation.
4
Bernie Sanders is a democratic socialist and,win or lose will get millions of votes mostly from young voters.They are votes of no-confidence for the present dysfunctional,greedy, unsustainable arrangement that we now have.Capitalism can only survive if all of society benefits from it.The alternatives are either the revolution that Sanders is proposing or dictatorship.
I'll take Sanders.
10
The entire stage of democratic candidates has been strongly influenced by Bernie's run in 2016. Before the primaries even begun, policy stances on minium wage, health insurance and college tuition had already been radically changed for nearly all candidates. The "left" is the most ill-defined term in U.S. politics. Living here in Central Europe, in a conservative, heavily industrialized country (Austria), I experience universal health care and free colleage tuition (with a time constraint), and nobody on earth would call any thing here remotely left. Its nonsense - let the people (and not the pundits) choose the candidate and then get behind that person and oust Trump, period. This haranguing about "left" and "moderate" candidates is hogwash.
5
It’s merely terms used to weaponized any change to the strip-mining of the resources left of the middle class here. What Clinton called pie-in-the-sky, (while Warren made not a peep), while Pete refers to as potential cruelty of ‘excluding’ billionaires, and Amy calls moderation, is simply using sophisticated psychological manipulation of the American people to surrender to thinking the pathetic crumbs and unconscionable brutality of life for most Americans is as good as it gets.
4
This is written sounding less from an historian than a partisan. The notion that adopting platforms advocated by Sanders will lead Democrats to victory even if he's not the candidate, is most unlikely. An economy based on sources of renewable energy? Voters will dependably come out on a chilly November morning to vote for that? Hardly. Democrats still haven't figured out how to beat Donald Trump. The approaches advocated here are not helpful.
2
@blgreenie It's hard to believe you still don't understand the threat that climate change presents us. We must transform our energy systems away from fossil fuels to renewable energies. Trump denies man made climate change. Do you? What do you suggest Dems do to beat Donald Trump?
"Like him [McGovern], they oppose nearly every armed intervention overseas and advocate shrinking the military budget."
Oh, really? Is that why after the eight years of the Obama administration we were no closer to being rid of middle-east involvement than we were at the end of the Bush debacle? Every president - Democrat or Republican - despite the promise of an end to endless wars - has caved in to the military-industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us of 59 years ago.
2
Could that possibly because the military industrial complex and war is a wealth transfer mechanism...? ::tuneless humming while y’all take a few minutes to think it over::
Seeing Trump demolish our institutions and many of our protections, spending huge amounts of money for what he wants, has made me realize we can have health care for all. I thought like many moderates that it was too much, but now I see it would actually be feasible to have it run by the government. My private insurance is a mess with me having to constantly call to get my insurance corrected. Others have said the same to me. What of the people who are not questioning their claims and insurance providers?
If you think of the waste and mistakes that are happening every day along with the money being paid in to healthcare by companies and insured, you know it must change. Why not pay a tax instead of these premiums? Maybe under one system the mistakes and grift that is occurring would disappear? I am willing to try it because the current system is a mess. I also would love an audit of the Pentagon and military spending as I know that system is also full of overspending and corruption.
3
Those young people who will carry Bernie to victory are fictional. Big city Barristas concentrated in a few already Democratic down towns are certainly not enough to win the Electoral College. Most of the other "youth vote" is too zombified by staring at their cell phones to cross the street safely, let alone to vote. But Mr. Kazin has a brilliant solution: just call losing winning.
4
Let me change the last part of that lead sentence for you, Mr. Kazin. "...if successful (Sanders) could well defeat President Trump this fall." Did anybody at the NYT write articles about Hillary Clinton with defeat baked into the premise, in the lead sentence? Did you write lines like this: "With Hillary still short of the needed delegates for the nomination, even if she gets it she could well lose to Donald Trump this fall." Well, you didn't and she still didn't win. I know it's asking too much, but if defeating Trump is really the whole point, maybe open your mind to the possibility that Bernie Sanders could beat Trump. Stranger things have happened.
5
Unless Donald Trump is defeated in the election, everyone loses, including Bernie Sanders - he hasn't "Already Won"
1
Yes, but... there is serious concern that there won't be an America to transform, in some evolutionary future, not after Trump 2020. So Job 1 is not advancing 'ideology'; it's national salvation.
The 'in God We Trust' stuff wasn't written by God.
2
"Even if the delegates in Milwaukee this summer choose a different nominee...." They best not... if Bernie has a plurality of the delegates awarded through voting, that is.
3
What if our nation was run by the gender not known for its love for and perpetration of violence? I'm aware there are exceptions, the question is when will we all acknowledge the rule? This comment isn't about Berne, of course I'll vote for him or whomever is nominated.
It's about what happens to all females when yet another obstacle is obliterated. It's about beginning to develop bigger ideas about how things can be run in this nation and who should do it. It's about true change, real revolution.
If only we were as comfortable asking Bernie to support Warren as we are the reverse.
But once again...looks like something else has been collectively deemed more important and without any evidence a woman cannot defeat Trump.
2
As a survivor of domestic violence, having met and shaken hands and hugged Bernie, I felt safer with him and his respect and genuine caring for everyone than with anyone else in the world, (and I have lived and traveled all around the world). His spirit is reflected in his policies. Wanting healthcare for us all, when Clinton was saying it was pie-in-the-sky, and Warren made not a peep... made the opposite impression. Just because they are women, doesn’t mean they are better, more caring people.
4
@Lilly
As per above, I'm not saying Bernie is violent, although I do think he needs to call out his bros who keep suggesting they know more about feminism than any woman all the while routinely abusing women online.
Bernie had been in the battle longer than Warren, but her specific plans more than make up for that. Clearly her spirit is also reflected in her policies.
The idea that Warren can't be as progressive as Bernie since she was once Republican is hogwash. And we all know Bernie and Buttigieg knowingly benefit from their unjust advantage as males while all the while touting their commitment to social justice.
Both of them will continue to be leaders no matter who is elected. But for a zillion reasons, it's time we elected a female president. If we continue as we are going, whether a male is kind or socialist or whatever good thing, the patriarchy will take us all down.
2
@m.r.f.
Sanders has made it clear that he will support Warren if she's the nominee. And Klobuchar, if she is.
And he did exactly that when Hillary was the nominee.
1
As a progressive, I hope you're correct about a Sanders' legacy.
I also hope Sanders becomes President in 2021.
4
Gosh---how will the media pundits spin it, if Sanders keeps winning primaries like this? Gosh, the nerve of Bernie---actually trying to restore the spirit of FDR's New Deal, & LBJ's Great Society---now in the 21st C.
The media ignores what was more centrist in our past, that some living today remember--- now labeled left wing radical.
We had the GI Bill of Rights.
Medical costs were lower in past generations before HC became high profit.
Low or free tuition at state colleges paid by taxes (then paid back by higher earning grads)
Federal funding of the interstate highway system— under GOP Pres Ike-- who supported social security and labor unions.
Wide membership in employee unions, with rising pay/benefits
Very progressive tax rate, with a top marginal rate of 91%.
An expanding middle class and upward mobility for Americans—a role model for the world.
Now the US ranks lower than many nations in the GINI Index of economic equality, has the world’s highest college tuition, tax laws written for the wealthy, very weak employee unions, and insecurity & downward mobility for the middle class.
Now we have to fight for Representation For Our Taxation—what the colonies demanded of King George in the Revolutionary War.
12
Thank you for your wise words. The hysteria prompted by those setting the national narrative that we will turn into an anarchic version of Venezuela if we demand healthcare which is taken for granted by my European and Japanese friends is getting a bit wearing.
5
The narrative was set when Bernie praised Chavez. It’s a good rebuttal to those who say Bernie doesn’t want Venezuelan-style socialism.
2
If Bernie Sanders has already won then the Democratic Party has already lost. Bernie can't win independents, moderates and suburban women, a coalition that's essential to win the general election.
4
Are you sure Bernie Sanders will be that transformative a candidate? Not if the US goes full banana republic in a second term for Donald Trump. Attorney General William Barr with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's blessing is currently doing everything he can to hasten our demise.
2
Let us be frank. The quality of life for a frightening number of Americans is much closer to many developing nations than our neighbor to the north and our allies across the pond. Say what you will of Denmark, France, Sweden,etc, but their citizens are healthier, happier, and live longer than anyone in the United States save the very rich. These are facts, for whatever that's worth in the America of 2020.
As a member of the much maligned millennial generation, I'm incredulous that millions of my fellow citizens, apparently, would rather die than have access to healthcare, good jobs, paid sick leave, decent housing, etc., for fear that someone, somewhere in America, is "gaming the system" or "mooching". I deeply regret ever having been born in this country, and will be looking at any and all ways to jump ship should Trump win a second term. This is not a country that currently offers any measure of quality of life, which is, at the the end of the day, the entire point of a country in the first place.
"Hard work" is supposedly a nice little Anglo-Saxon Protestant virtue, but what good is "hard work" if it is without any inherent personal or spiritual value or meaning? Of what value is it if it is just to earn money, really? I'm asking. Of what value is it if it is all you do before you are too old or too sick to do "work" anymore? What, in the end, is the point of life at all?
Sanders may not be perfect, but he is the last, best hope of ordinary Americans for a better life.
7
@dramaticartchild
You touch on something very deep here - existential, really, that so many millenial/ Xennials and even X-ers feel.
I understand why it seems that Sanders is the only person running who truly understands how you (and me sometimes) feels.
But the reality is that there is a big portion of this country who is totally brainwashed into voting against their best (economic) interests, and that creeps over into people who call themselves moderates. It doesn't mean they don't agree with Bernie on everything, because if you ask them, they do. It's just that they carry around the belief that its too hard or too expensive to do all at once. They are driven by fear.
The point of this article was that: hopefully Bernie has reminded the rest of the party of what is truly important -- all the things you ask about. Hopefully, he is forcing the moderate (and the scared) to question themselves and their fears. I think we will get there, but maybe not under Bernie's watch.
2
@Melissa 40
This!
Our media doesn't give us the full range of views, alternatives, and solutions.
They keep their coverage within narrow limits--to avoid looking too 'left wing' by our distorted standards----standards shaped by super rich mega donors to our elections that have kept politicians in line. And by the FOX News GOP state media, that keeps other media on the defensive.
Main media hardly ever reports any information on how other democracies pay for their benefits that are said to be impossible here. Those countries are also capitalist systems, but they don't insult their citizens by letting profits rule politics.
Their govts have more respect for the citizens that elect them. Thus they realize better what the American colonists demanded of King George in our 18th Century Revolution---
Representation For Our Taxation.
That's what we are fighting for in the 21st Century.
2
In the past the nominees with "outrageously liberal" platforms were resoundingly defeated, but their ideas eventually were enacted. But this time if the incumbent is reelected there will be no next time.
3
The dream is over, Bernie people.
If you want to know what turns a lot of people off about Bernie. Here's a couple of items:
The absolutist, righteous indignation. We've had enough.
Immigration policies (and I cannot state this enough): getting rid of ICE and giving a safety net to illegal immigrants as though they are citizens is hugely unpopular. Forget about the socialist label. Trump will repeat this item with great success until the very last vote is cast.
No track record, only rhetoric, for highly complex "revolutionary" changes for the world's largest economy. In software development, they call this "vaporware."
He's had a heart attack during the campaign. I mean, come on!
6
@Frank Scully
"Forget about the socialist label. Trump will repeat this item with great success until the very last vote is cast."
Trump tried to rachet up anti-immigrant hysteria to all the way to 11 just before the midterms when he sent the Army to the border to stop the "invading caravans".
That scam did not fly with suburban women in 2018 who netted Dems 40 seats...why would the same ploy work in 2020?
2
@CDP
The point is that immigration on the far right and left have gotten extreme. Most people want sensible immigration policies that work and allow people to become citizens without free for all and defense of those who move here illegally.
Bernies policies are as unpopular as Trump's, so it's a strike against him.
1
@Frank Scully
It's not really about legal or illegal immigration.
It's about dealing with the *causes* of immigration, especially *forced* emigration from war and arid areas as refugee immigration to safer, more livable areas.
If you think immigration is a problem now, think mass migration and millions of refugees resulting from global warming and resulting sea-level rise and continental desertification.
Think of the millions of refugees from Syria, holed up in Turkey (which uses them as leverage, threatening Europe by opening the valve).
This very real, and no doubt growing, problem deserves a reasoned response by the left. And not only to combat and prevent the rise of fascism here and there.
Head-in-the-sand blame-the-victims and shoot-the-messenger just will not cut it. Nor will ignoring the problem - starting with ignoring climate change.
The Green New Deal is a vague vision at this point, but it's clearly on the right track.
America would be lucky to have Sanders as President.
The man is incorruptible. He ran for Prez. at 70+ in 2016 not because he has always wanted to be President some day (like Joe Biden) but only because he saw no one else was willing to stand up to the DLC corporatist wing of the Democratic party and its coronation of Hillary.
Sanders wanted someone to raise the issues important to the working class (which is what the Democratic party is supposed to be for).
Sanders speaks the truth about the corrupt nature of America's oligarchic capitalism and the inevitable erosion of democracy that will follow in such a system.
Many people say "Sanders is not a Democrat" but Sanders is the best representation of what a Democrat ought to be.
5
As a historian, I know the history cited here is true and love Sanders for educating the masses and dragging democratic leadership back to relevancy.
If we were working our way out of a collapse, in a way that propelled FDR, Sanders would have a better chance.
But given that this is a nation that could elect Trump, not impeach him, and where a right wing bias runs from Fox News thru the electoral college to the Supreme Court, I view that my preferred candidate, Bernie, faces long odds and I'm very afraid of what damage Trump can do with four more years.
So I've switched my allegiance to a better bet: Bloomberg. His policies are mostly to the left of Obama, and he nullifies the institutional advantage conferred on Republicans by Citizens United.
JFK broke the barrier to the White House for catholics.
We're overdue at breaking it for Jews.
3
@frankly 32 Bloomberg says he will spend the same money regardless of the nominee and he is free to carry out independent expenditures under Citizens United.
So the money advantage is not lost if Sanders is the nominee.
1
@CDP I realize that, but what is lost imho are our chances of winning.
Bloomberg does not alarm Republicans, except those who are members of the NRA.
He consolidates the center.
He reaches out to the left with progressive programs.
All of we anti-trumpsters can find something in him to like if we don't insist on purity.
To me the election is Bloomberg's to lose.
Bernie, who I have sent money to for 5 years, by comparison, is a longshot and a prayer. In New Hampshire, the moderates emphatically outscored we leftists.
Job one is getting ride of our psychopath president.
1
Bernie Sanders is truly an army of one, the man who started the movement.
He’s trying to resurrect the meaning of word “socialism”.
That is one of the most uplifting ideas that exists together with the faith, justice, freedom, democracy, truth, ethics, honesty and choice.
Is it even possible to separate them? Can the society exist without all those aforementioned traits?
Our politicians have destroyed true meaning of the words trust, character, morality and personals sacrifice.
That’s not the fault of those ideas but the corrupt leaders.
The same happened with the socialism. The expression was used in lieu of Leninism, Stalinism, Maoism, or Titoism.
The socialism is a state of the human minds and souls. It cannot be achieved by voting but by gradual social development, maybe in century.
We will reach it when we stop being greedy, biased, prejudicial, hateful, et cetera.
It could be said that socialism is the best implementation of true faith.
A guy who created the concept, Karl Marx, clearly defined the prerequisites for it.
It’s going to happen in the most developed countries, meaning that the personal education, creativity, innovation, productivity, maturity and team spirit are the necessity.
It’s impossible to create those conditions overnight but solely through generational individual development.
The socialism is the state of human minds, something like the faith.
Those two concepts go hand-in-hand.
3
Until Sanders can motivate the Older Black Population, the Latino vote and Moderates, he will never win this General Election. He has the support of the young (mixed) and older white population because of his promises. He is also advocating to push all of his agenda the same way Trump has done his. This path seems to be the same with his Supporters who push back Sanders' doubters as establishment trying to cheat him. All elections are about money and lies. However, there is still a need for Sanders Supporters to try to convince us that we are not voting for someone who will become a Leftist Tyrant in the WH from a Racist one. We all believe that there needs to be change but is that revolution under Sanders or someone else that can motivate and energize the Democrats of all types not just radicals and progressives. Sanders's speeches always talk about how money corrupts but fails to understand his support comes from those who believe that we should all be equal in terms of wealth not in stature. He scares older populations that are not white because they always dreamed of getting above their parent's status. He has never really explained how to pay for erasing debt and free healthcare is going to work without burdening the government with both deficits and bureaucracy.
1
Please... DO NOT VOTE FOR BERNIE.
I love his ideas. I love his policies. But Bernie could not win against Trump. He will certainly will not get my vote. And besides, who wants to trade one megalomaniac for other?
4
Even if you think Bernie is too radical. Do you really want to defend capitalism.
Is Capitalism a immutable theology or a 200 year old philosophical construct with a bunch of unresolved contradictions?
Is it the invisible hand of divinity beneficently directing human activity or an rough approximation depicting colonial era mechanisms for distributing goods and services?
The real question for people in advanced civilizations is how we use our autonomy:
Should we design society to serve capitalism?
or
Should we design capitalism to serve society?
I chose the second because:
1) An economic system can do everything necessary to reward it's entrepreneurs and regulate the functions to eliminate abuse and exploitation.
2) Capitalism has proven it rewards greed, avarice, amoral behavior and corrupt practices.
And
Boy! I hope I'm wrong about this one.
3) Capitalism is incapable of handling Climate Change. Capitalists will "solve" the coming crisis by retrenching themselves in "secure zones" and letting a large percentage of the global population fend for itself and probably die.
1
Since Reagan, the country has had 40 years of supply side economics. Now, the great American post-war middle class is just about gone, while the rapacious titans of tech and health care (industry having been outsourced) have accumulated unimaginable wealth. Bernie represents the core belief that this situation is exploitative and needs to change. Trickle down economics hasn’t worked for anyone but the richest. The jig is up. Fasten you’re seatbelts as Bernie becomes the most transformational president since Reagan.
1
Go Bernie!
All of the senior DNC leadership should be shown to the door.
50 years of selling out the working-class Democratic base to special interest may be coming to an end, that's a big maybe!
1
Yes, and to borrow from the author's apt Goldwater analogy, the reinvigorated Democratic Party might embrace his ideology in 2024 after again anointing a "centrist" neoliberal technocrat like Buttigieg, Klobuchar or Bloomberg, losing again to Trump and finally throwing the Clinton/Obama paradigm onto the dustbin of history.
1
Yes it is a great thing that Democrats are willing to embrace more activist policies, but pragmatism also has its place. So Sanders has a significant place in our party, but to embrace every aspect of his revolutionary policies may be suicide in our attempt to unseat Trump who is the bane of every democrats' existence.
This is baloney.
Bernie Sanders policy position are what the center of the DEM party has always been. When the right of reagan Bill Clinton seduced the voters after 12 years of the republican redistribution of the national assets upward groomed them to think becoming a self serving billionaire was no longer destructive to society.
Bernie has not "changed" the party he has brought the prodigal DEM party back to Home.
1
We need to keep in mind that these multiple-candidate primaries are contests to see who is disliked the least. Bernie and Pete win because only three-quarters of the voters don't support them while almost 90 percent do not support Biden and Warren. Yea! We "won"!
1
So somehow we are at a point where we are saying a 38 year old ex mayor of a tiny town who happens to be gay is the “safe” candidate to run against Trump? Or the sadly somewhat doddering ex VP who is coming in last in the exact states that would seem to represent his base?
Have all you centrists asked yourselves how Trump got elected? An enormous and mostly disengaged portion of the electorate is desperately struggling to afford a decent life, with housing insecurity, healthcare insecurity, and lack of upward mobility in the insane costs of higher education. And while our counterparts in EVERY OTHER MODERN LIBERAL DEMOCRACY (Canada, UK, Germany, Australia, et al) have a decent safety net and guarantees of access to healthcare and education, somehow south of the Canadian border these ideas are extremist fantasies? All so that the already obscenely rich can be unconstrained in their ceaseless pursuit of more? Where billionaires pay less in taxes as a proportion of income than teachers and cops and construction workers?
The Democrats must again become a party of and for the people, and must make and win the case that government ‘s purpose is to ensure everyone gets a fair shake.
3
This seems very premature. Sanders has done well in two not-very-representative states due to the moderates splitting the vote. Votes for 2nd and 3rd place finishers in NH (Mayor Pete, Klobuchar) together beat Sanders handily.
2
From a recent David Brooks column:
"Only 53% of Sanders voters say they will certainly support whomever is the Democratic nominee. This is no idle threat. In 2016, in Pennsylvania, 117,000 Sanders primary voters went for Trump in the general, and Trump won the state by 44,292 ballots. In Michigan, 48,000 Sanders voters went for Trump, and Trump won the state by 10,704. In Wisconsin, 51,300 Sanders voters went for Trump, and Trump won the state by 22,748. In short, Sanders voters helped elect Trump."
If Sanders fails to win the nomination, he must insist that is followers vote for the Dem candidate ... otherwise he may be responsible to Trump's election, again.
4
@James Cunningham I wonder where you're getting those statistics? Last time around Bernie did insist that his followers vote for Hillary and he campaigned hard for her. Remember, we live in a free country and "followers" are free to vote for whomever they choose.
2
To all those Bernie skeptics out there: The future is the future, you may try to postpone it, but it is coming. Better to start the future quicker, to reap its benefits & work out all the bugs sooner.
The system as it operates now creates untenable disparities of wealth, with gross extremes at the ends & a rapidly shrinking middle. Don't be fooled by temporary aberrations from this pattern. It's in the nature of automation & our banking & financial system that this will happen.
At some point UBI, for example will certainly become necessary; we should start working toward that, incrementally if necessary.
One measure in that vein would be what I would call a "Universal Resource Card" given to every citizen: it would have specialized dollars programmed into it for each category of unequivocally healthy expense:
1) foods designated as "superfoods"
2) scholarly books (must be academic publisher, but extending down to remedial academic books for under-educated citizens) to improve intellectual engagement & attainment, in or out of school.
3) rent or housing dollars
4) fuel/transportation dollars.
5) clothing dollars
6) hygiene dollars
7) telecommunications dollars
(maybe a 8th category of leisure/entertainment as well; all need these things as well, as a matter of basic well-being and mental health)
All products in these categories would be coded so the cards would be accepted as payment. The amounts credited to people's cards should be on a sliding scale according o income.
2
What we learned from NH is that Bernie squeaked out a win in his neighboring state. Buttigieg did just as well, delegate wise and Klobuchar is hot on their heels. Clearly Klobuchar and Buttigieg combined constitute many more votes for the center than the left.
The logic that Republicans have moved far right and thus democrats can move left and succeed is not correct. Demographics do not favor us. We could win a large majority, but because democratic voters are concentrated in urban and blue states, we would still lose. We need independents, moderates and maybe even never Trumpers to win. There are too many people, within the Democratic Party and without who will not vote for a self-declared socialist. In some states, such a standard bearer would sink the congressional candidates as well. This election it too important. I don’t like living in an authoritarian regime, where a person who answers a subpoena and his family are frog marched out of their jobs, political opponents are smeared and investigated. Children reside in cages on the border. The earth is warming, and Trump undermined the scientists working to figure out how to develop crops in the face of a changed climate. The cuts in funding to the sciences will leave us with fewer scientists in the future. Now a decree has come in Hitlerian fashion that all government buildings must be built in the “classical style”. I, personally, am frightened. We need a Democrat, not a grand experiment.
1
Capitalism works well for those who it advantages, but that number seems to be shrinking over time. Fundamentally, is not sustainable over the long haul, for a variety of reasons. Not one capitalist I've ever spoken to or read has made an argument to even suggest that it is sustainable. It keeps things going in its direction, and will for as long as it can, but a change is coming. Hopefully we can hear folks like Bernie who have ideas about what to do when the change gets here.
2
Thank you Professor Kazin.
At some point in history, things change. The process is stochastic so we don’t know for sure when the change takes place. Sometimes change happens over time, evolution is what we call that type of change. Sometimes change happens suddenly, like a jump process whose frequency and magnitude is impossible to predict. That we call revolution.
Bernie wants a revolution. If the conditions are ripe, the probability of it happening is higher. But it is not certain.
The main source of uncertainty comes from people voting not knowing what is good for them, partially because of the unbelievably powerful false rhetoric they have been fed from day one. It is hard to filter that out. It requires a lot of education and few can afford it. The media manufactures consent. Herman and Chomsky told us how, a while ago.
I believe we are in a singular moment where Bernie has a chance that neither Debs nor McGovern had. FDR had it and he turned it into four electoral victories and his presidency to the best we ever had.
I am an optimist. I love Rawlsian Justice and I love Bernie because he is the one to implement it in this country.
May the Lord give him health and bless us with his leadership.
When mathematics fails to predict, prayer takes over :-)
2
Thank you Professor Kazin.
At some point in history, things change. The process is stochastic so we don’t know for sure when the change takes place. Sometimes change happens over time, evolution is what name that type of change. Sometimes change happens suddenly, like a jump process whose frequency and magnitude is impossible to predict. That we call revolution.
Bernie wants a revolution. If the conditions are ripe, the probability of it happening is higher. But it is not certain.
The main source of uncertainty comes from people voting not knowing what is good for them, partially because of the unbelievably powerful false rhetoric they have been fed from day one. It is hard to filter that out. It requires a lot of education and few can afford it. The media manufactures consent. Herman and Chomsky told us how a while ago.
I believe we are in a singular moment where Bernie has a chance that neither Debs nor McGovern had. FDR had it and he turned it into four election victories and his presidency to the best we ever had.
I am an optimist. I love Rawlsian Justice and I love Bernie because he is the one to implement it in this country.
May the lord give him health and bless us with his leadership.
When mathematics fail to predict, prayer takes over :-)
3
Won exactly what, two ties in very small states. I admit
Joe is in trouble but nothing he can't fix if he does well on
super Tuesday.
3
It's a nice theme, but, if Jackson was so influential, then why, as the writer himself points out, are all of his policy goals still just goals? We've had two democratic presidents since, so it stands to reason that Jackson had little or no influence on the party, much less, of the transformative type. That Bernie is now trying to push them again on the same recalcitrant party is proof that Jackson, like Sanders, is still an outsider in this corporate funded, establishment-oriented, center right party.
2
We voters of any stripe to the left or far left of the GOP must consider this reality : The Dem. nominee must be able and equipped to work / deal with a possible GOP majority in House or Senate...probably Senate. (No one knows for certain how Congress will shake out going forward...) All the proposed solutions on the campaign trail to the serious issues in this country, the idealism of purpose, the priorities of change on the respective candidates' agendas MUST be framed for the American voter AND the reality of the office of President in these tortured times in a moderating, reasoned manner so as to enable effective work with Congress to accomplish desperately needed changes in our gov. and polity. Polarizing voters and then Congress ( IF a Dem. candidate, "moderate" or "socialist," is elected) will NOT assure a safe, reasoned passage into an improved future that the U.S. sorely needs.
@Ellie A Republican senate will not work with any Democrat, just because he/she is a Democrat and not a far right-winger. They wouldn't work with Obama, who is a middle of the road Democrat and they won't work with Biden either. It's all or nothing with them and they are willing to let people suffer until they get their way (which is no way). Let's hope younger people in red states eventually prevail, because time is against the GOP.
2
Bernie cult members are out in force. I admire the public healthcare systems in other advanced countries that have universal healthcare as a right. Bernie's plan goes far beyond what other countries have and would cost 20% more than those systems, even if he can reduce costs to what other countries pay. The bigger problem is that it will not become law in the foreseeable future. Bernie's folks think the passage of the ACA was nothing, but it had to be watered down by eliminating the public option just to become law. Bernie also wants to make college free for everyone in public colleges and forgive all student debt. He's going to spend $16.3 trillion on climate change, and guarantee every American a government job paying $15 hour + benefits. He would guarantee every teacher a minimum salary of $60,000, and have universal preschool and paid family leave. He recently admitted that he doesn't even know how much all that would cost, but estimates are between $60 and $97 trillion over the next decade. Do you really think Congress will pass all that if Bernie were to be elected?
We have a lot of problems in this country that we need to fix. Bernie needs to explain how much his plans cost and how he going to pay for them. So far, what he has said doesn't add up. Republicans want to run against him, and won't criticize him much, just as in 2016. If he gets the nomination, the Republican/Russian propaganda machine will unload against him, and Trump will be reelected.
5
The important change Sanders and Warren are after hasn't happened yet. Without this change everything else is temporary and meaningless. This single most important change Sanders is aiming to accomplish is ending corruption of our political system by the financial elite for the benefit of the financial elite.
That is the real battle in this election. Do average Americans have the vision to regain control of Their government? Or do they continue to be herded by the financial elite through the media and party pressure into the cowardly complacency of willful blindness to their own increasing subjugation.
Wealth inequality happens because we let it. It is Our policy. We have financial and healthcare insecurity because we allow it. We allow it by voting for the candidates put forth by the financial elite and letting our political parties rely on the money of the financial elite. It is Our fault for not supporting the candidates who actually represent our interests and instead voting for the candidates who support the interests of the financial elite.
When Sanders ends Big money in the Democratic party, that will be transformative and meaningful. When that happens the Democratic party will crush the Republican party for at least a generation. Nobody likes corruption. An honest, people oriented Democratic party will be a new thing and a tremendously popular party. That is why I'm supporting Sanders and Warren.
3
Sanders really means well and I like his overall message regarding equality, living wage, healthcare.
But I don't think such drastic, revolutionary change all at once is what people actually want, particularly when you don't have concrete fiscal accountability. Whether he's all truth or not, many seem wary of the 'reign of terror' that might occur in the markets, economy, and social networks if he were elected. This is especially true when the economy is currently doing well for the majority of people. Add this to the fact there are candidates that pose more gentle change, I think he is unelectable.
Maybe we did learn something from the French Revolution?
1
@Jules
The _French_ certainly learned something from their revolution. And they're still defending it, and still defending all of the "acquired rights" obtained through the decades since then through mass struggle.
And French of all stripes - even the right-wing extremists defend the multiple weeks of vacation by law, parental leave, full healthcare, solid public education, and all the rest.
It’s possible, someday we may look back, and determine that Bernie was ahead of his time. Some of his policies may become reality someday, when the majority of Americans want them.
In the meantime, he is fracturing the Democratic Party with an agenda that doesn’t sell well in most of America today.
The question is, is it wise to push a losing agenda today, if it will result in four more years of Donald Trump?
3
@Tigerina Enough Democrats want them he's finished first in the first 2 primaries.
Maybe not what you want to hear...
But it is what it is
1
The strength of any country is measured solely by the personal willingness and ability of the individuals to sacrifice for the common good.
3
As a middle class citizen that still has to put a child through college, I still do not buy Bernie's promises of free college tuition , medicare for all theory. Bernie supporters are just in awe with his over ambitious promises and are pinning their hopes that under Bernie's Presidency, life will be like living in one of the Scandinavian countries. What they forget it , America is huge and very diverse racially and economically and it can never become Belgium or Norway. No Mr. Sanders, I don't want any freebies. Just make college and medical care a little bit affordable.
1
@ALN you have no idea what you are missing. Things people in the rest of the developed world take for granted, are considered socialist.
Many think that Sanders is very far to the left, but it's not true. He seems to be far left only because the Republican Party has moved so far right. Every other western nation takes care of its citizens, who don't have to worry about going bankrupt due to medical bills, or even about being put in jail when they fail to show up in court where they are being sued for medical bills that have not been paid.
Democrats should not allow the incumbent or any other Republican to define issues during this election cycle. Democrats need to stay on course as they did in 2018 and win the presidency.
4
While I appreciate the optimism of this opinion piece...we simply cannot afford another four years of Trump! If Bernie is to be the democratic candidate in the general election (although there is still a lot of time left to see what transpires) then I hope history will not repeat itself and that every democrat who didn't get their choice for candidate gets over themselves and votes for the candidate running against Trump. Hillary Clinton lost because of three reasons: the electoral college, Comey and people who couldn't get over Bernie. I will vote for whatever it takes, even if the Democratic Party's choice is a Baby Yoda Plushie (he is, indeed, a unifier), so we don't have four more years of the Commander and Tweet. EVERY single registered democrat must unite and do this if we are to be successful in restoring our democracy and also having a chance of saving the planet. Here's hoping...
3
If Biden, Buttigieg, Clobuchar and Bloomberg were really moderate candidates, shouldn't they use that moderation and ability to negotiate and compromise to agree on the best one among them and team up together?
If the moderate Democrats cannot unite, who could?
The smart people could evaluate personal age, likability, knowledge, managerial abilities, long term thinking, personal courage and energy to figure out who the best among them is.
If they cannot make such a simple call, how could they negotiate with Kremlin, Tehran, Pyongyang, Havana, Beijing, Brussels or London?
That's what the presidential primary elections are for - to decide who's best. Besides, the prospect of, say 6, egotistically-driven politicians, each of whom 'know' that they're the best candidate, to meet and somehow decide, amongst themselves, who is best, is as unlikely as it is undesirable - let the people decide who the best candidate is - not the politicians.
1
Let’s assume that the number of Democrat voters older than 65 who die in the next 4 years is roughly equal to the number of Democratic voters who are currently 61-65 and who will replace the current 65 and older crowd over the same period.
Such a replacement is not going to change the Left - Center - Right distribution of Democratic voter priorities. Few people aged 61-65 rearrange their political priorities after age 65.
Let’s assume that the number of Democrat voters 18-21 who continue as Democratic voters 4 years from now are joined by teenagers currently between the ages of 14 and 17.
Will such addition change the Left - Center - Right distribution of Democratic voter priorities?
Of course it will, and there is no doubt in which direction the needle will move.
Which is why universal affordable healthcare will eventually be a reality in this country, assuming a Democracy Extinction Event does not occur in November 2020.
1
Enjoyable look at a brief history of politics in America. Yes, these men did make a difference in moving the needle very slightly for changes in how their respective parties addressed the geopolitical, economic, and social frameworks over a period of over a century.
However, I would argue that what we're faced with in American life these days are the results of political stagnation for an equal amount of time when it comes to taking bold action to ameliorate the neglect by both parties: sagging employment opportunities, stagnant wages, loss of small communities to downward trends, enormous wealth disparities between classes, a medical industry that has become obscene, and the undeniable dire results of climate change.
Over this same period, both parties have protected business interests to the point that current political understanding has entered into a unique realm: right or left, with little evidence of a center (the place of business-as-usual)
To make any comparisons between past effects on our political parties by a few men who stand out for their supposed innovative ideas is, to my mind, now irrelevant.
We are so very behind in this nation in areas of deep environmental, social, economic, cultural, and political progress and change; it's obvious that the American public has now reached a point that we are deeply divided on what to do about this. But that these crucial problems need to finally and seriously be addressed in the present, is what unites us all.
1
I don't think Sanders should be the nominee due to his past support for dictators and subjugation of entire populations based on a love of Marxist writings. He support horrible regimes based on his inflexible ideology. Granted, the US doesn't have a good track record on supporting regimes either, so maybe this point is a bit overblown.
He is honest, and in that regard I like what he has to offer. He is happy to state the obvious: taxes will go up for middle class families to pay for his programs. He has said that numerous times. He focuses on raising taxes on the wealthy, but he and his advisers can clearly see that in no European country with this programs are middle class taxes lower than they are here. Income, VAT, payroll taxes. All are higher in other countries to pay. They learned quickly that billionaires don't have billions, and when markets plummet, the wealthy have much less. See CA after 2008. The middle is where the money is. Selling higher taxes for the greater good is his difficult road.
I prefer to see a more moderate change in policies to include reforming the tax code to eliminate deductions, credits, etc. Taxing corporations a flat 25% of gross profit without all of these exclusions, credits, etc would be much fairer. This will generate far more revenue than this wealth tax or increasing the taxes on capital gains. I hope if he does win, he will have to moderate a little.
2
If Sanders is the nominee, he has my vote. And we will see if Democrats really believe what they so often preach. If they are truly for the working person in this country, the choice between Trump and Sanders is as stark as can get: the one gives tax cuts to the rich, bankrupting the country and has not an ounce of decency in his body; the other would raise taxes and expand programs so that all Americans could have decent lives, rather than just the rich. Come on, people. The choice here isn't exactly difficult.
8
I consider several of Dr. Kazin's historical interpretations questionable. He writes: "The resulting policies [of William Jennings Bryan] did much to elect Woodrow Wilson to the White House twice (with Bryan as his secretary of state from 1913 to 1915) and Franklin Roosevelt four times."
To start at the start - Woodrow Wilson received a minority of the popular vote in his first presidential campaign. His 6.5 million votes enabled him to enter the White House only because the 7.5 million Republican votes were split between two Republican candidates, William Howard Taft (a traditional Republican) and Theodore Roosevelt (a Progressive Republican).
Further, crediting Bryan with FDR's election victory of 1932 does not take into consideration the reality that with an unemployment rate exceeding thirty percent, the incumbent Republicans could not have won under any circumstance.
I suggest that the best parallel would be with the McGovern campaign. After that debacle, the Left wing of the party yielded to the center and the Democrats won with Jimmy Carter and later with Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.
1
@Quiet Waiting
Besides Wilson, Taft and Teddy Roosevelt, there was a fourth candidate who captured 6% of the vote in the 1912 election named Eugene Debs who's been Sanders's role model since college. A railroad worker with a h.s. education, he called himself the candidate of the working man and ran 5 times for president.
At least I now know that Bryan received the 1896 Democratic nomination a few month after Plessy v Ferguson institutionalized racial segregation, officially at least, although it had started earlier and lasted well beyond Brown v Board.
So the African American vote is crucial to Democrats in the 2020 election. Any opinion on whether a majority will still support Biden, or choose Bloomberg, Sanders or someone else? What will the turnout be like and how many will be willing to stand in long lines like many have had to for Obama?
1
Many people here are saying what I’m thinking: the moderate candidates got the majority of the votes. Bernie did not. The only way he can actually win is because the moderates will divvy up the votes and Bernie will win by default, not because he truly represents the will of the majority of the people.
Also, we have many primaries ahead of us. Why declare a winner after only two states, very unrepresentative states, have voted?
8
Sorry, don't buy it. Jesse jackson is a minor footnote for the Democratic party. Sanders, hopefully, will be as well. They are both gadflies without having much in the way of legislative success or success at getting much done. Gadflies are fine as they stimulate thinking.
4
The swing states will decide the election. And that dictates that in order to win the Democrats must nominate a centrist. Any other path will further endanger the American democracy.
Save the big plans for 2024.
3
In 2016 voter's of all stripes were calling for SIGNIFICANT change. Instead of Bernie Sanders, who well-represented that change, we were given Hillary Clinton - aka: more of the same.
Had the DNC acted fairly and responsibly and nominated Sanders in '16 - I'm confident he'd be our president now. Instead, we indeed, got SIGNIFICANT change...
I "felt the Bern" in '16 and it never left...and incidentally, I'm closer to Bernie's age than those of my kids!
12
For once I'd love to see a discussion about the Overton Window and how far to the right its moved, in establishment media. A discussion like that would highlight the fact that Sanders is not some far left socialist, but in fact an FDR Democrat.
12
If Sanders is nominated, all he will be remembered for is enabling Trump to be re-elected. Quite a legacy.
7
Good luck. Should they run him as their candidate it is a sure thing that Trump will be reelected --as he is just too far left for even the most open minded independent or Republican voter. The Democratic party will just add to the divide with this decision.
5
Actually, no, he hasn't won. Sanders won Mayor Pete by 1.3 percent. Also, the aggregate percentage of Pete and Klobuchar well exceeded Sanders and Warren't progressive aggregate:
52.7% (including Biden's 8.4%) to 35.1
No offense, but New Hampshire is but one small state out of 50.
This is just fanciful thinking by progressives and click bait media narrative to generate views and revenue.
4
“Whether he captures the White House or not, he has transformed the Democratic Party.”
How so? I see moderates taking over the DP while the progressive radicalization seemingly on a march has been marginalized by Buttigieg and Klobuchar. Warren is a train wreck and Sanders is not far behind. In addition, the youngest candidates are seeming to gather steam. The boomer candidates are passe’.
6
Bernie Sanders is to the Democrats what John McCain was to the Republicans. Had the Republicans stood behind McCain in '08 and a viable vice-presidential running mate been on the ballot, McCain, and they, may have won and possibly kept the office for 8 - 12 years. If Bernie wins & takes a running mate that isn't seen as real potential presidential, he will lose. If Bernie wins the nomination and has a strong V.P., then maybe he can win.
There is a lot Bernie stands for that I do not - as it is presented. I'd want a of safe guards for people to opt out (like Medicaid for all). But I remember in 2016 the "Never Trump" people were told not to vote their conscience, and vote for the party. Maybe they learned from the previous two losses. Will Democrats do the same?
3
If Bernie is serious about his run for president, he needs to drop out of his race for the Senate. This dual candidacy isn’t just hedging his bets—it’s making Democratic control of the Senate more unlikely.
Vermont has a GOP governor who will appoint a Republican to his Senate seat if Bernie should win the presidency. That means that Democrats would have to capture five Senate seats (Doug Jones will probably be a Democratic loss) to take the majority. There aren’t five likely Democratic pick-ups in Senate races. If Mitch McConnell remains majority leader, no legislation will pass and no judges will be confirmed or considered.
The same is not true of Amy Klobuchar because Minnesota has a Democratic governor.
All of these promises will go nowhere without the Senate.
4
Sanders has "already won"? He beat Mayor Pete by 1.3 percent of the vote in N.H. And, he trails Pete in delegates awarded so far. He's behind in the polls in Nevada and South Carolina. He's the most extreme of all the Democrats, and he only recently formally joined the party.
I can't believe how much members of the MSM over hype delegate-deficient Iowa and N.H.
I hope that Kazin, who is writing a book on the history of the Democratic Party, can perhaps speculate on how JFK -- a capitalist who used tax cuts and government spending to help the economy -- would have reacted to the turn to pure socialism that Sanders espouses.
5
BALONEY. Trump won. Joe was my 2, maybe 1 choice but I would have happily devoted myself to him, because he was far above above any other candidate in appeal to moderates and independents. Once elected, he could have hit the ground running due to his experience, no small need since it will take YEARS for a real leader to repair this mess.
But there has been an elephant in the room. And/or I've missed a lot of coverage.
Where and when did other candidates denounce Trump, Barr, and Pompeo in public and specifically for the intent to knock out the most viable candidate? Where and when did other candidates acknowledge with respect and supportively that Joe was a staggering disadvantage. Where and when did any remind us that Hunter has mental health problems and all this happened whilst Beau was dying of cancer.
And what press coverage have I missed? Are there editorials I did not see expressing the crazy imbalance Biden faced - this was not an equal primary race - Trump's attacks were a ball and chain. He won IA and NH, not Bernie. Unless something changes, whoever is in the race will not be able to face down Trump as effectively.
And Bernie, bless his "independent" heart - who has never administered anything of consequence & revisits his 2016 discord of making left of center - a vast umbrella holding true hope and promise - seem inchoate and rigid.
Grief and hopelessness have surged this week.
So, maybe I should amend that. Trump won. But Putin won "bigly"
4
Bernie Sanders' support is limited to 25% of Democrats. He has hardly captured the party. He did give voice to a progressive agenda, and Elizabeth Warren is in that space too. In New Hampshire I think they totaled about 35% of the vote. That makes it an important "wing" but hardly dominant -- however much it invites clickbait headlines like this.
4
Excellent, concise, history lesson! And I agree that it's often the "outsider" who has the biggest impact in the end. I do hope that Sanders can be both: transformative AND win.
One other thing that people should draw from your history lesson: Sanders' ideology isn't so much socialism as good, old fashioned American populism. He's always been for the common person. Hes no more a "socialist" than FDR was. It's high time the MSM begin reporting on him fairly and factually.
14
@Kingfish52
Then he should stop branding himself as with that label. You're talking about nuances that can't be distilled into a 30 sec soundbite, but will definitely be distorted by the highly effective republican lies. And these lies will work with independents, moderates, and voters in the Midwest states we need to win 270 electoral votes.
2
America in 2020 is not the America of 1932. We're not in a Depression, where middle America will embrace Socialism. Democrats win when we're Centrists, not radicals. Doesn't anyone here remember 1968? It may have felt good to rock the system, but we got Nixon.
Bloomberg will get the nomination and the Sanders crowd will revolt and stay home. Get ready for four more years of Trump, everyone.
5
Bernie is not the only one who has changed the Democratic Party, Elizabeth Warren has also had a hand in the changes.
4
So, if Bernie Sanders is going to be the candidate, it's time for his BernieBro supporters to put their money where their mouths are.
Get off social media, stop fighting and WORK!
Volunteer. Donate. Work with other Democratic candidates up and down the ticket.
4
They said the same thing about Jeremy Corbyn.
7
and Pol Pot.
Sanders has won and the democratic party has lost.
What is different in this election is we are running against a President who openly aspires to be a dictator and a sycophantic Republican party that is exceptional only in its cowardice.
If we lose in 2020, the ballot in 2024 will only have Trump's name on it.
2
People with closed minds rush to condemn a man who never lied, has been consistent, caring and a fierce defender of the middle class. What can possibly be wrong with his agenda, nothing! He is the only man with the spank and dogged courage to put the bully in his place and at the same time redress some serious problems. Once elected he will have no choice but to move to the center. No candidate has his experience or knowledge . He is not corruptible. What else in the world are we looking for?????
19
"Bernie Sanders has already won"
Perhaps, but wait till the DNC gets through with him.
5
Thanks for reminding us what happened when Eugene McCarthy, and George McGovern ran?
3
America likes its facile history and the 1964 GOP convention was a purge of moderation from the GOP and the GOP never stopped being the nation of extremism and gaslighting. In 1964 Nixon, Reagan and the rest of the America firsters
began the slide to the dysfunctional state we see today.
Going from William Jennings Bryant the Prairie Populist to Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders without Wilson's Creel Committee is to ignore the century of gaslighting that has put America on the road to self destruction.
It was Wilson's Creel Committee that eliminated examining the error of America's entry into the first World War One and collaterally taught Goebbels everything he knew.
We can still watch the Klan marching outside the Cow Palace with their Goldwater signs in 1964, we can watch Reagan with the Southern delegates initiating the Southern strategy and we can read the GOP platform which is the same divide and conquer agenda as today.
It was William Jennings Bryan in 1925 and the religious right that won Tennessee vs John T Scopes.
I fear all this talk about truth is far too late and Georgetown is not the only University content to teach history as we prefer it, not as it was.
There was never a leftist plot the blacklists were a warning against truth tellers and the blacklisted were the truth tellers fighting the gaslighters.
The truth is Bernie arrived in Mississippi North and healed the reddest state in the union where Gentiles Only almost seemed the State motto.
4
If Candidate Far Left cannot "beat Trump like a drum" he is a wasted choice for nominee. I'd go with Bloomberg over Bernie.
4
Trump is his worse enemy and will continue to drive people away from him. Remember he lost by 3.5 million last time. He had an opponent that he created as a wicked woman and Russian help and lots of Red state Repub cheating. Bernie will be so much more knowledgable at debates and will not back down from Trumps yelling at debates.
Can we afford Bernie and his ideas? Well Trump has run up over 1 trillion debt in one year and that will give Bernie lots of wiggle room. 1 trillion could buy lots of infrastructure repair and create millions of good paying jobs that have to stay here. Instead it has created a huge debt for taxpayers and rewarded the very Rich Trump donors, Trump has created 1.5 million FEWER jobs then Obama in 3 years.
1
True. Sanders has returned the entire Democratic Party to its historical roots in the center left. He also has put the Industrial Health Care Compex Cartel (IHCCC) on white-hot notice. And why not? The IHCCC, with their monopoly presence on the need for health care, is stealing $100,000 from every American over the length of their life. This is the cost of excess premiums which are being diverted into this gigantic industry rife with profiteering, insularity and political power through its corrupted members of the U.S. House and Senate.
Klobuchar is indebted to Minnesota Blue Cross/Blue Shield. Biden is in the corporate bag. Hillary said no way to Medicare for All in 2016 and Bloomberg won't even discuss it. Except for Sanders and Warren (who has since backtracked some), all the rest of the candidates are just fine with tinkering with the system, or providing a public option.
None of this addresses the central issue of need for the federal government to intervene and force all this excess profit taking out of the private sector IHCCC and putting the $$ back in people's pockets where it belongs.
Would you care to have this $100,000 in your pocket? That is the supreme question worth asking in this election. It's all about the money. It always has been.
So, the next time get from your local mafia health care franchise a notice of "Procedure Not Covered" or "Deductible of $12,000 not yet met" or "$80 Copay Required," consider this: Voting for Sanders.
9
@BearBoy -- "[The Democratic Party] Going far left now in a period of economic prosperity and low unemployment will take the party right off the cliff into political irrelevance."
Your analysis of the Democratic Party is fanciful and disconnect from reality. "Going far left?" Please explain. The Democratic Party is currently paralyzed with chaos. Half the party is center right. One quarter is moderate and one quarter is progressive. All, right, fixed that for you.
Now, your boot-shaking fear of "going far left", is an incomprehensibly gauzy statement. What is that supposed mean? I'm talking about the $100,000 in health care premiums I don't want to pay to Blue Cross and other private insurers over my lifetime. I want the government to get involved and lay down the law and bring sanity to health care costs.
I don't understand your values. You seem to be among the stack of Democrats who believe if we do anything to upset our abusive Congressional reps that they will do nasty things to us, when in fact, they are already doing horrible things to us, both Republican and Democrat.
"Economic Prosperity?" This is nuts. The underclass and poor are suffering and wealth is extremely skewed towards the ultra-rich. BTW, I'm just barely inside the top 10% of earners, so this isn't a plea for "free stuff" and all that right-wing rhetoric. I live in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. There is tremendous poverty here.
Your analysis of "prosperity" is worthless.
4
"Despite his loss that year, and in two subsequent races,"
Yep ...
3
Stunning ignorance from a professor. Educate yourself processor. Bernie is not a socialist. If he is socialist, then most other advanced nations (Canada, UK, Australia, Germany, Sweden, Japan, so on) all are socialist countries. Democratic Socialism is what Bernie is pushing for just like other advanced nations already have.
8
Excellent piece, other than this typo: "Like him, they oppose nearly every armed intervention overseas and advocate shrinking the military budget."
I think it should read "every stupid armed intervention."
Iraq, Viet Nam, central America. It's a longer list than that and it's all contributed to the decline of America.
1
Nonsense. He hasn't transformed anything. And if he has it is to make Dems more unelectable. Mike and Amy are the path to defeat Trump and restore sanity. If that's even possible at this point.
2
What a hack. After voting in 2 tiny tiny states, Sanders controls the Dem party? Could you at least wait until Super Tuesday before telling voters what to think?
2
I seriously hope Sanders renames himself a Social Democrat. This Socialist Label freaks the superficially informed.
6
All this handwringing after 2 small primaries. Yes, Bernie won some delegates and the centrist Democratic party hyperventilates along with the press and pundits.
Let’s not all go nuts over this. Next up is South Carolina. Everything changes for all the leaders but Biden. Amy will get her mojo and enter Blumberg. We will find out if more conservative America is ready for a gay president should he maintain a share of the lead, and if Warren will finish flaming out or get some wind at her back.
As always, South Carolina begins the end game. Only one year that failed to hold true and that was the year Robert Kennedy entered the race in time for Super Tuesday, which he swept. He was summarily assassinated so we don’t know what his eventual outcome might have been.
This year there is no sense in hyperventilating over Bernie until Super Tuesday. Until then, it’s anyone’s game who is still in it after SC.
1
Uh...there’s nothing on that list of St. Bernie’s “innovations,” that Obama didn’t support, and that wasn’t in Hillary Clinton’s platform.
Bernie is the only one addressing climate change with the boldest action proposed that we can muster. That is necessary for humanity to survive. Nothing else will matter if we do not solve this problem. Bernie gets it. Our other leaders are so in bed with the fossil fuel donor money that they would rather have the world blow up than give up those bribes. How does anyone with a brain support these insane greedy shortsighted politicians? We are running out of time and all they care about is money. It's beyond sickening. It's suicidal and homicidal at this point.
4
"Sanders has already won"?
Correction to what I just posted. At one point I meant "Biden", and should not have said "Sanders" Here's the corrected version. My apologies.------
Bernie Sanders has "already won". I don't think so. He did come in first in New Hampshire, with less than 26% of the vote.
It may surprise some that he only captured 40% of the New Hampshire pledged delegates. Sanders got nine, Buttigieg got nine, and Klobuchar got six.
Lest Sanders supporters, or those of Warren or Biden cry "foul" let's look at the rules of the Democratic party per pledged delegates. First, no one with less than 15% of the popular vote gets any delegates. That's the why of the zero delegates for Warren or Biden. Second, with any of those breaking the 15% threshold, the delegates are awarded proportionally, which resulted in the 9, 9, and 6 mentioned above.
It was similar in 2016. The press made a big thing of Hillary Clinton "winning" the primary in Missouri. If coming in first is "winning" she did that, but the vote there was so close that Clinton, who came in first, and Sanders who was second, each got the same number of pledged delegates.
1
I guess every party needs its divisive blowhard. At least he seems to want to help people who need it rather than those who need it least.
1
Best thing for Clinton to do right now is zip it.
1
When the Blue billionaires give up demonizing Sanders, they will coast to victory in the Red House, Red Senate and Congress. Then appoint more Supreme Court judges to balance out the White Supremacist Court we are stuck with.
1
Bernie can’t win, because they gonna steal the election from him agin.
@Brewster’s Millions
He barely won last night in his own backyard. No one is going to have to steal anything because most Democrats don't want Bernie just like they didn't in 2016.
This is so exciting.
AOC is going to be Bernie's Chief of Staff.
Ilhan Abdullahi Omar is going to be Secretary of State.
Rashida Harbi Tlaib is going to be Treasury Secretary.
Ayanna Soyini Pressley is going to be Attorney General.
Elizabeth Warren is going to be Secretary of Defense.
1
And trump has already won with event he thought of Bernie as the opposition. In that situation, trump will win in a landslide. Let's not be stupid.
1
Bernie's liberal non democratic socialist opponents are surging,
Bloomberg, Amy, Pete. One difficulty with democratic socialism is that there are no successful role models. Canada and Denmark are
liberal capitalistic countries and democratic. Cuba and North Korea
are socialist, but not democratic. Where are the democratic socialist republics which are actually democratic in fact?????
2
Some of us see Sanders as a man with fire and brimstone rhetoric that energizes and, yes, elevates but has no political path to victory. Sanders seems to believe that his moral call will recruit voters behind the socialist label in the face of the Trumpist twitter politics of denigration, disinformation and targeted manipulation. Sanders thinks he can fight Trump on a level playing field with $10 donations from the grassroots. This faith in moral purity and the common man would be touching if we did not face the sinister battle that Trump will wage to win or else face jail. At a time when we need the Democratic Party to be as one with all eyes trained on the evil in the White House, Sanders has introduced issues that - though correct and worthy - are distracting and divisive. The main goal of this election is one and one alone - to defeat a cabal of men who are destroying democracy, allowing the degradation and death of our planet, and putting us back on every progressive issue. I am for the person who has his eyes trained on exposing the evil that Trump is doing - NO distractions. In the face of this existential threat, Sanders needs to think about progressive issues in the context that we find ourselves in. Bring them up after the defeat of Trump, not in the midst of the most dangerous election in the country. Only ONE issue matters right now - the defeat of evil and untold power entwined as one in the person of Donald Trump.
2
Sanders is an entertainer, not a politician, economist or statesman. He is having a grand time living on the federal election subsidy and campaign contribution dole; flying around in private jets, eating at fine restaurants, writing his book and enjoying the media. This is his bucket list. There is no transformation.
4
The common argument about Bernie's ideas not really being "left" and comparing this country with Europe's left-leaning policies are missing context and facts.
Even if Bernie's ideas are more mainstream in other countries, the ideas about taxation to support such policies and the policies themselves couldn't be more different in this one. Most Americans think their taxes are too high as it is and the wealthy and corporations make Job 1 avoiding them. Here taxation is demonized, and so is the idea of getting "free stuff". Bernie's revolution may claim to serve the working class, but most of the working class in America likes Trump and his ways, voted for Trump, and buys into the idea of being better than all those lazy and bad people who want free stuff. They only want their highly paid outsourced jobs back and they will decide what to do with their money, thank you very much. So, despite all the policies to benefit them, they're not interested, and it's going to take a lot longer than four years to go from electing a malevolent dictator that most of the working class in America identifies with to changing their minds .
Thank you for that ray of hope. It is in very short supply. It is by engendering hope that we touch people, and by confirming their decency in the midst of chaos.
Suggesting that George McGovern, who flew something like 38 bombing missions over Germany and never opposed that war, had opposed nearly every armed intervention is just wrong. McGovern certainly opposed the imperial-American war in Vietnam which was in no sense defensive and began as US support for French colonialism. And he was right. We lost the war as well as about 60,000 Americans and killed about 3 million Vietnamese, most of whom were innocent civilians. Those who directed such a war deserved to be put on trial in The Hague. I would also add that any rational person would oppose continuing a US military budget that is larger that the combined military budgets of the next 7 highest military budgets in the world.
5
I had to go to the Emergency Room
as my doctor could not see me.
I sat in one of the four rooms, two of the others were empty,
and one had a patient who fell and they were determining if she broke her arm or not.
5 minutes of having blood pressure and pulse and temperature
taken by a nice nurse and asked what were my symptoms.
75 minutes waiting to see the doctor.
Spoke to him for five minutes.
No blood drawn, no major examination.
25 minutes waiting for prescription.
Bought the medicine and after I paid for it the assistant to the
pharmacist said I could get the generic version now for 85 % off.
Cost ?
$ 1,200 for Emergency Room
$ 150 for Medicine
And you wonder why I want Bernie to win.
13
@John Brown it happened to my daughter too. Acute abdominal pain
Middle of the night. She sat in the ER four hours. They finally put her in the exam room where she fell asleep woke up an hour later no doctor yet. Exhausted she left for home swallowed Tylenol and bore the pain.
She is waiting for the bill...even though she did not see a “doctor”.
2
When Medicare was introduced, I assume that there was a dispute that some people preferred private insurance. But Medicare did prevail and the Republicans aren't about to end it. Lowering the age for eligibility, as Sanders proposes, has an excellent existing example. People would be welcome to purchase additional insurance beyond what Medicare II would offer. Private insurers are good at finding ways to stay in business.
2
Bernie Sanders has "already won". I don't think so. He did come in first in New Hampshire, with less than 26% of the vote.
It may surprise some that he only captured 40% of the New Hampshire pledged delegates. Sanders got nine, Buttigieg got nine, and Klobuchar got six.
Lest Sanders supporters, or those of Warren or Biden cry "foul" let's look at the rules of the Democratic party per pledged delegates. First, no one with less than 15% of the popular vote gets any delegates. That's the why of the zero delegates for Warren or Sanders. Second, with any of those breaking the 15% threshold, the delegates are awarded proportionally, which resulted in the 9, 9, and 6 mentioned above.
It was similar in 2016. The press made a big thing of Hillary Clinton "winning" the primary in Missouri. If coming in first is "winning" she did that, but the vote there was so close that Clinton, who came in first, and Sanders who was second, each got the same number of pledged delegates.
2
He has neither transformed the Democratic Party or even the state of Vermont. He's definitely got the pundits transformed though.
4
Pie in the sky means Trump in the White House for another four years.
What will the Bernie Bros do when Sanders pulls a Mondale vs. Reagan?
Bernie can at least go out on the road and do impersonations of Larry David.
5
Kazin's historical analysis is very astute. And it is so fairminded that I can't decide whether he thinks Bernie Sanders could win the presidency or not. Clearly, Kazin thinks it would be a good thing for the country.
I do disagree with his final sentence (without making any judgment about which nominee could win):
"Mr. Sanders wants to be the next Franklin Roosevelt — but if he can’t, better to be the next William Jennings Bryan or Jesse Jackson than the next William Howard Taft."
Bryan's Republican opponent in 1896 was staid William McKinley; Jackson's opponent in 1988 would have been staid George H. W. Bush.
The Republican candidate in 2020 is Donald Trump. Donald Trump is willful. Donald Trump is in absolute control of his party. Donald Trump seeks revenge. Even discounting the hyperbolic language of every election year, this year the alternative to the Democratic nominee is a natural autocrat who is in the process of learning how to, and perfecting his means of, taking a sledgehammer to the Constitution and the system of checks and balances.
The stakes this time are higher. Much higher.
4
You write Williams Jennings Bryan’s impact on Democratic policies help elect Woodrow Wilson President. I have to disagree. Woodrow Wilson, about as close to a dictator and an overt racist as you can get, was elected because a Teddy Roosevelt’s Bull Moose Party split the otherwise Republican vote,
2
Yes Bernie has transformed the democrats into the party they have been trying to be for 40 years. He is a socialist and the democrat party should now change it name to the "socialist" party. I am very curious to see how he would fare under that brand name in America in 2020. You have to be an extremely tough person to be free and care for yourself. Most young people today struggle mentally just to get out of their folks basement and are pretty lazy too. You all would be much better off with new government parents to provide and coddle you. Sorry, but most aren't really up to the American experience. We went from "strong and silent" to "weak little weenies" very quickly.
2
How can you say that? Specially when the centrists have gained ground - 46pct Pete and Amy and the socialists, Bernie and Warren, failed to get 35pct. Bernie factually lost 80k of the 158k voters than he had in 2016, this time he had more money and more Bernie bro’s doing bidding bidding. Please don’t let math and facts discourage you from your fantasy.
1
No, Bernie has not won.
What his man, who refuses to become a Democrat, who calls himself a Socialist and who speaks of Revolution, has done is to create a cult of personality, like Stalin or Mao.
He has millions of followers who slavishly follow his every whim.
He also has antagonized most Americans.
He will guarantee four more years of Trump.
There couldn't be a more off putting candidate for the average American.
Thankfully, there is an antidote to this virus.
Mike Bloomberg.
Mike will get rid of Trump and take back the Congress.
He is the unSanders and the unTrump.
Mike will get it done.
5
@Simon Sez I agree with you completely about Sanders; the Bloomberg part, not so much. But I'll vote for either of them if they get the nomination.
1
This is not true, and it's sensationalized article headlines like this that put Trump in power in 2016.
2
So far I see nothing being transformed in the the Democratic party and I would not hold my breath for that.. but hope dies last.
Just want to point out that Amy is no environmentalist.
5
Lower middle class Ronald Wilson Reagan was the capitalist conservative evangelical Confederate rural right-wing white European American Judeo-Christian American majority partisan political epoch counter-revolution response to the dominant epoch united liberal secular urban ethnic sectarian color aka race national origin left-wing socialist coalition of the Democratic Party plutocrat oligarch Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
4
Quality comment.
I wish I could be more encouraged by Bernie's latest win, but I'm not. I see storm clouds on the horizon and they are not the ones we are talking about right now.
Bernie is an old, grumpy, social democrat who's been saying the same things for the past 40 years: He has not evolved a 21st century grasp of our rapidly changing society.
Most worrisome, as a rule, social democrats while extolling what appear to be very democratic ideals do not compromise their ideology easily. In 2020, Bernie will not extend a wide enough tent to capture marginal voters, because for him it's "the highway or my way". A large swath of voters---those that won't ever vote for Trump---will just stay home.
We are now in a critical societal loop where history may repeat itself with devastating consequences: I'm thinking Weimar Germany, 1933. I'm remembering that the only way the National Socialists (Nazis) were able capture control of the Reichstag was as a result of the ideological intransigence of the German Social Democrats; they were unable to build a coalition powerful enough to counter the Nazis because, as I read history, they insisted on ideological purity.
Now, as then, is not the time for ideological purity. We all know that the road to hell is always paved with the best of intentions.
5
Strange the author doesn’t mention the sharp right turn to the nationalist racist agenda of Trump, which obviously flavors the pull of the Democratic Party back to the moral and democratic roots of American ideology based on government subsidies for public works using taxpayer money.
1
It is a dangerous habit of nyt to continually assist with the weaponization of the “socialist” label when discussing Bernie. Please be more accurate with your labels. Does your paper refer to “democrats” when discussing politicians from North Korea ? (Home to the “Democratic Front for the Reunification of Korea“ )
While I appreciate your journalistic integrity in most cases, you are now (purposely? Or not?) aiding those who place democracy and the future freedom of the press at risk.
1
My take; Elizabeth Warren, not Bernie carries the legacy of reform: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2020/2/9/1917818/-The-Misguided-War-Against-Elizabeth-WarrenT
Because she supported the progressive policies she’s running on last election?
@Lilly No, because unlike Bernie she has a better chance of bridging progressives and moderates. Her task, however, is to explain how the center has moved further right over the last 50 years and how it must move back. This is something that a liberal who believes in New Deal capitalism than a democratic socialist. The mantle of FDR and Truman more accurately belongs to her, not Bernie.
Bernie has showed America that the leftist, Sarsourist, Tlaibist wing of the Dems is strong and rising!
Ahh, the American voter...
Well, I guess things are just not bad enough yet for enough of us, or maybe a majority are not sufficiently imaginative or informed or empathetic to understand how bad things really are, or how good they could be, but a lot of us have a nervous feeling and are asking ourselves, "Is it really possible that the GOP - and their useful idiot of a president -are doing a coup d'etat on us, right under our noses?"
Yes, it is.
But, we are a stupidly incredulous bunch, so we fall back on Democratic politics as usual, wondering if one of our candidates might somehow squeak by Trump and even snatch the Senate and give us 4 more years to figure out what to do next. Y'know, a little breathing room after these last 3 miserable years, though it seems like decades to me.
And yet Bernie has known and been fighting for the only way out of our uniquely American dilemma for many years and would surely die happy knowing that he had been the Goldwater of the left, the seed planted that grows into an enormous tree, but this time for the benefit of us all, not just the rich. Bernie has been to the mountaintop and seen the promised land. But will we ever get there without him? Is it too late?
No, we will probably miss this opportunity and fall back on the billionaire Bloomberg, and we might get our 4 more years to decide what we really want, though we already know what's really right, don't we?
Meanwhile the rich wink and get richer as winds blow and the seas rise.
8
@David in Le Marche
Great comment. The more I look back at my old country in exasperation at the people's abject acceptance of their own powerlessness, the more I conclude they have Donald Trump as their leader because they deserve Donald Trump.
2
@617to416
Thanks. The truth is I get a little emotional when I think of the shrinking - or already gone - glaciers in the Wind River Range of Wyoming, where I used to backpack in my youth. I'd love to go back there some day, but I'm afraid of what I'll find.
1
Ahh, the American voter...
Well, I guess things are just not bad enough yet for enough of us, or maybe a majority are not sufficiently imaginative or informed or empathetic to understand how bad things really are, or how good they could be, but a lot of us have a nervous feeling and are asking ourselves, "Is it really possible that the GOP - and their useful idiot of a president -are doing a coup d'etat on us, right under our noses?"
Yes, it is.
But, we are a stupidly incredulous bunch, so we fall back on Democratic politics as usual, wondering if one of our candidates might somehow squeak by Trump and even snatch the Senate and give us 4 more years to figure out what to do next. Y'know, a little breathing room after these last 3 miserable years, though it seems like decades to me.
And yet Bernie has known and been fighting for the only way out of our uniquely American dilemma for many years and would surely die happy knowing that he had been the Goldwater of the left, the seed planted that grows into an enormous tree, but this time for the benefit of us all, not just the rich. Bernie has been to the mountaintop and seen the promised land. But will we ever get there without him? Is it too late?
No, we will probably miss this opportunity and fall back on the billionaire Bloomberg, and we might get our 4 more years to decide what we really want, though we already know what's really right, don't we?
Meanwhile the rich wink and get richer as winds blow and the seas rise.
No. No. No.
1
I’d rather vote for a democratic socialist than the fascist incumbent . Maybe if a REAL Republican werej running? Nah.
...
2
Feel the Bern. Thanks Bernie.
4
Professor Klein appears to be damning Bernie Sanders' candidacy with loud praise: He'll be the next Jewish William Jennnings Bryan but not the next president after the worse one in memory. I think Bernie has a shot because, unlike Trump, he has a moral compass (which Trump conspiculously lacks) and advocates for humane policies that will greatly benefit most Americans, and not just the filthy rich. Go Bernie!
2
The comments poo-pooing Sanders as too extreme and his supporters as hell bent on ruining the country sound similar to the complaints leveled against Trump et al.
For those who exist in a comfortable bubble in the middle it’s important to realize the vast number of Americans barely scraping out a living. When you’re at rock bottom there isn’t much concern or care about maintaining a status quo that keeps you down.
Some of these people see Sanders as the fix, others see Trump. The one thing they have in common is the belief that this country in its current state isn’t working for them.
3
This article leaves out Eugene Debs, the widely popular five time candidate for president of the Socialist Party of America. The last platform he ran on was virtually co-opted by Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1932.
The difference is that FDR not only rounded off some of the rough edges of the Socialists' plan, but he presented it as part of the American tradition, not as a revolution or refutation of it. Most importantly, he offered it to the American people at the right time, when we were desperate for some relief.
Timing is everything. Bernie has done a lot of good by moving the conversation to the left, and by pointing out some of the glaring grotesqueries of our current form of capitalism.
But people don't want a revolution in 2020. They want reform and return to semblance of basic fairness, that's all. They don't want Debs, they want a bit of FDR. That's why Warren was getting so much traction, before she tried to out-Bernie Bernie.
2
Deval Patrick is a voice for community and decency. That's a needed antidote to Trump's violent and self centered agenda.
Is a Sanders and Patrick ticket possible? They both represent ideas our country really needs right now.
1
This whole Cacophony about "Left" is really so Nineteenth Century America.
What Sanders is advocating has been implemented in MOST Western Democracies for almost a century. There is Nothing "Left" in those policies. Everything about Sanders's Platform is RIGHT, like in Right vs Wrong.
Sanders will shock the Republican Party and Trump with his landslide win.
3
Somewhat off topic, but I thought Michael's name was familiar. He is the son of teacher, author and literary critic Alfred Kazin. As an undergrad in engineering school I took mandatory liberal arts courses and one of them had "A Walker in the City" as required reading. Fifty years later I can still remember what an engaging read it was. I look forward to Michael's history of the Democratic party.
It is always amazing to me that these types of generalizations are made about the party without even taking a glimpse at what we are fighting for in towns, counties and the states. Take a look, we Democrats are raising the minimum wage, taxing the rich and cutting taxes on the middle class and poor, expanding healthcare, protecting the rights of workers to organizing, reforming and funding education, etc. All without any help, or any support, from Bernie.
2
Interesting history. Think about this: I am the same progressive I was when I supported McGovern and Jesse Jackson and Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. But when Bernie became a candidate, he embodied what I wanted more fully than any had done before. Bernie's followers are often accused of being "cult like" but, at least for us older people, it's just that we have waited so long. I believe that it is finally our turn and it feels very much like when Obama won and we felt how long we had waited for the first black president. I am still waiting for the first woman president but we cannot vote for just any woman!
In the future please call him a Democratic Socialist not just any old socialist. I never like labels myself but the least you can do is get the label right.
8
Socialism, you say? The GOP kleptocracy has already come for the middle class (while enriching the already wealthy and large corporations), most recently in their tax cuts under Trump, which benefit the top-income group so disproportionately.
This is socialism too--it just has wealthy and powerful beneficiaries, D.J. Trump and family among them.
8
Whether he transforms the party or not remains to be seen. I’m certainly a moderate and would vote for Bernie vs Trump as would many that consider themselves Democrats.
Should he win, I would pressure my representatives and Senators to not acquiesce to Bernies more left-wing proposals, ie immediate Medicare for all. You notice I don’t refer to the vote grab of cancelling all college loans as I don’t consider that left wing, i consider it the buying of votes and resent the attempt (more later)
In the future , I would realistically assess the possibility of voting GOP. I doubt that I would as many things in their platform, ie anti-choice are not acceptable to me.
Back to cancelling college loans. What do I resent? Elizabeth Warren compared it to social security. The difference is that social security protected those who had no lifeline in their old age. Forgiving college debt outright pays off the loans of those that made a poor financial decision while fully realizing the consequences. Go to an expensive private university in Manhattan rather then a good state university school when my future income could in no way pay that debt? Sure, why not, we’ll deal with it in 4 years or 6 or 8.
Comparison is the thief of joy
The headline here utterly fails basic reality checks.
The most obvious proof that Sanders has not "transformed the Democratic Party" much yet, is that the establishment of that party is still clinging to same sorts of fear-based, tokenist, clichéd soundbites and failed identity politics which led to the disaster inflicted on America and world in 2016, and have been hardly addressed (let alone redressed) in the years since. That, indeed, is the main reason Sanders (whose views on most key issues were right on then, and remain right on now) is again leading among the swing voters whose choices will decide the presidential outcome this coming November.
4
Bernie has the best chance of the so-so lot of current candidates to win in November. He speaks the commoners language and is sincerely believable!
The DNC has got to get real and support Bernie this time around for the party’s sake, and the country!
2
Good op-ed. But if the craven Democratic Party nominates Bloomberg, it will be clear they have not been "transformed" enough. But Bernie is indeed something of a heroic figure who has accomplished much, both in 2016 and in this campaign.
7
The problem is that this election will be decided by those in the middle, not those on either extreme. Those in the middle are looking at a roaring economy brought to them by someone with issues, versus someone who's own statements indicate he will impose massive taxes to fund his programs. I am afraid that the middle of the country will vote their pocketbook and let the future take care of itself.
Unfortunately, the Democrats don't even seem to see this as a threat. If the Democrats nominate a far left progressive as their candidate, they will be empowering "The Man Who Would Be King."
3
You couldn’t be more wrong. This election, as with all others, will be decided by turnout.
Young people and diverse populations vote at much lower levels, yet when they do, Democrats win (hence the scourge of Republican voter suppression tactics aimed at those groups).
If those populations vote, Democrats will win this election. If they don’t, Democrats will lose. A “moderate” candidate offers so little hope of meaningful change that precisely the voters we need to win will instead sit this one out.
8
@Disappointed In the NYT
2016 Part Deux.
1
"Americans who are seriously disenchanted with an incumbent president or his party tend to be moved more by a serious candidate who offers a sharply different alternative, one based on a set of moral convictions, instead of merely a sense of who might be a more efficient administrator of the existing order."
At this point, three years into the Trump administration, that the above quote from the article is what American needs now should be obvious to anyone with a pulse.
The trouble is that what followed in this article, the talk of "fervent hopes" and "motivated followers" for a win a some future date is exactly what we don't have time for.
Now that our shameless Senate has handed Trump the keys to the DOJ, the question is no longer has Trump learned anything, but what will it take to open the eyes of the American right wing true believers.
Because if our conservative friends quake in fear at the term "democratic socialist", I have a couple of other system descriptors that should give them pause.
Ever hear of democratic fascism? How about a democratic totalitarian state? Democratic autocracy?
Well neither has anyone else.
You can remove the word democracy from those examples and know that under the next Trump administration that is where we will find ourselves, because you can count on the fingers of one hand, without using your thumb, the number of times Donald Trump has used the word in a sentence as president.
Well past the point of worry, we must now act.
Vote.
6
@Skeexix "Vote."
And find someone who is not registered to vote and help them register.
1
What really needs to happen is that, especially if Bernie is denied the nomination, a real Socialist party needs to be formed, independent of the Democrats. As much as Bernie is influencing the party, I can't see the Democratic Party shaking its fealty to Wall Street. If Bloomberg becomes the candidate, and unless he's truly a traitor to his class a la FDR, we'll have a choice between plutocrats. We deserve a real choice.
14
Bernie's young voters should learn a little about socialism. See how things are working in Venezuela. Ask Bernie what he thinks about Cuba and the former Soviet Union. I encourage Bernie voters to think about what socialism really means. Everyone gets everything for free until there is no one left to pay for it. Individual achievement is less important than group cohesiveness. Government knows best and will get you healthcare just like they provide at the VA and public hospitals. College will be free bit the degree worth nothing. We will ban all testing and measurement of achievement in school because some will be left behind (note what is going on in NYC). Best of luck young socialists!
5
@Bill, sorry, but your examples are bad.
Why not mention the other socialist states? Canada, Germany, Sweden, Denmark, France, and more. They are democratic and have a robust socialist safety net. They are also economically successful.
If you want to think socialism must mean communism, well, ok boomer.
4
Okay by you if we also notice the glorious achievements of capitalism, among which are massive wealth concentrated in the hands of a very few, a long series of wars that continue, starvations, a warming and polluted planet, and a clown like Donald Trump?
Every Democratic Party candidate today is running to the left of Obama - a transformative President in his own right who was crippled by those Republicans radically energized ever since Goldwater; and every candidate is far to the left of Trump. As your piece demonstrates, populist candidates, like William Jennings Bryan, have failed (repeatedly) because the vast political middle could not get on board. Sure, they helped change the longer-term political dialog, but they did go down in defeat. Today, like no time since at least Reconstruction, we cannot afford allow a far left candidate like Sanders deliver Trump a second term. Trump is licking his chops at the prospect of running agains Sanders. The day before New Hampshire, he was even campaigning for him! We need to select a center-left candidate who will not be constantly pilloried by Trump as being - horror of horrors- as Socialist!
1
The Democratic party sold its soul and lost its way. God Bless Bernie for leading it back home. What he has already done is remarkable. Not since Jesus Christ has a human being so consistently and steadfastly spoke truth to power and tried to relieve the pain and suffering of the many. It is hard to believe moderate "Dems" see this great man as a threat.
4
@Laura Philips The DNC is trying to sink him for the second time. That's why I have contributed to his campaign 5 times.
What about transforming the USA? I can't believe that the Democratic party is about to make the same mistake Labour did in the UK. Long-standing thorn in the side? Check. Views well to the left of centre? Check. Reputation for integrity but not cooperation? Check. Curmudgeonly manner? Check. Appeals to Radical (and newly growing) section of the party? double check. But what about the non-party voters? We did this in the UK, in December, and the result for Labour was SO bad you have to go back to the 1930's for a precedent. Elect this man and you hand Trump four more years. It's true, the left has become addicted to protest at the expense of power. Never complain about Trump again, you're handing him the keys to the White House.
7
Yes, he has changed the party, whether he wins the nomination or not. He has brought the party back to its origins. He's done this without racial dog whistles or gender superiority appeals.
Justice for all.
5
Well it's good to know that we'll have jam tomorrow, if not today. Of course, a Democratic party that could think and plan ahead would have been nice, but they're all too busy polishing their social justice badges to be a coherent organization.
Bernie is a madman, and one with built in term limits. He would be lucky to survive a full term even if elected. He should have been run out of the party long ago, but see my note above about thought and planning. Instead the usual summer soldiers of politics came out of their gopher holes and voted the crazy option.
Perhaps a future, better run party would restrict caucus and voting rights to party members who actually contribute over the long term. Of course these would be like the "super delegates" that the populists hate so much.
3
He has indeed transformed the Democratic Party. Into one that won’t win the Presidency for the next 12 years at least.
5
Not like the Dems were big winners before him, losing the Congress for 14 years, and losing the Presidency to worst possible candidates.
1
For me this is merely an indication of how powerful psychological narrative can be. When you appeal to people who think of themselves as good people, if you are ruthless enough you can trick them into thinking nibbling around the edges of a system where they are consciously made powerless and being told that is what they want, and to add insult to astonishing injury, being told that inclusiveness, which as a gay man, people are already thinking about, but then to redefine it as .not. excluding already all-powerful billionaires... Simply stunning. Immoral. Immoral in resulting in the continuation of the degree of unconscionable pain and unnecessary brutality for most Americans in all aspects of their lives. But stunning, you have to admit.
1
I look forward to reading your book. My basic thoughts on the history of the Democratic Party fall under three umbrellas of their evolution: 1. The keepers of the slave trade; 2. The shining beacon of hope for America and the rest of the world; 3. The party of the politically deaf.
2
In recent history, when the economy booms, a Republican won even if a Democrat presided over the growth (Gore, Clinton).
Conversely, in a recession, when there's broad demand for change, the centrist Democrat won: Bill Clinton ("it's the economy, stupid"), Obama ("yes, we can").
The economy is booming like never before. The center is not looking for change.
Democrats need to rely on their coastal bastions to hold and look for the votes in the heartland from the people who are not benefiting from this economy. Only Bernie can pull off a win in this economy, maybe.
There is also the issue that the centrists are low quality this year (definitely not young Obamas) and they all have issues with minorities. Bernie is the only inspiring candidate. Elections in the US, where turnout is really low, are won by bringing out the voters that normally stay home. Look where the enthusiasm is.
3
In my humble opinion the Democratic Party does not rise or set on Bernie Sanders victory yet. There are a world of issues which the DNC isn’t questioning because of Lyndon B. Johnson shell shock. Get over it hippie folk. This administration is bringing the world closer to world war three. It’s sticks and stones after Trump. What is Bernie’s understanding beyond Vermont?
George McGovern was not running against Donald Trump and the demographics of the time were extremely different than what they are now. So comparing the political environment and what we have now to 50 years ago is ridiculous.
1
I’m glad William Jennings Bryan is actually getting some credit for leading the progressive movement of the early 1900s. Its funny how a Republican President (Teddy) was the first to take up his fight in the White House.
No, Trump has transformed the Party. Yikes.
1
Here is the thing. Whether Trump is reelected or not, whether Trump tries to implement a dictatorial state or not, the Progressives are coming. We are in the midst of the monumental collapse of supply-side economics and company, the religious doctrine of the Dirty Party (that is the Republicans) and by in large the same policy followed by socially liberal centrist Democrats (i.e. Clinton, Pelosi, Schumer, and all those educated billionaires), while Progessives are the only ones with any idea of what to do about it. They could be right the could be wrong, and we won't find out until they are in charge, but they will be in charge. You can only sucker the people for so long. This will become disastrously clear to the Dirty Party over the next decade.
2
bernie lost.
he lost all credibility when he endorsed hillary.
need i say more?
Mr. Sanders transforms nothing. When Barack Obama said they’d win without the white working class the party was transformed...but not the base. Hence, the loss of I believe around 12,000 state and local political races during his administration and hence Trump. Running Bernie is the revenge of the Resistance...it’s like drinking poison and then hoping the other guy dies. RIP Democrat Party.
2
He’s won small primaries.
1
How has he changed the Dems? He is not a party member. And that is main reason the DNC can snub him. Unlike the GOP which jumps on a good deal when they see it, the Dem Party is actally politically more conservative than te Republicans.
The GOP has realized where the American mentality resides...celebrity...that's basis of its populism...they get a movie or Tv star . run him and win...all the time.
The Dems don't apprteciate that Bernie is a populist candidate for the youth. They prefer safe moderates . And to be honest, in a race against Trump, that may be a better bet...ie, Bloomberg....
Bernie's main attribute Vs. Tump is his percieved honesty and respectability, which is really about what this race should be.
1
Dr. Kazin, you are drinking your own cool aid and getting ahead of the news. New Hampshire is not the United States- I think a truer gauge of whether Bernie has changed the Democratic Party will come on Super Tuesday..
2
The Democratic Party is over. This is not good for America, we need to have two parties.
1
All Bernie does is create problems. That’s what he did in 2016 and we got Lovely Donnie. And, that’s what he is doing now. That’s all he does, besides talking that is. Nominate him as Democratic candidate and send gifts to Toddler Trump for winning second term and completely destroying everything America stands for.
3
This kills the Democrat Party’s inclusiveness. It will now be you’re either with us or against us, with a vary narrow radical view. Anyone who is employed, pays taxes, and does not receive welfare will vote against this. Bernies policy’s don't poll well with minorities. This is the worst possible outcome.
5
Yeah, but I'd prefer an actual win, myself.
Michael Kazin: Have you maxed out for Sanders yet? Anyone reading this who can afford to and supports Sanders: have you maxed out yet?
Now would be a good time. Call it "Sane and Relatively Unselfish Bougies for Sanders and Sanity." Not hashtaggable, but you get the drift.
2
Yes, Dr.
Bernie’s win is described here in traditional moderate post-election and inside politics form by the “Times”, despite the fact that “the ‘Times’ they are a changin”.
Secondly, the supposedly ‘radical’ Bernie Sanders made a more than ‘slight understatement’ in his victory speech by calling his victory the beginning of overcoming “President Trump, who is the most dangerous president in U.S. history”.
The double error was in calling Trump both “President Trump” and tagging him as only “the most dangerous president in U.S. history” accrues to the term ‘President’.
More radically, from an accurate and progressive media reporting standpoint, the “Times” and Bernie should have exposed this honest truth, which would be quite shocking but necessary to ‘we the American people’:
“Bernie Sanders won in New Hampshire and started the essential drive to re-establish a truly and necessary radical state of democracy which may well “overcome Emperor Trump as the figure head and merely visible ‘symptom’ of the most dangerous virtual Disguised Global Crony Capitalist Empire in America’s 21st century”.
FDR in speaking of the start of the Second World War of Empires described it as a “day of infamy” and continued to somewhat strangely say, “a state of war has existed between the United States and the Japanese Imperial Empire”.
What Bernie Sanders, is revolutionarily doing with this one small state victory may hopefully be starting to overcome Global Empire with global democracy.
1
Isn't it shocking that "unelactable" Bernie Sanders already won two primaries?
Of course it is!
Thats why the headlines keep focusing on Buttigieg second place and Clobuchars third rather than to acknowledge own bias and prejudice...
1
In July, the NYTimes printed haikus about every candidate. Many commenters added ones of there own. Here is mine:
Thank you Bernie S
Even if you do not win
You already won
Great Headline and accurate the old guys Clinton Kerry Biden are all gone since the squad appeared and Bernie shook up Clinton clear from now on its irrelevant what Dems think Bernie is way outside the norm.
Super commentary. Enlightened, fact driven, positive. Thanks.
1
NYTs you are not listening. Something is happening. Lack of job security, affordable healthcare, affordable higher Ed, environmental protections and the religious control of other people’s bodies is not the American dream. You all gnash your teeth over impeachment, contort yourselves into pretzels for centrism, but whose rallies do you breathlessly cover? How many columns have you run wagging a finger at the Dems versus 51 boneless Senators who prefer a bully monarch over the American Constitution? Just like 2016, your coverage of Bernie shows how out of touch you are with reality. And yes, I will vote for whoever the nominee is (as all board commenters must state, since the media fuels the idea that Democrats will stay home - ignoring the empirical evidence of the last two wave elections.)
1
The most important objective of Bernie Sanders shouldn’t be the White House but to regain the control of the word “socialism”.
There is nothing dirty, immoral or nasty about that idea.
The socialism is the earthly equivalent of true faith.
It puts the entire society at the pedestal in lieu of the nationalism, chauvinism, racism, capitalism, Nazism or Stalinism.
If you are looking for the best interpretation and implementation of the socialism, just focus on Sweden and Denmark.
That’s a good quality of life - hardworking and creative people, full of spirit and innovations.
Those countries haven’t waged a single war for many decades and centuries.
There is nothing free in the socialism because it teaches the individuals you personally have to create and earn what you need in your life and some extra to support those disabled and sick.
What’s wrong with it?
The national debt per capita in Sweden and Denmark is dramatically lower (about three times) than here in the US.
The socialists cannot burden their children with own spending!
By the way, socialism doesn’t mean the planned economy either.
Socialism means “society first”.
Every human being is a part of society meaning the individuals come first too.
It is impossible to separate the individual interests from the social ones and otherwise.
The society is comprised of the individuals, isn’t it?
Sure, feel the BURN, when Trump “ wins “, again.
Seriously.
It is funny to see the same NY times writers saying over and over that Bernie cannot win. these are the same who said Trump could never win.
If transforming the Democratic Party was Bernie Sanders goal, then, yes, he has already won. If, on the other hand, winning the Democratic nomination was his goal, he has already lost. On his home ground, he barely won the primary by a point and a half. That is nearly 35 points behind his win in NH in 2016. Buttigieg and Klobuchar garnered nearly twice Sanders vote total. It now just remains to be seen which moderate Democrat will bring home the nomination.
William Jennings Bryan denounced "the money power” and defended the labor rights. McGovern spoke to the need for America to end the war of his time. Jackson denounced economic violence by large corporations. Yet here we are in 2020, having had several Democrats assume the office of the presidency, and these issues are still relevant today.
The discourse is guided by those daring enough to walk away from the status quo but never carried out by those who toe the line. I appreciate Dr. Kazin's very sober view of our past and how it relates to the current climate, but I wholeheartedly disagree with the notion that Sanders has already won. He needs to win the race at large because it is the only hope any of us have that any of his policies will see the light of day.
Sanders is not going to run again in four years, and there's no telling whether or not another progressive will throw in their hat after seeing the way that he has been treated by the establishment and mainstream media outlets. And if young people don't have somebody out there speaking to their needs, they won't vote and we'll continue down our current path long after Trump leaves the White House.
2
Bernie didn't leave the Democratic Party.
The DNC left the principles behind that for several decades used to be the very essence of the governing creed "of the people, for the people and by the people".
There are the people in the Constitution but no global corporations, the GOP, the DNC, the lobiste and campaign donations.
What kind of the Supreme Court would think that the people lack the money to pay their taxes but have more than enough to bribe the elected officials?!
2
Poor rich Bernie got 60 percent of the Democratic voters 4 years ago and now less than 30 percent today. A 100 percent loss is hardly a reason to celebrate!
4
So Medicare for All (or almost), a $ 20 minimum wage, soaking the rich and the Green New Deal will be the Dem's platform against Trump? Eeek, another resounding loss. And I'm a dyed-in-the-wool Progressive!
Either the party moves to the Center or they perish electorally. A Bloomberg-Klobuchar ticket is what's needed. Desperately.
2
When the Party was at the center, it lost the Presidency and the Congress. Moving left allowed the Party to win the House, moving back to the Center will make it in constant opposition with no hope for power.
@yulia
Barack Obama was as successful as he could have been, and operated from the Center. Personally I saw him as an Eisenhower-style moderate. He certainly didn't govern as a liberal.
Can American show what metric they rank first in the world at besides military spending?
2
Jeremy Corbyn transformed the UK Labour party in many of the same ways -- but ended up consigning it to irrelevance. Boris Johnson has a substantial majority and Labour's next batch of leadership candidates are unelectable. We need a moderate Democrat, not a radical extremist. The alternative of Trump for another four years is too awful to countenance. Hopefully people will realize this before it's too late.
1
Politics has swung so far to the right that the only way to get back to the center is to swing far to the left.
A president isn't a king, and Bernie won't have the power to just wave his hand and make all of his objectives magically happen.
But what he can do, as he already has done, is to push hard against the current on behalf of the working and middle classes to achieve a better quality of life for all.
3
Yes, he has moved the party to the left. But he and the party have "won" only if they take this new political stance and win the presidency and the Senate with it. It is not clear that they will. Even the House was captured only by the election of moderate centrists. Those candidates backed by the AOC crowd failed to win. If Democrats lose the Presidency, the Senate, and possibly even the House in 2020, what exactly has Bernie won, other than personal gratification. We only win if we win.
1
I am not voting for Bernie. Not ever.Under any circumstances.
4
@P then you are functionally voting for the president*. Not participating in democracy is a choice this country can no longer afford.
Yes, Senator Sanders has moved the needle to the left in the Democratic Party. Maybe it is more accurate to say that he has moved the needle to the left in the entire electorate, and the Democratic Party has followed the trend. This said, his victory in New Hampshire yesterday was less than impressive. He barely defeated Butigieg. And more votes were cast than in the 2016 New Hampshire primary, but he received less than half the votes this time compared to back then. Even if you add in Senator Warren's count, the total "Medicare-for-all" vote was only two-thirds of his vote in 2016, 35% of the total. On the other hand, the bulk of the progressive vote — Butigieg, Klobuchar, Biden together — was over 50%. From this point of view, the progressives won handily.
2
Bernie Sanders embraces the name, "Democrat Socialist"; calls for a national revolution and makes proposals that sound a lot like "open borders", "free stuff" and rigid far-left ortrhodoxy attracts only a minority of Democrats.
The claim that Europeans find such stands mainstream is irrelevant.
His ongoing refusals [see: NYT interview last month] to explain the costs of his plans or how he'd pay for them and his calls for massive demonstrations outside the Senate to force compliance with his proposals - a poor substitute for broad electoral coattails - further call his ability to beat Trump into question.
2
Sanders may be old but his appeal is young. He has inspired and fundamentally shaped the politics of a huge swath of those under 40. The party has changed because of those newcomers, not because the D establishment has been swayed, although the establishment is now certainly listening.
2
Sanders is running amidst a herd of milquetoast moderates and flimflammers copying his rhetoric with half-hearted enthusiasm, it's not a surprise he's standing out. But that's only because hardly anybody is voting compared to 4 years ago. Voter turnout is down in both Iowa and New Hampshire from 2016. Less people actually voted for Sanders in this primary than the last one.
Bernie took 21 delegates in Iowa in 2016's democratic primary. This year he only took 12. In 2016 Bernie swept New Hampshire with 15 delegates to Hillary's 9, this year he tied 9 to 9 with Mayor Buttigieg. He won 60% of the popular vote in NH in 2016 but this year he barely scraped over 25% and narrowly claimed victory by less than 2% margin over his chief rival.
Sorry but this is not a strong showing for Sanders. If anything this is a sign of total apathy from the Democrats. Bernie's base is out and voting but they're just about the only ones who are.
3
It is definitely strong - in 2016 he bear only Hillary, this year he beat four candidates.
1
@yulia
He won fewer delegates, less people chose. to support him now than when he ran against Hillary. The only reason he came out on top in NH (barely) is because there was no strong front runner to unify the rest of the party. The numbers show that Bernie has actually lost support.
The problem with anecdotal historical narratives is that you can always choose those aspects that fit the story that you want to tell. And then, there is the question of whether "great men" are the ones moving history forward, or whether they merely reflect structural changes in society that would have occurred regardless of their agency. Not a convincing article to me.
3
...he’s a caricature of a politician- jobless and on welfare until he was 53 yrs old - has never passed or sponsored any meaningful legislation.
He’s promising the world to get votes - he’s was totally embarrassed and at a loss for words on Face the Nation - he says the same things over and over and over again.
He’s not even close to being electable. I would vote for Biden, I would vote for Bloomberg, but never ever would I vote for Sanders. If he’s the nominee, I’m voting for Trump.
5
You may vote for Trump of Sanders will be not the nominee it will make no difference.
Good article. Dare I say it, but Bernie may already be more consequential in the broad sweep of history than Obama. I like Barack and he his highly honorable, but he was in the White House for eight years and proved to be basically a good, middle-of-the-road caretaker. There was no transformative change as we were promised, with the possible exception of Obamacare. Bernie has already done more to change the narrative on what is possible and what is just.
13
Obama took us out of the worst recession in recent memory and put in place the polices that ushered the biggest economic recovery in recent times. Millions have been benefited in meaningful ways by his actions. Sanders hasn't pass a single meaningful policy, his colleagues in the Senate cannot stand the guy, and he has contributed to the factionalism of a party that he has always refused to join. History will not look kindly on this divisive ineffectual angry socialist.
1
But the recovery didn't benefit many people that's why Dems lost the Congress in 2012, and lost everything in 2016. If Obama's economy was so beneficial, why so many voted for Trump?
2
I am waiting for a journalist to ask Sanders what he likes about capitalism. He has claimed, despite his history of honeymooning in Moscow and support of Cuba, that he doesn't mean collectivism when he says Socialism.
So, he should have some very kind words about capitalism, the same as the leaders of the Nordic Countries.
We need to understand if he is a Capitalist with a vision of a high tax/high social safety net or a Collectivist opposed to individual decision making.
1
Bernie Sanders hasn't transformed the Democratic Party, he has temporarily damaged it. The party will recover and continue on after he is gone.
8
He is definitely transforming it. Take a healthcare. Before him M4A was the anathema, now the candidates argue not about how bad or good it is, but how to achieve it. Only Biden didn't do that and where he is now?
3
@yulia M4A is DOA in Sanders' plan for it. We must modify the program and gradually bring people into it.
Start at birth, then lower the age to 60, then 55, then 50 and eventually we'll meet in the middle. To do a sweeping change is too destructive to the economy and will never pass.
3
Again, that is argument about how achieve the M4A, not about the value of M4A. And that is Bernie's achievement. Personally, I don't believe in gradual approach. It is complicated to implement, it brings benefits only to the few, eroding the support for the program making it difficult to sustain the funding. It is also decreases the negotiation power of the Government for lower prices. Obamacare is supposed to be gradual approach, as result the society got little benefits from it: healthcare cost are growing much more rapidly than inflation and people are not secure about their healthcare expenses even with insurance .
One of the most significant things about Sanders is that his campaign is funded almost entirely by small donors.
If you're in an affluent bubble, you may not realize the significance of this.
We in the real world have multiple demands on our resources and rarely enough money to cover them all. We have to decide whether we want to meet this need or that need, because our monthly incomes will not stretch to allow both. In the real world, we ask ourselves, "Can I do without this just a little bit longer? Can I afford this feel-good purchase, or would it be a foolish waste?"
As such, we who live outside the affluent bubble do not contribute to political candidates unless we really like them. Unlike billionaires and industry PACs, we don't donate to both parties or multiple candidates in the hope of calling in favors later.
A $100,000 contribution from a PAC guarantees no votes, but $100,000 raised from 4,000 ordinary people contributing $25 each nearly guarantees 4,000 votes.
12
@Pdxtran Generally, my affluent friends support Sanders more than others. Maybe that is the problem with inherited wealth, deep down you don't feel like you deserve it.
All I ask is the same system that allowed my friends parents and grandparents to accrue wealth be available to me and my family. Sanders and Warren are millionaires from the prosperity boom that started in the 1980's. They shouldn't take the ladder away once they reach the top.
2
So why your family didn't prosper in 80s? How many people could prosper if the salary are stagnated even in the good economy? Sanders and Warren want all people to prosper not only you and your family.
5
@yulia My family did prosper in the 1980's, 1990's and through this day. My mother raised 5 children who all attended college, and 3 of whom have advanced degrees.
Generationaly, our family moved from lower-middle class to upper middle class. But what is our reward for working so hard, only to have investments taxed as income? Will the government refund me if the investments lose money or fail to keep up with inflation.
My great grandparents immigrated in the 1920's from Poland and didn't finish middle school; now there are petroleum engineers and business professionals in the family. That is the promise of America.
1
Sanders is a good person but a narrow minded one who seeks to win one election and force all those unenlightened souls who fail to agree with him to learn from him how to live correctly, and it will not happen. Like it not people have good reasons for living as they do, due to differing priorities, and there are no simple ways to change people’s priorities. To have a workable democratic system there must be compromises.
4
Hoorah for Bernie. He is exactly who we need at this time in history.
10
Bernie, if you win the Democratic nomination but refuse to join the party and/or explain how you’ll pay for free everything, I’m writing in Amy.
2
He already explained - through taxes on wealthy, Amy is yet to. explain how she will pay for her program. Who will pay for ever-growing healthcare cost? We through higher premiums, higher deductibles and higher taxes to pay for expansion Medicare without controlling the prices?
6
@yulia
Unlike BS, Amy has detailed how she would pay for every one of her proposals with actual, believable numbers.
She even promises to remove my [middle-class income] income tax increase as part of the plan.
Right on point...Bernie will join the long list of idealistic losers like Bryant, Debs, McCarthy ..,and Trumpism will continue to degrade our Democracy....in fact Trump’s sociopathic quest for power will be lamented in history as more transformative than Sanders socialistic dream for a just and fair society. It will not be Sander’s unrealistic idealism that will eventually change our society; it will be the depths of destruction wrought by Trump’s trampling on Democracy that will cause Americans to change direction, not Bernie’s campaign. Unfortunately, it may be too late to reverse some of Trump’s Reign of Error primarily climate change denialism.
Bernie’s biggest flaw is not the policies he advocates for, but his inability to compromise and moderate to achieve a needed victory.
3
If the moderates are so great in compromising, how come they lost the WH and the Senate? How come that all their compromising skill didn't work when Obama was in the office? How come that they barely could move their agenda even when they had the WH and the Congress? Seems to me either value of compromise is greatly exaggerated or the ability of the moderates to compromise
3
@yulia
I don’t mean compromising with the Party of Trump..I mean moderating positions so he doesn’t turn off voters who see Bernie as unrealistically idealistic and who vote for Trump as the devil they know or don’t vote at all.
Absolutely. I won’t vote for him. But I am glad he is there as an influence.
2
The author all but admits that Sanders would lose to Trump in the general election. The result for the Democratic party for this loss will be the rejection of Sanders-like policies and move to the center to gain rational thinking voters next time. This might be summed up when NY Times called one of his supporters, AOC, and I quote a "superstar" last week. May I ask exactly what bills she or Sanders have proposed and won in Congress that mean anything at all? I thought so.
3
Great article, I would have hoped that Warren took that mantle and ran with it.
Unfortunately the more liberal block is more receptive to outrage and a promise to fight than to technocratic discussions of how to make this country more like a social democracy.
Sander remains the Original torch bearer of this movement with a lot of loyalty, yet it is doubtful that he can develop the policy to turn his vision into reality.
There is a reality of economic violence in the US with limited social mobility, limited access to a good education and good healthcare that is appalling. Sanders, Warren and in a sense Trump are denouncing that. In the case of Trump it is not genuine but got him some support in the rust belt.
1
No, Bernie hasn't won yet.
He hasn't won until the federal government and the Democratic Party are no longer bowing and scraping to monied interests. He hasn't won until a billionaire can no longer openly buy his way onto the debate stage. He hasn't won until racism is no longer tolerated at all levels of our criminal "justice" system. He hasn't won until medical bankruptcy goes the way of the rotary phone. He hasn't won until workers can form unions and bargain collectively again without fear of being fired for it. He hasn't won until real action is being taken on a large scale to combat climate change. He hasn't won until having a baby isn't an unmitigated financial disaster for any woman who attempts it.
I get the impression political pundits think that those goals are just a pose to get people to vote and support him and get him into the Oval Office. All available evidence is that he stands for exactly what he says he stands for, and doesn't believe he's won until he's transformed the nation, not just transformed the rhetoric of some campaigns.
7
What I find frightening is, like Trump's voters, Bernie's supporters are cultish. I'm afraid they will only support Bernie and will stay home or place a protest vote guaranteeing 4 more years of Trump.
3
And how many moderates say the same thing about Sanders? It goes both ways.
5
If you pay attention to who Bernie's supporters actually are you might not be frightened. The whole Bernie Bros thing has been disproved, they are a very small portion of Bernie's supporters. Most of us are working people and most of us are female. Bernie also has the highest level of support among Hispanic voters. Workers know that Bernie is for us and we are the majority of his supporters. Don't be frightened.
7
Transforming the Party while losing the White House is a fool's bargain. I admire Bernie but Elizabeth Warren has the same general agenda and more detailed plans than anyone else. And she hasn't had a heart attack. Still, I'll be for whoever the Democratic nominee is. Bloomberg and Klobuchar? Fine. We can get back to transforming the Party later.
5
Go Bernie, not the candidate of fancy vacations, extravagant meals and $50 haircuts but still about excellence in education, fairness, honesty, environmental stewardship, hard work that the elites should prioritize and say to always have valued above all else.
11
Republicans: You have the right to remain silent. Anything that you legislate, can and will be used against you in the future.
Imagine, in the future, a Democratic President such as Bernie Sanders, declares a national emergency related to people dying excessively because of the inability to pay for health insurance and cannot be seen by a doctor or pay for hospital care. He could declare a national emergency and rule that everyone from conception to grave is now covered under Medicare.
4
I’m with you all the way, but I believe Republicans are betting that with gerrymandering and algorithms America will never have a president like Sanders. “Heads I win, tails you lose “.
I'm all for a variety of voices in the Party, but the way in which the far left has elevated him to a position where he is could give Trump another four years is dangerous. It doesn't matter if progressives want Sanders' policies to be national policy, most of this country is still moderate. Combining "we will take away your employer coverage" with a dearth of messaging on jobs is going to be a death sentence to the Dems and the country as a whole if Trump gets four more years.
7
Not so fast! Never underestimate the ability of the corporate Democrats to cut their voters off at the knees. Sure, they’ll adopt Sanders talking points, but the policies will end up as unpopular corporatism like Obamacare.
Mayor Pete is this years empty corporate suit. He will wrap up a vague promise of “change” in a gay marriage candidacy - you’re not homophobic, are you. His “change” will be more complicated corporate mandates to purchase their goods and services. The public, left and right, will be turned off, and Republicans will surge back on that failure.
Progressives best hopes are at the state level in states that are progressive. To achieve that, they are going to need their federal taxes back. Progressives, if they fail at getting Bernie elected should concentrate on moving power (and $$$) out of Washington to transform life in their communities.
7
thank you Professor Luke-Warm.
Not quite yet, certainly not the party hierarchy. Hasn't made a dent in Krugman, Edsall, Friedman...
It's in the hands of voters now.
3
Bernie is nearly 80 years old and has a history of cardiovascular problems. If he wins the nomination, let's hope he lives to be sworn in so that the line of succession is clear.
3
Maybe Bernie has done well lately, but as Tom Friedman pointed out this morning, Bernie has the right causes, but the wrong answers. Nope, not a Bernie fan.
6
The so-called moderates could better be called the do-nothings. Or the sit-on-the-sidelines party. We're far better off taking a stand for our beliefs, all the things that made our country great. That's why I'm voting for Bernie.
10
It seems to me this essay paid to short-shrift to the presidency of Ronald Reagan, who is either a great hero or a great villain in the eye of the beholder. But he was the supposed author of both the "Trickle Down Theory" and the infamous "welfare queen," and the GOP has taken its bearing from him and moved steadily to the right. He ended Fairness Doctrine of the FCC -- Congress voted it back and Reagan vetoed it, so we got hate radio and Fox News. Now Rush Limbaugh has a Medal of Freedom and a man who would be king in the White House. The media -- the supposed left-wing monolith -- has already begun the campaign to save us all from creeping socialism (which started with public education, I guess) and protect the status quo.
7
It seems to me this essay paid to short-shrift to the presidency of Ronald Reagan, who is either a great hero or a great villain in the eye of the beholder. But he was the supposed author of both the "Trickle Down Theory" and the infamous "welfare queen," and the GOP has taken its bearing from him and moved steadily to the right. He ended Fairness Doctrine of the FCC -- Congress voted it back and Reagan vetoed it, so we got hate radio and Fox News. Now Rush Limbaugh has a Medal of Freedom and a man who would be king in the White House. The media -- the supposed left-wing monolith -- has already begun the campaign to save us all from creeping socialism (which started with public education, I guess) and protect the status quo.
1
Sanders is not a winning candidate for the Presidency. His age, his archaic regional dialect, and his obsessive hatred of wealth limit his appeal to most Americans.
The path to the democratic socialism defined in the Preamble to our Constitution does not begin with soaking the rich, but with tax reform to distribute created wealth optimally between labor and investment. Optimal distribution balances the creation of capital, which is unspent income, with consumer spending, which is income spent on social wants and needs. Imbalances between investment and spending lead to a boom-and-bust economy, sustained social negligence, and enduring poverty.
Social democracies like Denmark and Singapore provide a pattern for balanced tax reform.
The path to avoiding entanglement in foreign conflicts begins with a foreign policy of abstaining from interference in foreign civil and regional conflicts, and restricting foreign aid to infrastructure improvement rather than arms and financial assistance.
China's Belt and Road Initiative is a pattern for constructive foreign aid without entanglement in conflicts or endorsements of foreign political factions. Roads, bridges, and harbors are enduring benefits for the people. Arms and financial aid support destructive and divisive politics.
3
The problem I see with Sanders is that he calls himself a Socialist, not a Social Democrat, like some who want to sugar coat him do. Although some of his proposals make sense. that was also the case with other Socialists that he admires, like Castro and Chávez. And that is the problem, the fact that real Sociailist, like Sanders present himself, once in power have no respect for the
person, for the human being, his Human and Civil Rights.
2
Bernie Sanders won – if you discount the cumulative votes for Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobachar and VP Joe Biden. They represent the preferences of a range of moderate voters who seek a path to adequate healthcare, reasonably priced higher education, immigration reform and immediate response to climate change.
Senator Sanders has not introduced these concepts to an uncaring Democratic Party. Moderate candidates aim to make these goals a reality without subjecting the country to four more years of turmoil, this from the radical left. We’ve had enough from the radical right.
Any Democrat will face an uphill battle in the toxic Trump’s Legislative Branch unless the heirs to Goldwater, Gingrich et al calm down.
4
The progressive wing of the Democratic party (Sanders and Warren) continues to take an almost 2:1 thrashing in the early caucus/primary. Democrats don't want a Socialist President. America doesn't want a Socialist President. Dreams of Che died for me after age 15 when I first started paying taxes. Bernie supporters need to grow-up.
2
Bernie Sanders is a "real Democrat" espousing mainstream views. The deviation from Democratic norms was instituted by "Republican lite" Bill Clinton and the DLC when they sought the big money and abandoned the working class. Most people aren't in the middle; they're one paycheck away from homelessness. Only a corporate owned media that disparages Sanders at every turn as "unelectable" perpetuates the fraud of people not wanting to improve their lives through government interaction.
13
@Jack
May 2019: "Almost 40% of American adults wouldn't be able to cover a $400 emergency with cash, savings or a credit-card charge that they could quickly pay off, a Federal Reserve survey finds."
The city Democrats, representing the majority of commenters here, need to really let that one sink in.
The votes of these people, most of whom turned to iconoclasm/Trump, can be recaptured by Bernie Sanders, provided the coastal bastions hold and support the strategy.
That's the only path to victory.
The suburban vote, where folks are enjoying the job opportunities, raises and 401Ks going through the roof, is a dead end.
2
Fantastic! So, if Bernie has already won, he can now step aside and back a candidate with actionable and realistic plans to implement good ideas, and someone who can beat Trump.
6
Outside of Sanders and Warren, there is little policy difference between the Democrats and Republicans. Basically, the only differences separating the other candidates from Republicans are social values: gays, abortion, guns and perhaps immigration. And even on those issues some "Dems" peel off into Republican land. And I'm talking pre-Trump Republicans.
Meanwhile, issues that Sanders and Warren support poll higher than the Republican alternative: not cutting SS or Medicare, increasing taxes on the wealthy, providing universal healthcare, universal background checks, not growing military spending, minimum wage increases, campaign finance reform, promoting renewable energy, paid maternity and sick leave, free state college education (somewhat mixed).
8
Your statement is wrong
Many moderate Dems support some of the items you list in the 2nd paragraph.
Bernie Sanders, who had done more to elect Trump than any other individual, including Trump, could do so again in the next election.
10
@Ran I think you got them facts wrong. Ultimately Hillary’s campaign failed to show up in WI MI PA as were needed. The on the ground campaign workers pleaded for Hillary presence but she was too busy raising big bucks from celebrities. In the end it was arrogance and complacency on the part of Hillary’s campaign in these states, they just could not excite enough voters.
Thank God for Bernie.
In my lifetime there has been very little actual difference between the Democratic and Republican candidates for President. Every election was a choice between Conservatives or Republican Lite candidates.
HRC, Obama, Bill Clinton, Gore, they were all basically Republicans. Republicans with correct social views.
The times and CNN will do their best to pump up Bloomberg but people don't want another Republican.
14
This is not just another presidential election where a rogue is opposed by someone more moderate. The US is at a historical point in its history where a fatal and enduring fall into fascism awaits it. trump, the tv huckster interested only in image, with no concern for country, with no knowledge of US history nor the boundaries of his office, will surely, irresponsibly, drive the nation and its people to an unprecedented disaster.
Why did this catastrophe befall us? Clinton-Obama led the way, submerging the needs of the vast majority to an ever-growing disparity between rich and poor, forcing the poor unknowingly into the arms of a tyrant.
Should another Democrat-middle of the roader prevail in the next election, it will only set the stage for a recurrence of what we now experience.
And there is a way to assure the proper future for the majority of Americans and for American democracy. We should support and prepare to vote for a man who promises the proper benefits to all Americans and has fought for them all his years in office.
That man is Bernie Sanders.
19
@JFP -- The danger of a fatal fall into fascism extends beyond just Trump. The "moderates" have many of the same policies favoring the same interests in wars and wealth. They are just more polite about it.
7
One caucus and one primary do not sew up a nomination. While I much prefer Sen. Warren, I will enthusiastically support Sanders should he be the nominee of the party to which he does not belong. He has moved the Democrats closer to the party's New Deal roots, and not a moment too soon. The radical GOP will cry, "Socialism!" Yet 40 years of trickle-down has left the US in a sorry state. A second term for the Baby King will put an end to the social safety net, clean air and water, and the rule of law as we know it. Climate change is past the tipping point. The fate of the nation and planet may well be decided in November.
3
The Democratic Party has been fighting for universal healthcare since Truman...along with minimum wage, etc. Giving Bernie credit for what has been basic issues is insulting.
2
@L Rodriguez -- 72 years since Dewey was not elected is a very long time to "fight for" something and yet not get there. Somehow, their hearts were not in it.
3
This is an excellent historical analysis, yet distressing for most Democrats in that it foretells a likely defeat if Sanders is the nominee. Perhaps even more upsetting for liberals is the possible division of Democrats into two permanent camps: one Socialist and one Center-left liberal, neither one with enough strength to win back power. That scenario would cement in a authoritarian Trumpist far right into full control, unified by driving all independent and principled people out of government. Yikes!
3
@Blue Dot
....unless the Centrist Democrats can find enough common ground with Centrist Republicans (Never Trumpers) to form a much larger party to defeat the radical left and the radical right.
That party might not last for too many years, but if it serves the purpose of defeating Trump, then it would be well worth the effort.
The danger of Sen. Sanders "revolution" lies in its rapid transformation of a society unready for, and in some measure undesirable of, being reshaped.
Though I may agree with the Senator's call for a more egalitarian society, his prescription rents the present system unnecessarily, and his aims can be largly achieved by a less provocative program.
The "revolution" Trump brought is unpalatable and proving to be difficult to control. Bernie's revolution is fraught with the same possibilities.
4
Au contraire. There is a Huge backlash against Bernie within the Democratic Party and within the great majority who could never for Bernie. He did much better in NH in 2016 than in 2020. That is why Amy surged
and Pete is doing well, and Bloomberg is surging in 2020
3
This article reminds me so much of the kind of Corbyn worship that handed the UK to the most destructively reactionary Governent in recent hstory. As though what atters is not winning power, but establishing a personality cult within the party, or enabling one faction to control the party. No, no, no. What matters is beating Trump, and that MUST involve a broad coalition of different elements of left and centrist thinking.
The US will never elect a man who declares himself a socialist. Never mind that he's far too old to enter the highest office and has serious heart problems
Self indulgence that is unpardonable, given what another Trump terms means
3
"Bloomberg's Billions". "Bloomberg's Billions". For those us even moderately financially secure, money is simply a number on an account and if big enough, does indeed translate into political power for those who desire it. That power is quintessentially undemocratic and it is an albatross around Bloomberg's neck that cannot and will not be ignored. The spectre of him buying off the DNC for a podium bespeaks corruption and indifference and that it precisely why Sanders with his millions of contributors versus Bloomberg and his billion of dollars will prevail in any election that is even remotely democratic. And that is the key question facing Americans in November: will we have an election that is even remotely democratic?
7
Sanders does not necessarily represent a growing trend in the Democratic party. Mr. Kazin uses examples from history to show a supposed pattern. But we are removed from that history. Today many republicans register as Democrats so they can vote in the primaries for the candidate they agree will be the weakest , most likely to be defeated by their republican candidate. You cannot underestimate that. Secondly, this is the age of advertising mentality: the same tactics used to sell 'stuff' is used to manipulate and overwhelm, and now flat out lie to, a passive audience. This cannot be underestimated either: it has been developed into a very sophisticated and effective tool. Sanders does not represent the majority of Democrats; for all his angry pronouncements in the name of equality, he is being Co-opted as a tool of right wing for the very opposite results.
2
Bernie + obstructionist Republicans = the cost of health care goes down a little, and minimum wage goes up by a nickel (in 2050.) Life gets marginally better for the less wealthy. All this panic over socialism is insane. Let's add healthcare to the list of 70 or so other services already socialized in this country - in the past, even Republicans have proposed socialized medicine. If Bernie's ideas were going to destroy American Democracy, Russia would be supporting him, not Trump.
14
I am a liberal Democrat. If Bernie wins as the Democratic candidate I will vote for him; but, we will lose the Presidential election. If he cares about our country, and not just his own ambition, he will turn his money and his ambition over to a candidate who can win and who will be a better president. Though the Bernie Bros have swallowed the cool aid, they'll take us all down with them. Unfortunately, the majority of this working class country is voting for Trump.
5
Bernie’s “win” in New Hampshire was marginal and incremental. His “wins” will be few and far between from here on out, and he will soon be sent to the back of the pack when the primaries turn South.
Bernie is destined to remain a loud and angry backbencher the rest of his political career.
6
I just want to Trump to be voted out of White House in November.
If nominated, Sanders will lose to Trump, so will dems down the ballots. It's not rocket science.
7
Is this the demise of the Democratic Party? It certainly appears to be that way. The majority of Americans are not as progressive as Bernie Sanders and do not agree with his liberal policies. He will not win the presidency. President Trump is assured four more years in the White House. That is a given.
5
@KMW Sanders is not progressive. He is a radical left socialist. Call a spade a spade.
You're right, Bernie is a hero. And a person of integrity and principles who has walked his talk throughout his life.
If he wins, his goals will not be easy to achieve. He knows that. We all know that. But with his determination and principles at the helm--and with the help of other fighters for "not me, us"--this US ship could be turned toward a more humane society.
16
Of all the people I know who voted for Trump...and i live in mississippi, so there are many....the only other candidate they were considering in the 2016 elections was Bernie Sanders. I really do believe he can beat Trump. Not because moderate democrats will give up the ghost and "give in" to supporting him...but because he is going to attract voters who threw their populist yearnings in the wrong direction. The biggest hurdle he will have to overcome is the socialist label and how much that is propagandized on fox news.
15
Taking a moment to examine my Dem-liberal heart after hearing the outcome of NH, I am proud of my party. I agree, like many commentators - Bernie proposes what we believe. Why compromise? Is there any real evidence it is possible now, given the makeup of the GOP and their real, practical, need to maintain minority rule via their charismatic leader? The Dem base is going to hold; there are no undecided swing voters - how could there be? Lets focus on getting out our own vote, through unabashed passion for our true goal to create a recognition of individual worth and an entry-level secure common weal.
5
When Sanders chose to run against Clinton, it was my assumption that moving the party left was exactly why he was running and since no one else was challenging Hillary it gave him an opening. Then he got traction and money and maybe a taste for celebrity. I’m not sure when he started calling it a revolution, but, my brothers and sisters, he seems to now believe he’s leading one. Maybe he is, but I’m skeptical. Apparently that’s a typical Gen X trait, but a Revolution of the Democratic Socialists doesn’t really resonate with me and it’s tough to not to associate it with socialist movements of the past, even if very different. I think it’s the messaging more than the message itself, with which I largely agree.
Mr. Sanders barely won the primary. In a neighboring state.
His message is anathema here and throughout the South.
In 2016, HRC beat Bernie by at least a 2-to-1 margin (and much worse) across the South. To even have a chance of winning, he would have to bring all those HRC voters under his wing, and that ain't gonna happen...Bernie's idealogues helped elect Trump in 2016, by either not voting because they hated HRC or voting third party. They will once again assure Trump an easy victory, if not a landslide, in November.
In November, the stock market will still be sky high, the economy chugging along, and a lot of people will be at work. Trump will do everything he can (legally or illegally) to make sure of that...
Should we continue that, or shift the entire economy to socialism? You want to convince anyone over 50 that that's a good idea? Sorry...that idea will be DOA.
So you will assure us 4 more years of Trump, which could well be the end of the United States as a country.
No thanks, Bernie.
Not again.
Bloomberg 2020.
7
@Duke "or shift the entire economy to socialism?" Not remotely close to Sanders's program.
A Republican-turned-Democrat billionaire is not the answer. Looking to the billionaires to solve our problems is an abdication of democracy, not an affirmation of it.
5
@Max Robe
Maybe, maybe not, Max...as regards Bernie's program. But if you don't think that is the strong belief of most people in our neck of the woods, I suggest you take a weekend drive through your home state and ask.
That R-turned-D is ready to address a lot of the most pressing issues for America.
And it's way too late to worry about the "looking to the billionaires to solve our problems".
To save America, we need someone who can beat Trump.
And Bernie can't, and won't.
2
More to the point: Millennials and younger are ascendant as the dominant political voice within the nation. Bernie Sanders has mapped the platform they support. They will continue to support that platform one way or another for the duration of their political influence. The same thing happened with Goldwater. The Goldwater generation is finally in decline. The Sanders generation is the future whether Sanders ultimately wins or not.
The problem of course is the Goldwater generation may prevent us from fully realizing the transition. Climate change in particular presents an urgent and present threat to the lives and prosperity of humans everywhere. Older Americans are literally stealing the future from their own children. They don't seem disturbed by this realization at all. It's very frustrating to repeatedly confront thoughtless greed in people you want to trust.
11
Sanders is not seeking public ownership of industry or nationalization of the giant corporations. He is not a socialist. He wants to tax the wealth of the billionaires at a slightly higher rate, not confiscate it to use it to meet social needs. He cites as his models the wholly capitalist countries of Denmark and Sweden, and even Germany.
18
If we abandon or cancel the middle we will loose in Nov. Focus on winning the critical election not winning the argument.
3
Robert M LaFollette, running in 1924, had a whole lot more to do with Franklin Roosevelt and his policies than Mr Bryan. Although he carried only his home state, most of what he advocated became the New Deal.
2
When he states his "transformative" positions, all his supporters, particularly his young ones, hear is FREE. I think his ideas are worthwhile but only a catastrophic event necessitating a start from scratch mentality will cause these policies to happen in America. Sander's supporters seem to hoping for that and that's what distresses me about him.
2
Unless you can read minds, you don’t know what "particularly the young" voters hear. Your assertion is actually a reflection of your own position.
Only the right claims voters are beguiled by "free stuff". There are many ways to fund Medicare for All and other social programs. On the other hand, there is no way to fund the tax cuts passed by Republicans. So who’s really signed up for "free"?
5
If you don't think that most young (and older) people are only interested in free, I'd like to tell you about something called the internet. Many older talented people have had their careers ruined by the availability of free on the internet. As to your allusion to"right claims voters" not sure what you are referring to there. Tax cuts have been paid for but unfortunately by hurting the disadvantaged. Speaking of paid for, maybe you can tell me what the cost of Medicare for all is because Bernie won't answer that simple question. I think we need new leadership just not a revolutionary.
Bernie Sanders has been in the US Senate since 2007.
He has 46 Senate colleagues who align with the Democrats. These are people who know him well. Only one has endorsed him for President, his Vermont colleague Patrick Leahy.
Sanders cannot get the majority of Democrats behind him, and he certainly cannot get the majority of the voting public.
There are several candidates who will be more competitive against Trump. The upcoming primaries will select the one with the broadest appeal.
8
@AKJersey It's almost as though many of those Democrats are part of the old order and intent on maintaining their power within the party.
7
The title of the article itself, made my heart soar with hope
1
I want what Bernie and his supporters want, but I want to beat Trump more. I’m not alone in being worried sick that Bernie is too easy a target, creating doubt and hesitancy among many in the middle. I remember well my disappointment when McGovern, whom I loved, lost. A passionate corner of the party is great, but quite likely not enough to beat the machine that will be arrayed against them.
4
@JPGeerlofs -- "but I want to beat Trump more"
Replacing one NYC Republican billionaire with another of the same is not exactly the "beat Trump" you are looking for. It isn't personal, its business. It isn't the orange hair, it is the way he governs appealing to long term Republican ideas, as would the 12-year Republican Mayor.
Simple New Hampshire math:
(Sanders + Warren) lost to (Buttegieg + Klobuchar + Biden) by more than 20%
If "far left" & "moderate" votes consolidate as they mostly do, don't see how Sanders wins this. Sanders also under performed in NH compared to his prior run, when he won >60% of the share.
6
Unlike Buttigeig and Klobachar, Sanders has broad appeal with a plurality of the electorate - young voters, African-Americans, Latinos, etc. Drawing conclusions about the state of the race based on the two predominantly white states of Iowa and New Hampshire is near impossible. And the notion that Trump will exploit socialism when much of the federal government is based on extremely popular social programs like Medicare and Social Security and Bernie is quite simply in favor of strengthening the social safety net while Trump wants to cut these popular programs to pay for his corporate welfare / tax cut, is way overblown by the media and not well reasoned. Most voters are becoming aware that the system is rigged in favor of the wealthy elite. Trump's identity politics pawned off as populism will easily be exposed in the general election. That and the fact that Dems nominated a centrist in 2016 who failed miserably. How will a less qualified than Clinton Mayor Pete change that result?
3
@rg -- This presumes Buttigeig voters are anti-Sanders in their policy choices. Yet Buttigeig makes a big point of his policy choices being "better."
@MarkusA
agree that cant draw too much conclusion from two state as now. The fact the Sanders win in NH dropped from ~60% votes (in 2016) to less than half of that in 2020, implies voters are looking for alternatives, specially since alternatives are available in this cycle. The alternatives people picked are further away from Sanders policies (i.e. not many votes went to Warren)
I don’t think Sanders has changed the Democratic Party. The ideas of healthcare for all, etc. have been around for a very long time. Sanders did not originate them. The problem lies in the difficulty of implementation. Sanders, long in Congress, didn’t have big legislative victories, although his ideas have remained the same. Until there is radical change in the Congress and the ever-expanding powers of the Executive are curbed, grand ideas will die.
We have seen the result of McConnell’s power to stop legislation from reaching the floor of the Senate. We haven’t heard how Sanders will deal with him. He has powerful backing from the Conservatives who are in the driver’s seat in the GOP and in the Senate. We have seen the power to impeach and be a check on the executive vitiated by them. We have seen the Executive become more and more dictatorial with their backing. And now, the Judicial branch is allied to them. The People are quickly losing their power.
It seems the media are more influenced in their judgements by poll and primary results and forget to educate the younger generation in the realities of our current system.
3
@Norma Gauster -- "Sanders, long in Congress, didn’t have big legislative victories"
He specialized in moving the ball forward with compromises that got him parts of what he wanted. That is exactly the thinking we need now, exactly what he actually did.
Thanks for the cogent essay.
Wither the Republican Party? Is there a Republican Bernie Sanders who would drag the party in the direction of Burkian normalcy?
At present it appears to be too heavy a lift. But one never knows.
1
I think Bernie, is right about his positions on the issues, but were he to be elected president he could do little or nothing without control of the senate. His presidency would just serve to exacerbate the divide in our country. I think Klobuchar is a better choice, and would be in a better position to heal the nation, and actually accomplish more in office.
4
I disagree a bit with Mr. Kazin assessment of Goldwater. It is true that the current Republican Party has followed part of his conservative agenda. However, it has ignored a major part of it.
Goldwater was a true libertarian. His opposition to civil rights legislation was not based on racism (his family's business was noted for being one of the most progressive in Arizona for hiring and selling to blacks) but on the belief that things like whom a business could serve or whom a home could be sold or rented to should be an individual decision.
I agree these positions were wrong but they were also consistent with the rest of his positions regarding the role of the government in the lives of individuals. He supported gay rights and abortion rights. He felt whom you loved and what a woman wants to do with her body were individual decisions and the govt. should stay out of them. The Republican Party including such faux libertarians as Rand Paul conveniently forgets those things.
"they [Democrats] oppose nearly every armed intervention overseas and advocate shrinking the military budget."
Is there evidence of this? don't they always vote in favor of more cas for the military and for keeping endless wars funded?
1
Just as Greta Thunberg has inspired young people all over the world to save our planet, the young people's army behind Bernie Sanders are doing their best to show us the way to save our country. Listen to them. They are fighting for our lives.
9
FDR wanted an economic bill of rights. Truman wanted a national healthcare plan. I'm struggling to see how Bernie is so radical here.
15
Thank you for writing this piece on the long term impact of Sanders. I hope that all Bret Stephens readers read your column too. What a relief...
3
No wonder why American academic elites have little influence on the American majority; they live in their own fantasy world. American elites are thrilled about the word 'socialism' while they drink wine in luxurious restaurants. They are oblivious about the fact that ideological wars took away millions of innocent lives in Russia, Europe, Asia, and even Venezuela. When the rest of the world at last endeavor to put ideologism behind and focus on pragmatism, American elites want to bring the ghost of ideologism back. When Europe, Canada, and other advanced countries converged on the middle-ground, the centrist position, American elites play the game of false dilemma: capitalism or socialism. American academic elites think it is cool to be partisans in politics while they teach the opposite in their intro classes. They are wrong. No doubt. They are as wrong as Trump is. The problem is that they are Americans; when they go against world history just because they did not experience it, the rest of the world will be forced to repeat the nightmare of ideologism and partisan politics. On the one hand, Trump convened the ghost of nationalism of the 19th century. On the other hand, American elites want to convene the bloody nightmare of ideologism. The combined effort of these two extreme Americans will plunge the whole world into turmoil.
2
Bernie Sanders IS the Centrist position !
In Europe all center right candidates are actually more to the left than Bernie.
14
Bernie is actually a moderate. He preaches (and made a lot of these changes in his home state) to increase access to childcare so families can go back to work, he wants to give access to education so our country is more educated and be more competitive, he wants loan forgiveness so large corporations aren't taking a massive chunk of lowr and middle class income so those groups can grow and thrive and create more opportunities. This and more are how you build a middle class. These are tried and true, not like the trickle down economics that we know doesn't work. But the wealthy elite of both parties, and many support both parties to hedge bets, have had a firm grip on politics for a long time and have sent our country into a crisis where unemployment is down while people struggle to pay basic bills. The democratic party has swung really far to the right and Bernie is actually center. Radical is someone who has new ideas, these aren't new ideas, the poor and middle class have been talking about these ideas for years and years, it's just that we haven't had a politician who also said them.
5
Transforming a party is not the same as transforming a nation. Bryan's effect on national politics is grossly overstated here. Wilson won in 1912 because the Republican Party was split. Roosevelt won in 1932 because of the Depression, not Bryan's "Cross of Gold Speech."
McGovern "transformed" the Democrats? Let's assume for a moment that that's true. What was the result? No foreign war since that time has been stopped or prevented by the Democrats. Indeed, many Democrats in Congress voted for the Iraq war of choice. Even Obama didn't bring the troops home. Since 1972 the defense budget has grown massively, and until 2008 only Republicans and neoliberal Democrats were elected president. Even Obama, who clearly is to the right of Sanders, won election because 2008 resembled 1932 -- the biggest economic crash since the Depression carried him into office. Some transformation!
Sanders, who doesn't even belong to the party, is a poison that will set back Democratic fortunes in this election and beyond. His core of support is smaller than Trump's, yet big enough to deny any Democrat the presidency if those supporters vote Green or stay home.
America has serious problems, but this is not the America of 1896 or 1932. The idea that a return to 19th century ideas is a winner in any sense -- electorally, economically, socially -- represents a fundamental misunderstanding of where we are, how we got here, and what can be done to affect the future in a positive way.
@Jon Harrison
Jennings paved the way for Wilson, a progressive, to get the nomination in 1912 over establishment Democrats. And lets not forget that Theodore Roosevelt, the first and so far only progressive Republican president, adopted many of his programs regarding oversight of business.
As to McGovern, one of the major reasons that Obama won the nomination in 2008 was that there was physical evidence that he had opposed the Iraq War. Without that, it is unlikely he could have clearly differentiated himself from Clinton.
1
@Steve Okay, but that doesn't translate into McGovern being a "transformational" figure. And I would maintain that absent the economic meltdown in 2008, McCain probably would have won that election.
Wilson was a "progressive" in one sense, I suppose. But he was also deeply racist and did more to trample on civil liberties than any other American president, not excluding Trump. His main legacy is the Federal Reserve Board. His foreign policy ended in disaster -- couldn't get the Versailles Treaty or the League of Nations through the Senate, helping to pave the way for World War II.
As a Democratic Centrist aka older guy and card carrying member of the masses, I will be on board with Bernie or any other Democratic candidate for that matter.
What baffles me, among almost everything that's happening today, is a health care program that slashes an immediate 22% executive overhead, gives the millions of uninsured a fighting chance at life, and by all appearances would net cost less than the health care fiasco we face now.
Only time will help the millions of younger people who have bought the worthless 500$ donaldcare policies.
An entire new wave of medical bankruptcies will soon follow as the trump type grifters begin to scam the unsuspecting who can't afford "real" health insurance.
I'm certainly not some Harvard Economics Grad with a PHd but if I was in charge the very 1st thing that would get done is simply some old fashion negotiations with the drug companies.
The American form of capitalism has been a shining success over the decades and provided hope for the world. We must admit the Europeans, no all industrialized nations, have it right regarding healthcare. What form of capitalism doesn't negotiate? Only capitalism that cares about nothing else but keeping the Dow rising for the 18%.
5
What is so left about Bernie’s policies that it leaves out the Center? Living wages? Unions? Medicare for all? Isn’t the dem party meant to be the party of the majority of this working class country?
854
@Traisea
Thank you for stating what should be obvious to all, especially the MSM and pundits.
Maybe I'm paranoid, but it's facts like these that coerce me into believing that they just really don't want Bernie under any circumstances, even if he would make things better for the poor and working classes.
Bernie's just not in with the In Crowd.
120
@Traisea
Massive wealth transfer from folks who have legitimately earned it to those who have chosen not to earn it is generally considered socialism.
It is populist when it involves billionaires but after they flee and when they come for the middle class - that is definitely socialism.
14
@SteveRR -- "Massive wealth transfer from folks who have legitimately earned it"
That isn't what happened. After the many rounds of tax cuts from Dubya to Trump, their massive wealth is not all their "legitimate earnings." It is ours, looted by their purchase of government power.
110
He has changed the party, and in my opinion, not for the better. We already have one extremist political party with the Republicans. Now we have another extremist party in the left with the Democrats.
What about the majority of this country that is in the middle?
176
@Bret
Every measure Bernie stands for is considered “moderate left” in most of Europe and Canada. Universal healthcare is embraced as a social value of nearly all major parties. Our nation is the outlier among high-income nations.
I recently worked abroad and was astounded by the contrasts between my life and a friend I met from the Netherlands. His free healthcare, free university, graduate student stipend, multilingualism, fair wages, paid vacation, paid parental leave, and reasonably priced apartment were all a result of his government.
I think the US system will never look like the Netherlands for many reasons but as I watch my patients who work 2-3 underpaid jobs and still lack health insurance because they were born into poverty who then avoided going to a doctor early in their disease’s symptoms because they couldn’t pay...I can’t help but think there’s a better way.
Our status quo has become an outlier and I just don’t think moderate corporate Democrats aren’t going to get us to where we need to go.
392
@Bret
I'm not sure the majority is in the middle. At least 40% is strongly behind Trump. The other 60% is probably split about 60-40 between moderates and leftists. So maybe a bit over a third of the country is actually centrist. If the Democrats want any hope of beating Trump and his party—particularly with the structural advantages the Republicans have in the Senate and Electoral College—they need to keep liberal voters just as energized as centrists.
37
@Bret- sounds like a golden opportunity for a third party. Perhaps Bloomberg is just the man to jump start it.
5
How can you declare a 'winner'?
The goal of a primary is delegates. Sanders and Buttieieg are tied with 9 delegates. Popular count as in the general election doesn't matter. He finished tied.
This should be a lesson learned. Whoever wants Trump out of the White House must vote for the eventual Democratic nominee, even if it hurts. What I take away from this piece is that intra-party bickering, rather than radical ideas, is what prevents a candidate from winning an election.
I’m for everything that Mr. Sanders is advocating: Medicaid for all, free college, unions, a higher minimum wage and higher taxes on the rich... But I also know that my view has never been a majority view. The things I want have never been universally wanted. I don’t know if Mr. Sanders can beat Trump, but I certainly support him in that effort.
436
@EP
Then you will insure that we loose even more. Even if Sanders ekes out a win, it will be because moderate folks vote for him despite hating his socialism, just to get rid of Trump.
But what they will do is vote Republican down-ballot, insuring Sanders and implement none of his plans, and as a side-effect, insuring another 10 years of Republican gerrymandering.
Then he will loose bad in 2024 and we'll be much much worse off than if we had just elected a moderate that brought along the country with them.
But he will lose in 2020. The economy appears strong enough that claiming some kind of "revolution" is needed to fix things is just... not politically rational.
8
@EP Your views are shared by a majority of americans, just not those in power.
23
@EP : the President is the chief executive. He does not make the laws. ONLY CONGRESS CAN MAKE LAWS.
Therefore, the President cannot "give you a union" or even raise the minimum wage. He can support such legislation and sign bills that come to him....but he can't originate bills, and he can't simply "make all colleges free" nor wipe out the $2 trillion in college DEBT that exists right now.
7
In a global society America should look not just inward but to other developed nations. Europe was devastated after WWII. And yet it has recovered and surpassed US in many ways.
The metrics don't lie. Many Western nations offer their citizens better living standards that US now does. This achievement is owed to what many call, yes, socialism.
The term "socialism" is rather confusing and detractors quickly associate socialism with Venezuela or former Soviet states in Eastern Europe. That is not the case! In truth the system these nations follow are thoroughly capitalist; but please, call that capitalism with a human face. Or, as Scandinavian nations prefer to call it, Nordic Model.
Sanders advocates for a system that is not foolish or visionary. On the contrary, his policies have been applied with great success in most western nations namely the health care system which, in the US has become a monster that gobbles a huge chunk of the GDP while it still does cover all its citizens. Isn't that screaming to be heard? Well, it is being heard!
Sanders is the voice of reason. Although he is getting older in years, his policies are young and strong. This why he energizes an ever growing number of Americans like no one can.
Sanders policies - not just Sanders the old man - must be embraced. America needs it!
711
@Nicholas I concur! That's one of the reasons my husband and I retired to Portugal. Sanders is considered a centrist here. Democratic Socialism looks pretty good on this side of the pond!
161
@Nicholas
Exactly. Our nation has swing so far to the right that moderate positions in all of Europe and Canada, like a universal healthcare system and paid vacation, are seen as extreme.
The election of Trump and the state of our current system is a reminder of how much the narrative of our nation has been shaped by corporate political donations. If you want your neighbors to not go bankrupt when they get cancer and if you have any interest in saving our warming planet then we must get corporate money out of politics. Their insatiable thirst and immorality for short term profits will continue to ruin our society and planet.
Sadly, our national DNC and most centrist candidates are as entrenched in our corporate world order as the RNC and Trump. I’ll vote for the Democratic nominee as they are guaranteed to have more decency than Trump but our country is increasingly lost and it saddens me because our hard-working poor and middle-classes will continue to suffer.
179
@Mark
"When Sanders loses to Trump, his policies go out the window. When Mayor Mike wins, some of those policies get implemented."
Did you understand the thesis of the article? Sanders' influence will be longer lasting than a single election. And Bloomberg's platform will be as close an approximation to Bernie's as possible. That's Sanders' legacy.
11
Remember this exact time 4 years ago when the "important people" all said Trump couldn't win?
Bernie creates the passion among the young that will motivate them to vote. Consider that in most previous elections, the largest group was the non-voters.
Of course, if Bernie wins the nomination, the Trump non-voters will also be energized. However, the demographics favor Bernie.
Let the games begin!
580
@billd : I think Bernie Sanders could win…if he was 68 years old or younger.
Where was he 10 or 20 years ago?
He was already a Senator, so he had all the qualifications to run. Yet he sat home and twiddled his thumbs.
He's too old now, regardless of how much you like him or his policies.
20
@billd
I just can't see Bernie winning. It's not his policies that worry me so much... it's the fact he is a blubbering, inarticulate old man who sounds like he is yelling all the time. He doesn't have an ounce of charisma. His left-leaning base is strong and vocal, but I can't see the majority of Americans getting excited about him. Bernie is not compelling... he doesn't command your attention. Trump will tear him apart, and no one will listen when Bernie "fights back."
29
@Concerned Citizen So because Sanders chose not to primary Barack Obama he should not be taken seriously now? Really?
12
Cliché that is it, change is typically slow, except when it's fast. And this essay displays that. Bernie and his supporters want what many see as a revolution, while moderates want his policies implemented more, well, moderately.
Trump saw where the nationalist parade was going and ran out ahead of it to 'lead' -- the most exercise he's likely had. Now, buoyed by power, money, and ego, he'll likely emulate FDR only by seeking a third and fourth term -- a bizarro-world irony come back to bite our precedent.
Bernie is more the explorer than the pioneer or settler right now, in most voters' minds. As a lifelong Democrat, I agree with his policies -- but I admit I fear they may intimidate moderate voters, and his style may alienate some elders as well as "the Party."
History is a big uncaring glacier. It'll melt slowly until all of a sudden it falls into the ocean. Who knows what the election will bring, or who will be in it -- but I fear Trump will be carving the Democratic landscape to bits.
Great piece. Many of us like Bernie, but... And that but's a big but. One we can't afford at this time.
1
A historian casually writing that Sanders is a "socialist?"
Sanders has consistently, for many decades, called himself a democratic socialist. Omitting the adjective betrays the author's bias and doesn't befit a scholar.
The difference between "socialist" and "democratic socialist" is significant.
11
@Barking Doggerel I get that adding "democratic" is meant to allay fears of people who associate socialism with communism - but socialism without a leading adjective doesn't describe fascist socialism. The USSR was socialist, but so is Sweden, so are many sacred American policies. Public schools are socialist. Highways and bridges are socialist. Capitalists feel no need to preface capitalism with a qualifier - even though there are many examples of fascist capitalism in the world.
@Barking Doggerel
A socialist is somebody who puts a society at the pedestal.
You are mixing a bias with the facts.
A "socialism" in Russia has as much in common with the real socialism as the Democratic Party with democracy or the Republican Party with the interests of the Republic.
All those three political parties were taking care primarily about own narrow interests.
A socialism exists in Denmark and Sweden.
Do you know when those two countries waged a war last time?
Carnage is never in the best interest of society.
James Carville likes to say that Democrats win arguments but lose elections. But Paul Krugman maintains that it won't really matter who wins the nomination because the end result will be pretty much the same. If it's Bernie or Warren they'll moderate their policies because their more radical ideas will never pass muster in Congress. And if it's a centrist like Klobuchar or Biden, they'll move a little more to the left to broaden their appeal to progressives.
3
Thank you.
It’s “democratic” socialist. And, of course, you picked a McGovern photo.
1
A socialist is a socialist is a socialist.
And if you give the socialist a chance he will destroy our Country and our American way of life. Putin is cheering for Bernie.
I’m proud of Bernie Sanders, the candidate that I have unwaveringly supported in almost 5 years of presidential campaigning.
However, should another Democrat pull into the lead and cinch the nomination this summer, I will unquestionably support him or her in the quest to unseat Trump.
But I wonder and worry about the roadmap and 2024 legacy of a watered-down progressive, establishment Democrat in the White House, and the eventuality of a Trump progeny, GOP-driven descent into the hell we are attempting to avoid now.
2
Democrats have lost their minds and their hearts. Prudence, common sense and a simple sense of decency have disappeared. They have fallen into madness.
Accordingly sensible Democrats should vote for Trump in order to assure an overwhelming victory that will hopefully bring them to their senses by 2024.
2
What separates Democrat and Republican voters these days is that Republicans vote based on their values, and Democrats vote in ignorance, based only on who social and mainstream media tell them is going to be the likely "winner." Bereft of values, they shuffle obediently from one week to the next, parroting the next anticipated "winner."
They puzzle at Sanders' supporters because they've forgotten what it means to vote for a candidate based on their platform and values. Maddeningly, they often agree with Sanders' values, platform, vision. They know we must fix this country but they forget it because they are told, no, pick a winner, beat Trump, as if they are betting on a football game, not the future of our young, not the fate of our poor, not the health of our climate or geopolitical stability.
They know in their hearts that Sanders' platform is not radical; it's old-fashioned democracy. But they have forgotten how to vote for their values. They vote in fear and vengeance. They want a "winner." They mock the Republican voters for being ignorant, but what is more ignorant and dangerous than their own ignorant approach to voting?
4
Why is it that Republicans believe that they are the only ones with values? I have values such as upholding the law, telling the truth, protecting children, assisting those in society who are less fortunate than me, love of my country, respect for others, and a belief in a higher power. I’m sick and tired of Republicans who proclaim their values, yet support the current occupant of the White House who exhibits none of those values and, in fact, actively lies, ignores the law, cages children, and has taken away assistance to those in need. If you’re reading the NYT, which is still a reputable news source, how can you ignore what is happening to our country and still support any republican.
@Beth L I'm not saying that Democrats don't have values; I'm saying that Democrats don't vote on their values. Instead, they are talking about which candidate is most "electable." That puts them at a serious disadvantage, because Trump voters are passionate about him and what he represents. I keep hearing Democrats say they are strongly supportive of Sanders' platform and values, but they don't believe he's "electable." Then they turn to people whose platforms and backgrounds they hardly know, and listen to media tell them which one is "electable." That's no way to vote, and it's a very certain way to lose because we might not agree on who's electable, but, like the Republicans, we can agree on whose values best represent our own and that appears to be, for all but the very wealthy, Bernie Sanders' platform, which addresses the real circumstances of our lives and his deep knowledge of how this country was once run in a way that was more equitable for all. Putting billionaire-backed politicians is just going to give us a glossier version of Trump. Don't fall for the packaging or the rivalry chatter. Vote your values.
Wow, this historical view suggests that we can win by losing. So, let’s nominate Bernie, let Trump crush him in the general, pulling more Republican Senators with him, and jeopardizing the Democrat’s House advantage. We will always be able to say “We have history on our side.”
The historical measure for Bernie is that his unrealistic proposals and record for zero practical accomplishments will cause him to lose worse than McGovern.
5
The author fails to point out that McGovern was a one issue candidate while Sen. Sanders has a broad array of popular policy positions. And didn't the bland centrist Dukakis lose?
There was no immediate memory of a major financial crisis or an ongoing 40 years long gutting of the middle class when these candidates ran. We still had a semi-functional private healthcare system and a financially accessible secondary education system.
Sanders's platform is a matter for many working class people of voting to live a quality of life that has been eviscerated by the hard right and the and an appeasing 'centrist' left. Why vote for a candidate the establishment tells you 'can win' when they were wrong about HRC being able to beat a rodeo clown.
3
Ridiculous. What has Sanders won? Did he extend his coalition in New Hampshire or watch it shrink since 2016? Did he win more or fewer delegates in Iowa than Buttigieg? Did he or did he not TIE with Buttigieg in NH’s delegate count? IS HE A DEMOCRAT? No, he’s not. And finally, he will never be president as that title belongs to Bloomberg, who will trounce Trump in November with Buttigieg coming in at second place in the overall delegate count.
4
@ManhattanWilliam
Even if Bloomberg does find a way to get enough meaningful delegates to win the primary, his hard line position on guns has alienated huge portions of the South and Middle America. Without either Florida or the combination of Penn/Ohio/Michigan/Wisconsin he won't be able to beat Trump.
He has already—excuse the expression—shot himself in the foot.
I also want to add that DNC should stop derailing Bernie Sanders, like they did in 2016.
Really lousy image for democrats, let the people have their choice without interference.
Considering several decades of brainwashing and misinformation on Socialism, the "Red Scare" and the boogieman theories, now is the time
to start apolitical experts discussions and explanation of the differences between Socialism and Democratic Socialism...it should be approached as educational stage with charts, list of the countries who successfully implemented this system in their governments.
Open mindedness is the key for this stage. No political spinning please, no pundits, no agenda!
Objectivity and expertise is the order of the day!
Let's educate all the citizens for what looks more like a potential future, but whoever is the nominee let's us coalesce and merge our support.
Sanders vs. Bloomberg is the people's choice!
Once again I trust the wisdom and pragmatism of black voters!
2
I don't think Bernie Sanders has changed the Democratic party. What has changed the party is a lack of opportunity for people who are becoming increasingly engaged. They are tired of having everything taken away from them (stable job opportunities, usurious college costs, usurious medical costs, usurious housing costs) and being made into the Have Nots while the Haves corrupt our government and financial systems and refuse to pay their fair share.
Bernie is not a cause any more than Trump is. Bernie is a symptom. He is what people want when they're tired of being ignored and disregarded.
2
@Charles Well Said! I enjoyed reading your contribution.
Bernie has poisoned, not transformed, the Party. More importantly, he has poisoned the country. Whatever it’s merits on paper, as implemented by flawed men Socialism is always a disaster. The incompetence of big government combines with some men’s desire for money and power and some men’s desire to be taken care of and leads to deep dysfunction at best and real horror at worse.
1
Politicians taking money from billionaires guarantees representative democracy will become an even more distant dream, the times when companies would split profits almost equally between workers and shareholders will never return, corruption will continue unabated and the point two percent will remain in power and Americans will continue their race to the bottom in every aspect of their comparatively sad and desperate lives. Will Americans realize this? Not if their innate goodness and simple desire to be left alone to enjoy their children and Netflix is exploited by the smooth-talking charlatans who tell them being ‘inclusive’ necessitates including those poor, poor outsiders worth billions and that nibbling around the edges of change is all they really want.
1
Middle of the road Democrats will perpetuate the rigged game we call our democracy. Bernie is an opportunity to change he game, and voters should recognize their chance to even the odds.
3
I’m a Democrat and Sanders hasn’t shifted me anywhere.
All Sanders is going to do is put his ego ahead of the country and put trump back in office. His proposals are idiotic and dead on arrival in a national election.
Vote my friends for the only person who can win in 2020, Michael Bloomberg.
4
@Steven Bloomberg is barely registering in the polls. Why did he wait so long? I like Mike, too, but what a poor strategy. Please vote Blue in November.
Bernie, crusty old sea biscuit of a politician, just keeps floating and floating! How does he do it? Was he ever a working man?-- No, man never worked an honest day in his life. Is he as poor as a true socialist? No, man's a millionaire with mansions. Has he ever legislated anything either effective or effectively? No. Nothing. Check the record. I'm sorry, possessed of a mouth and the ability to kvetch, Bernie is nothing more than one of those balloon stick figures by the side of the road, inflating and deflating, indicating nothing but hot air.
5
Two points. No Democrats have NOT opposed every armed intervention since Vietnam. Both Iran Iraq wars, look at the Dems who supported it. And two, after McGovern's overwhelming defeat, the Democrats moved to the center and became a very neoliberal corporatist party. The leadership focused mainly on getting corporate money to win the presidency. As a result, it gave up on local and state governments. They did little to mobilize effectively against growing economic, and racial inequality. That, the results of the disastrous 2016 election, Sanders' campaign woke up the rank and file of the party. Whether or not the Democrats succeed in 2020 in both flipping the Senate (crucial) and defeating Trump remains to be seen. Right now, there are three political currents: Trump, white misogynist, racist xenophobic nationalism; neoliberal, the Clintons, Bidens, Booker, Buttiegeg, Bloombergs, and progressive, Sanders, Warren, Ocasio-Cortez.
1
How? He won states he was tipped to win anyway. Given that minorities form a significant chunk of the Democratic base, I’m not sure how someone can “transform” the party without winning them over. Whoever they end up going with, there’s no sign that he’s any more appealing to them than he was before (barely) winning Iowa and New Hampshire.
@Pacific There were far more votes cast for Mayor Pete and Amy Klobuchar than for Bernie and Warren. The party is not in Bernie's pocket.
never understood why the gop can yank the pendulum hard to the right and the dems have to go with a bush-lite soft republican so we do not offend anyone.
2
This article has some merit. But the elephant in the room is threatening the existence of our Country. We must beat Trump.
An extreme lefty is not going to attract those independent voters that we need to save America and our planet.
1
Bernie Sanders has transformed the Democratic party the same way George McGovern did in 1972. How did that work out last time?
3
You guys are getting really good at this. The race has just started and we are already writing articles about how he lost but did some good in changing minds. It’s just getting harder to read and more obviously.
Look what this man has done with the establishment middle pushing against him at every turn. Imagine what he could do if instead of the machine working against him it worked for him.
1
As a lifelong Democrat and as far left as they come I can tell you that if Sanders wins the nomination I will stay home on election day, He is just Trump's left wing twin. I do not respect him or his goon supporters. It would be 4 more years of the mess we are in either way. The dismal attendance in Iowa and his 1% win in NH should tell you that no, nobody is "energized" or changed by Bernie. SMH in disgust. Guess why I don't live in the US anymore.
If you're considering a democratic candidate to support and looking at it from a self-centered perspective, you might land on any one of the candidates. But, if you look at it from what is right for the country as a whole, who would best support and further our American ideals, who is more centered on We The People and not the monied elite who more and more encompassingly pull the strings politically and economically, there's only one choice in my humble opinion ... Bernie Sanders.
2
Bernie was not endorsed by the NY Times Edi board, the mouth piece of the Democratic party and if Kazin thinks he has won then the Edi board has lost once again due to not having endorsed the winner.
I see Bernie's win as the divided state of the Dems. Sure he won decisively in NH but what does that mean going forward and with Bloomberg and Duvall getting on the ballot.
With regard to whether he captures the WH or not, he has transformed the Democratic party? How so? The sole goal of the democratic party is to take back the white house not really to shove down unrealistic ideas down the throats of Americans. That goal hardly rattled the unity of the Republican party behind reelecting Trump. Of course the anti-Trumpers are happy that Gov. Weld of MA got 10% of the NH GOP votes, the same as the 4th place Warren in the Democratic party. That will get Wold a few additional donors but still nickle and dime stuff.
All I can concede is that Bernie has awakened the sleeping media giants and the knives will be out and they will get sharper and attacks more damaging. Hillary already said "no one likes Bernie" Prof Krugman has called out Bernie's lies and Obama has said that Bernie is not a democrat. Yes Bernie has transformed the democratic party in a way that has ensured a Trump victory in November 2020 and thereby dashed the solitary agenda of the democratic party to capture the white house.
1
Bernie spent FIFTY MILLION last quarter.
He's trying to buy our democracy.
1
@TMS $50 million in small dollar donations from millions of donors. There is no more popular alternative.
2
@Andrew
Those "millions of donors" comprise a tiny fraction of the voting public. That's called mob rule.
@TMS he was a being funded by we the little people who send in small donations weekly monthly annually whenever possible. Get it? We the people authorize him to spend as needed. Not celebrities or corporations nor Wall Street Silicon Valley. Ok? We the Little People.
Don’t tell us it’s not one person one vote!
Democrats are digging a deep hole by supporting Sanders the near 80 year old Socialist recovering from a heart attack.
This is political dysfunction of epic proportion.
1
Why not just say what everyone knows? Sanders can't win. He hasn't expanded the Democratic electorate. He certainly hasn't changed the party for the better. If Sanders is the nominee he will split the party in two. Moderate suburban voters will not vote for Democratic Socialism. Ever. Independent swing voters will hold their nose & vote for Trump. Sanders has contempt for the Democratic establishment & intends to eviscerate them once elected. The DNC will not co-operate in their own demise. They will try to undermine his campaign in ways both large & small as they did in 2016. Sanders has demonstrated time & time again that he doesn't have the temperament to be POTUS. Last year he called for giving incarcerated felons the right to vote. The Boston Marathon Bomber kills three people, maims & injures 280 more. Bernie’s concern? That he gets his absentee ballot. What will be the reaction when Sanders travels to swing states with Michael Moore & he tells women’s underrepresentation in Congress a form of “gender apartheid.” Or when AOC, says in Texas, “I’m here because Senator Sanders has actually committed to breaking up ICE.” Sanders' codependents are writing the GOP attack ads. If this election is about kitchen table issues: jobs & affordable education there's no way we lose. If it's about Medicare for All & more illegal immigration there's no way we win. We can win with or without progressives. We can't win without swing & centrists voters. Sanders will lose in a landslide.
3
I’m old enough to remember when you had to transform something in order to be called transformative.
2
Bernie Sanders, our next President?
Sheesh.
Give me stability, balance, and a nuts and bolts sausage maker any day of the week, especially after these past 3+ years of life under Trump.
Bernie sure does not work well with others. He's proven that time after time after time. But he sure can develop and project unrealistic, unbalanced legislative proposals on a myriad of topics that get little support.
In 16 years as a House Representative, and 13 years as a U.S. Senator, Bernie got 7 bills passed for which he was primary sponsor. On what topics?
1) veteran cost of living adjustments;
2) improving the VFW charter;
3) renaming a post office in Vermont;
4) renaming another post office in Vermont;
5) OK’ng a Vermont-New Hampshire Water Supply agreement;
6) a bill that protects the Taconic Mountains; and
7) designating “Vermont Bicentennial Day”.
Contrast that with Amy. Senator Klobuchar has quietly lead in the formation, development, and passing of laws in her 12 years in the Senate. As of 2016, Amy had passed more legislation than any other Senator.
A few examples of bills Amy primarily sponsored that made it into law:
S. 524, Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act;
S. 178, the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act of 2015;
S. 894, Innovate America Act;
S. 218, Veterans to Paramedics Act; and
S. 3021, America's Water Infrastructure Act of 2018.
Studious, trustworthy, works well with others, focused, results-oriented.
Exactly what we need.
1
Our free press is in terrible shape. It isn’t going to get better any time soon unless the fundamentals change.
Nobody can have two masters. They are giving us the opposite instructions and we start acting in bipolar way.
That is currently happening to media outlets. Allegedly, the objective is to serve the people but they must obey the corporate owners and advertisers with the different interests.
We don’t have the problem with Trump or any other individual but with the bad principles.
Our society is controlled by greed. Everything else is sacrificed at this altar – our children, our lives, the humanity and this planet.
Nothing can change till two political parties are kicked out of power.
Reagan, Bush Senior, Clinton, Bush Junior, Obama or Trump – the personalities don’t matter.
It matters what we’re trying to protect – the capital or the society.
If you think Buttigieg or Clobuchar – two tame and meek apparatchiks - can change this world, I wish you the best luck.
Don’t bother even to cast your vote.
You will hear the cheap words and empty promises. The only thing that matters is $22 trillion in national debt - the monument to the colossal greed and inability to protect our future.
When the next economic catastrophe strikes everybody will act shocked again as in 2007.
We still believe the trillion dollars can be made overnight on the Wall Street.
That foolishness keeps us on the wrong course.
1
As a historian you probably already know that this election is all about digital presence, the loudest wins the race. This is something obama campaign made full use of in 2008 and the Republican Party especially the Trump
Campaign has taken it to a totally different level.
Mr Trump successfully communicates with a large swath of the population which includes his followers, additionally those he converted, lawmakers of both parties (one slavishly the other just to keep an eye on him) and the media which includes journalists talking heads pollsters political pundits TV radio print media.
On NPR we learned yesterday that Don Trump Jr flags posts by media that are negative about Trumps. These flagged items are then vetted by brietbart who then conducts their own dirt digging on each of the reporter or journalist who has posted the column or article or comment. Then these media members are singled out for ridiculing and bad mouthing through the conservative channels.
It is appalling and tragic that we have sunk so low. These supposedly Christian people are breaking all commandments about telling lies furthering gossip and doing so without Shame or remorse.
1
If killing the Democratic party, of which he is not a member, is transforming it, the Sanders might very well do both.
Short of a 1930s-like depression, Americans will never elect a far-left candidate.
1
Sen. Sanders has won big time, the Sanders wing if the campaign cycle
Congratulations, Bernie! Allow for some down time! And make sure you walk in the mornings and afternoon, eat well and rest. I am now hoping that Kamala Harris might join you on V.P. ticket. Please don't veer too far away from your past support of 2nd Amendment. That is one of the things that has kept me with you. I support 10 round magazine capacity, background checks, 5 day waiting period and doing away with the gun show exemption. Don't fall into the trap of saying you will ban certain weapons. Stay away from the term assault weapons, but be prepared to parry that term in debates. Maintain the position of a woman's right to determine the health care and medicinal treatment she see's fit. You are not PRO abortion. You are pro-choice as set forth by the Supreme Court. If there are certain Senate races you would like for us to send small dollar campaign contributions, let us know when you return to campaign after a much deserved rest. I hope some of these Democratic Senate hopefuls endorse you or at least speak well of you. And of course, even thought I don't support all of her positions, will be sending contribution to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in support of her re-election.
2
Hey, Dr. Jones. No time for love. We got gotta get (out of our current mess) while the gettin's good.
1
Because we have an electoral college, a candidate who can’t win the 1.5 Million votes along I-4 corridor in central Florida, will lose Florida’s 29 electoral votes and thus lose to Trump. The opposite is also true— win there and you’ve won the election. Bernie isn’t going to win that critical “purple” swing region. To the Bernie bro’s I say: Vote your conscience or vote to beat Trump- you can’t do both.
The bottom line is that the Democratic party is becoming, in all but name, The American Communist Party. We now have the party of democracy, the Republicans, and the party of statism, the Democrats. I wonder how that happened and how it will play out over time. I guess the Dems will have to crash and burn then go through a multi-year restructuring.
1
Yes, Dr. Kazin, prophetic influence of Sanders and all of the Democrats who ran for the Presidency and failed (McGovern, Jesse Jackson, William Jennings Bryan ("The Great Commoner"), and a Republican Barry Goldwater who fell to Lyndon Johnson. The Rainbow Coalition is still alive and well today. Which Democratic nominees will remove Donald Trump from our Oval Office and White House? Sanders/ Buttigieg/Klobuchar, the winning trio in New Hampshire, are
showing America that the Democratic Party is on a roll today.
Interestingly enough, the magazine the author co-edits, Dissent, was a vanguard of the New Left in the late 50’s and 60’s, and itself did much to transform the Democratic Party. Like Bernie Sanders, it was not so much “liberal,” as it was a critique of classical liberalism.
Led by intellectuals such as Irving Howe, Lillian Hellman, C. Wright Mills, and Norman Mailer (all of whom were frequently published in Dissent’s pages), Dissent‘s influence on the left was largely responsible for nomination of George McGovern.
One reaction to the rising influence of Dissent on the left, led by a number of disenchanted liberal intellectuals like Irving Kristol & Norman Podhoretz, was the movement that became known as Neoconservativism...which eventually became transformative as well.
I was a volunteer in George McGovern's crushing defeat in 1972 and remember it well: he carried only ONE state. Score: Nixon 49. McGovern 1. That, I fear, was his most memorable political legacy for some of us. We who remember should probably remind ourselves that now is not then, and Bernie Sanders is far more of a passionate presence than McGovern was. But with four more years of Donald Trump as the consequence of a Democratic defeat, we may be understandably concerned about Sanders' ability to pull off a national electoral victory.
2
Yes. For decades, leading Democrats insisted that the the party had to hew to the center. In 2016, Sen. Sanders embraced progressive policies and proudly called himself a Democratic Socialist. The result: to the dismay of the party "establishment," millions of voters supported him. Centrist Democrats still retain a lot of clout in the party, but they will never again be able to ignore the party's progressive wing.
8
I've said it before and I'll say it again. The youth, not the people writing these editorials, are the only ones that can save the world from another 4 years of Trump. The youth are drowning in student debt from simply trying to get a university education, can't afford medical care, and see no possibility of buying a house in the future. YES they (and many others) desperately need a new deal. The older crowd, still brainwashed from antiquated cold war rhetoric, and going to have to do some soul searching and realize that no one can possibly change the extreme capitalistic economy in the US and they have nothing to fear from Sanders. I am not a Bernie or bust person. I will vote blue no matter who. But I can totally comprehend the youth getting behind Sanders.
91
As an older person on social security I can understand his appeal to that age group as well. As a matter of fact, I consider it almost insanity for any older person to vote for anyone but Bernie.
5
This column has it completely backwards. When combined, Bernie’s moderate opponents got more than twice as many votes. He got only about half the votes he received four years ago and barely won. Even if you add Warren’s votes, only about a third are in his camp which is about the same size the left wing of the party has always been. In fact, these results are a ringing rejection of his ideas.
10
Bernie needs to clarify his position on private insurance. I believe he is not proposing to eliminate it, only to disallow duplicate coverage, as is already written into the Medicate rules.
Bernie is not an extremist, like Corbyn, and will beat Trump once his positions are perceived as realistic and moderate, by international standards anyway.
8
@RjW the media delights when Bernie’s messages are twisted. They have an unhealthy obsession with bashing Bernie at all costs at every opportunity. In 2016 Bernie led his campaign without any help from the media. Despite media obstruction bashing squashing his campaign spread to all 50 states. The youth loved the vision he projected and saw him as someone they could trust. But their parents said no he’s a socialist and the media enhanced that narrative.
I blame the media for twisting words when it comes to Bernie. They are gentler with Liz Warren who has very similar ideas but did not label herself as a socialist democrat. It’s all about messaging.
10
Interesting that your opening sentence says that Bernie may "well lose" to trump this Fall. Why say that? He might also "well win". I'm a moderate. But this opening line was more than I could take. It's no wonder that "experts" are losing their luster. Stick to your expertise.
15
@Richard Winkler
Trump will eat Bernie's lunch. No amount of bullying by Bernie Bros, yelling, and arm-waving can overcome the socialist label that the Trump campaign will plaster on Bernie's forehead.
Bernie inaccurately and unwisely calls himself a socialist. He emulates the Scandinavian model. That model is a capitalistic model with an expansive social safety net. Nordic countries believe in capitalism - but a more regulated and fair playing type of capitalism with broader safety net systems. Bernie is a social democrat and not a socialist and it is extremely irritating that he and others continue to mislabel themselves. It will be the downfall of this election.
15
Jennifer: Agree! The biggest mistake of Bernie Sanders is to label himself a socialist. Were he to call himself a social democrat and prove himself more flexible on his key issues, he would stand a much better chance. The bickering among the democrat candidates is foolish and will result more votes for Trump.
1
After 3 decades of neo-liberal economic policies (global free trade, deindustrialization and rapid technology advances), our middle class has been decimated and the majority of wealth has been concentrated in very few wealthy hands. If our country wishes to thrive in the 21st century, we must rebuild and revitalize our middle class, and address the needs of the working poor and poor. So, the policies that Bernie advocates, accessible health care for all, quality education for all, a living wage for all workers and a total commitment to confront and address climate change, are not radical policies. Nor are they policies of the past, they are necessities of the future. So, I actually think that the Democratic primary contest and debates are healthy for the Democratic party and the American public. I expect if one of these candidate wins the primary contest outright, then that candidate will likely defeat Trump in the general election.
8
Whether most Americans realize how much has been stolen from them and how differently the rich live from them will determine whether people will be happy with the impression of change or actual change.
8
Politicians taking money from billionaires guarantees representative democracy will become an even more distant dream, the times when companies would split profits almost equally between workers and shareholders will never return, corruption will continue unabated and the point two percent will remain in power and Americans will continue their race to the bottom in every aspect of their comparatively sad and desperate lives.
3
Is this one of those articles that is supposed to remind us to be 'realistic' because of the author's command of history? Kazin, I respect you and the work you've done, but what this article fails to take into consideration is the material, lived conditions of people. But I suspect you know this? In any event, the article telegraphs so much losing for Sanders, you have to wonder how much winning Kazin really has on his mind, or cares to imagine. Sorry to say it, but OK Boomer.
7
The best change Bernie can affect is endorse ranked choice, and destroy the lock that the two parties have on government elections. There will never be true reform while corporations own political parties and their elected offices. We know that Donald Trump gave a huge amount of money to Democrats. We know he did not believe a word of a what any of those Democrats wanted to do. We know that Donald Trump gave the money to influence the decisions. Why don't we have affordable housing? Why is there a money laundering operation going through real estate? Why is there banking secrecy and shell companies? Politicians are owned by corrupt billionaires, including state actors siphoning money off the backs of their impoverished people.
8
This is exactly what the Corbyn supporters said after the biggest Labour defeat since the 1930s: "We won the argument!".
7
Americans are not British. Americans don’t actually realize how desperate and sad their lives are, so they aren’t as angry as they have a right to be. Very different scenario in England.
3
@Joseph Not to mention that Bernie Sanders is a moderate dem when compared to Corbyn. That nonsense talking point is getting old.
Bernie is not a socialist, Mr Kazin. Sanders believes in regulated capitalism, not socialism. The corporations need to be reined in with sensible regulation, and all Democrats know that. That's what this election is all about. Common sense governance vs corporate/wealthy control. We the people need to regain a voice.
17
Bernie has "transformed" the Democratic party after winning only in two nearly-all whites states?
If Sanders fails to win the nomination, would it not mean that the party did not feel comfortable with his far-left, "socialist" agenda, thus challenging the assertion that he is likely to be remembered as a "transformative" figure?
4
@Dikoma C Shungu Clearly your recollection of history doesn't stretch back to 2016.
Soon as our hero and champion of American values Bernie Sanders passes from the scene his advocacies will be forgotten, buried, rejected, denied by all Dems who seek to maintain their least relevance as US continues its slide toward right-wing corporate-state control of all branches of government, privatization of all resources, advantage flowing ever more to the privileged controlling elites. Koch-financed Reagan set the pattern, Bernie Sanders - bless his vision, energy, arc - can and will matter only if he wins; if not the otherwise pointless Dems - Elizabeth Warren excepted - will revert immediately to GOP-lite sycophancy.
3
Er...all Democrats have for decades have supported universal healthcare (remember Hillary care) by some mechanism or other. Right now however most including all the candidates other than Sanders regard Medicare for all as unrealistic. Sanders has changed nothing in that respect.
3
Perhaps we're setting the stage for a four party system.
Trump and his merry band of deplorables can separate out from the rest of the conservative movement.
Sanders and his gang of Bernie Bros can take their far left socialism with them as well.
That leaves two moderate parties in the middle to help build coalitions.
3
@Chris: That's my fantasy too. Unfortunately, our system, for whatever reason, doesn't support more than two parties. I'm afraid that will be the death of our once great Republic.
1
Wonderful history lesson op-ed. But I do have a question.
Prior to the 2016 Presidential contest, Sanders was an Independent in the Senate, albeit a self-declared Democratic Socialist. Always has been. But when he wanted to get into the fray, he declared himself a Democrat. Failing in his bid, he immedately returned to Independent status.
He has done it again for the 2020 contest. While I have no problem with his desire to run for President, I do have a problem with his flip flopping and the Democratic party 'temporarily' welcoming him under their tent.
This country could use a change from the current two party system. He seems to be the perfect person to run as an Independent or however he wants to declare himself. Why doesn't he? Could it come down to money, how individual states formulate their primary system, and historical inbreading of the current two party ssytem.
He wants change; here is a perfect opportunity to test his platform.
3
The American history related by Michael Kazin is correct, but he is mistaken in assigning a pioneering role to Bernie Sanders.
Every Democratic politician on the national stage, well prior to Bernie Sanders, has been in favor of affordable health care for every American, in favor of strong labor unions to protect workers against exploitation by management, safer working conditions, higher taxes on the wealthy and on large corporations, higher minimum wages, etc.
Democrats also have been pro-choice, have urged more progress in civil rights for people of color, have long been in favor of sensible gun control and have advocated equal pay for women and a strong safety net for the poor and disabled.
For Bernie Sanders to be given credit for things which others have fought so hard and for so many years is annoying.
13
@sdw reality needs to be given its due. Under the democrat regimes of the last 50 years reality has not approached their rhetoric. Instead we get republican lite. The downward trajectory of living standards, the destruction of the planet, the endless pandering to the military industrial complex and corporate neo liberalism continues with every more disastrous results. It’s long past time for meaningful change. We have learned that talk is indeed cheap.
2
It’s not novel getting support from the younger generation by offering to legalize marijuana in all states , forgive their student loans and offer free college and medical care
What’s novel is that people fall for this line as these ideas are not willed into existence by presidential decree. They must be pushed through the house be the senate which is not likely to support this.
Bernie has no chance in the general election against practically any Republican much less Trump.
Bloomberg, a Republican at heart, may be the Dems best and only chance here.
19
@Norville T. Johnston Except that nearly every poll of a national match between Trump and Sanders has shown a Sanders victory.
2
@Andrew
Thanks for noting this. And some of us are still sore at the DNC over its shenanigans to exclude him in 2016. The DNC thought it knew better than the electorate did, and we see how well that worked out.
I'm no kid--I'm retired--and I am very excited to see Sanders' strong showing.
5
@Andrew
Ask Hillary about the accuracy of the polls.
2
Kazin could have gone on the explain why Sanders has been so effective in transforming the Democratic Party starting with all the Clinton moves to ‘the left’ in an attempt to become more popular and how this year there is wide support for the issues of health, education, and attempting to reintegrate the Middle Class into supporting Democratic Candidates at all levels of government.
Bernie has a vision of a healthier America and the populations seem to favor it, hopefully wide enough to put him or at least one of his compactors in the White House.
Kazin seeks another failed reformer to add to his scholarly list.
He may be disappointed.
8
All of us are coached to cling to a narrative of the USA that hasnt been valid for 30 years.
Every single comment in this section starts with a plea to return to the values of a bygone era. Even Bernie's Campaign Platform is a Message of Reinforcing the New Deal Value System. Every single DNC candidate harps on the same thing.
...
We are all obsessed with keeping things exactly as we imagined them many years ago. Absolutely NOBODY is interested in facing the future.
...
Except Trump.
Trump's approach is to destroy...utterly destroy the existing bureaucracy, all the Status Quo assumptions about "how the world works."
This is necessary in order for us to locate leadership that will guide the USA into a Better, more prosperous, healthier, safer, Stronger future in the 21st Century.
...
Sorry, folks......clinging to another aging Professor who proposes nothing new, only a bigger, stronger version of the existing New Deal Bureaucracy, established circa 1930.....is NOT the answer.
9
@Wherever Hugo
Pretty sure nobody just "imagined" their free tuition at public colleges like at the University of California system; it actually existed.
So Trump is not the answer, Bernie is not the answer. Then who is the answer? And more importantly, what is the question?
4
@Viv the question is how do we get a more just and fair society, the answer: FDR/MLK/Bernie.
3
@Wherever Hugo you offer a typical regressive false equivalence- how is injustice and unfairness (Trump) moving towards a “better” USA, while justice and fairness (FDR/MLK/Bernie) not moving forward to a better USA? You’re saying more prosperous for the billionaires and their wannabes, but not for 99.9% of us.
What Sanders is doing is less a matter of transforming the Democratic party than restoring it to the glorious days of FDR's New Deal. He would do more for the poor and working class than Trump has or will ever do. Sanders wants to assure that they and all Americans receive health care coverage. Trump will continue to be in the back pocket of the rapacious health insurance industry. His talk of protecting those with preexisting conditions runs counter to what he will actually do if reelected.
20
Maybe having a more liberal leaning candidate would be good for the country. I thought Obama was a great President but even he had to cave on so many important progressive ideas. Our country needs a strong social safety net because the money spent moves through the economy and that is what keeps the engine moving. Money that is just sitting in Wall Street doesn't fix any infrastructure and any bomb dropped leaves the money on the ground. Moderates are just Republican-lite and if that's what replaces Trump then we will continue to see attacks on social security, healthcare, consumer protections, corporate oversights, and the middle class.
74
Obama’s policies were no different than any moderate Republican. Most of Obama’s cabinet and his personal friends are Republicans. His major difference from a Republican is that he had a personality that made people like him. In other words he, like his hero Ronald Reagan, was a great actor. So he did not cave on progressive issues, he never wanted them and he worked hard to make sure they did not happen. To compare Obama to Sanders is literally like night and day. Sanders is an authentic progressive who admires FDR and who is not acting. He is actually telling us what he believes and what he will attempt to do. He is a breath of fresh air and something of a unicorn in modern politics. And he may be the last chance the country has to retain its democracy.
3
@Bobotheclown Sad, but true. "Yes we can" morphed quickly into "Maybe, but...", and before he left office President Obama declared openly that he wished to make money. He is still the titular head of the party, since Clinton was cheated of her victory, and his silence regarding our terrible plight is unnerving. It is sad to think that he has sold out to enjoy jet-skiing with billionaires. Maybe he hasn't, but it certainly appears so.
1
Bernie Sanders is the best thing that could happen to the Republican Party. Trump will have come close to ruining it, but Sanders will be responsible for many moderates to switch to the Republican Party and in doing so make it more moderate......and powerful.
9
@Travelers The Republican Party is incapable of becoming more moderate at this point. Trump drives the party, and he's not going to moderate anything.
Are you truly comparing Bernie Sanders to Barry Goldwater?
Although I did not share any of Goldwater's political views or goals, Goldwater, unlike Sanders, was a powerful and very respected figure by his fellow Senators. And his legislative accomplishments were significant, particularly the Goldwater=Nichols Act. In contrast, Sanders' has (to be kind) relatively few legislative accomplishments.
Comparing Sanders to George McGovern is much more apt. They are both One-Trick-Ponies, regurgitating two or three notes over and over. Why were (and are) young men attracted to both angry older men? McGovern was going to keep them from going to Vietnam, and Sanders intends to pay for their educations. A further comparison is also in order; they both have been very successful in dividing the Democratic party, making it much easier to reelect insecure Presidents who are steeped in paranoia, rage, criminality and vindictiveness.
5
The young voters are the ones who are going to have to live with the consequences of this election and the elections to come, so I think that we have to follow their lead on this, and they are solidly behind Sanders.
14
We let the GOP go devastatingly far right. It's time for the democratic party actually be liberal like it claims it is. I cannot wait to vote for Bernie in my primary, and hopefully again this November.
44
@Emma
The Dems are liberal.
We are not Socialist.
If you want to vote Socialist then vote Socialist.
Bernie is a trojan horse and will be treated like one.
We need to stop an infestation before it destroys the whole house.
1
Well written. You are a student of history.
However do disagree with you on one point.
You mention, groundbreaking a lot. It I true with Bryon, Goldwater, etc. but these guys did not win, they were drubbed.
Better for Bernie not to compromise on his policies but tone down the socialist thing. It could be lethal to him. Example, he can still accept the support of AOC but make it clear he does not support her on everything, ie turning America into a socialist state.
The supreme leader on how to do this and get elected immediately with new ideas and not have to wait 20 yrs. was Lincoln.
He had the forward looking platform of ending America's original sin slavery but instead of becoming a radical republican he compromised and got the support of conservative republicans and union state slave owning by winning the Civil War first and then ending slavery because without the former he could not get the latter.
We cannot wait 20 yrs. to get rid of Trump.
3
@Paul
Bernie would be well advised to accept AOCs support and nothing else. She unfortunately rants and has very little if no depth and comprehension of what change is possible.
You don’t need to debate her, she will be propose totally unrealistic ideas
1
@Brewster agreed, maybe in 20 yrs. America will accept her but now she can be lethal to Bernie and democratic hopes to take back the gov't.
1
This is an interesting take on the idea of losing. The GOP has never overcome the insanity of Goldwater. Unfortunately for society, the Dems might lose on evidence-based policies, while the GOP might win based on myth and fearmongering. The difference is stark.
3
The most interesting aspect of this piece by Michael Kazin is the last paragraph, which hints, correctly, I think, that Bernie Sanders is not so much a vanguard as a Throwback Thursday.
Mind you, that is not a bad thing. The programs Bernie wants are familiar to those of us with that historical perspective, who remember Jess Jackson and George McGovern and FDR. It used to be called "the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party" to contrast it with the third way triangulation viewpoint.
But Kazin may be right that it's likely still a losing proposition in the current election cycle. For the "average" voter, not very engaged with politics most of the time (in contradistinction to most people who write in these comments boxes), circumstances in their day to day lives have not quite reached the Depression level disruption that brought FDR to office--and the scapegoating racism and xenophobia that Trump and his minions engage in is very effective on those subset of economically liberal but socially conservative voters who may have gotten to that level of disruption.
But if there are four more years of Trump, especially with a likely economic downturn? You might well see an electorate much more primed for radicalism.
Of course, by then there might not be any elections.
3
I am a Canadian who grew up in Philadelphia and took the noble principles of America to heart -- truly. It pains me to see that Trump can run the country like a lunatic dictator and the right wing (who are supposed to respect law) will do about it.
But what pained me even more was when I saw how the Clintons -- from Walmart country - pushed the Reaganism right-wing lie that if we just send jobs to where the "lowest price is the law", America will be fine. I watched my family's honourable factory jobs be sent to China where nobody respects labour rights or environmental rights, two things that the Democrats had pushed for for years.
The middle class grew up strong thanks to the principles that had been espoused by the Democratic Party prior to the Clintonian version of the Democractic Party.
I so wish that the Democrats could find their roots again without being shouted down by the strange brew called Republicans today.
Imagine what a different world we would be living in had the West responded to 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre with a withdrawal of financial support and the message to the Communist dictators of China that they needed to find their way to respecting human rights before we'd toss Capital and American jobs their way. So so very sad.
15
The difference between Republican and Democrat voters is that Republicans vote on their values and beliefs, and Democrats vote on who they think will win. That makes Democrats unreliable and easily manipulated. Indeed, Democrats have gotten so used to voting like they're at a horse race that they do not know what to make of Sanders' supporters, who care about the future of the country, who know that we need to address massive income inequality, an environment being destroyed, an infrastructure in crumbles, and geopolitical instability. We all know that Sanders isn't a socialist; he's an old-fashioned democrat with old-fashioned democratic values that most Democrats (used to) believe in. If Democrats voted for the platform, rather than their weekly manipulated notion of who is most "electable," they'd be as formidable as Trump voters. And we'd have a real Democrat in office, to the horror of all the corporate Democrat billionaire-backed politicians that uninformed, reactive Democrats are being urged to support. Please, remind yourself of your values, Democrats. Stop worrying about beating Donald Trump and start worrying about the future of the country. You will then join the powerful grass roots movement of diverse Americans who are backing Sanders, despite his getting no support from the Democratic party or the mainstream media.
15
@Valerie Well said!
Sanders has been the most consequential political figure of the 21st Century for simply making enlargement of the public sphere a discussable possibility once again. Of course, Bernie might point to the ravages of neoliberalism and ask "Why should I take the credit?"
6
Correction: The Republican Party does not pursue a laissez-faire economic policy. Quite the contrary. Republicans use federal, state, and local governments to control the economy--including labor--to the benefit of their narrow class interest. Why do you think they pursue so strenuously tort reform, restraints on unions and class action suits? Why do they oppose almost any form of federal regulations that protect workers and the environment? Oh they know very well who they are as a class even if working people don't. They count on that. They leave as little as possible to blind market forces--that's just bourgeois rhetoric.
29
All this consternation over who the democratic nominee might be all for naught. President Obama was as moderate as they come (moderate being center right in today's politics), yet the republicans wouldn't budge an inch to compromise with him. Mitch McConnell said his top priority was to make Obama a 1-term president and he spent 6 years blocking everything Obama tried to do. Would the right's attitude toward a Klobuchar, Buttigieg, or a Bloomberg be any different?
I'm not even sure this is even the most important race. The republicans have been using their majority in the Senate to pack the courts with conservative judges which will have consequences for years.
Wring your hands over who might oppose Trump in November, but the most important races might be the 35 in the Senate. And if liberals can't get excited and vote in 2022, how much will 2020 even matter?
7
@David Biesecker : I am tired of the meme that "McConnell said he wanted to make Obama a one term POTUS" --- come on, that's EVERY political party's desire!
YOU want to make Trump a one-term President, don't you? why is that OK?
Do you believe every POTUS is guaranteed two terms? (Because it ain't true.)
BTW: this started in 2000, when THE LEFT decided to say they wanted to make Bush 43 a "one term President just like his father".
That's where McConnell GOT THE IDEA.
While I admire Bernie and much of what he proposes, I also admired George McGovern and all that he proposed. He, too, changed the Democratic Party - we know what happened then, and with Bernie as the Presidential candidate we'll see history repeated. Idealism isn't sufficient to win the vote of the electorate in the general election. (Let's keep the Electoral College out of the discussion for now.)
If the Democrats nominate Bernie or Pete or Elizabeth, they are insuring the re-election of that ne'er do well who presently occupies the White House. The moral victory will be a defeat for the country. And that nomination will risk the keeping of the House and the re-taking of the Senate.
3
I really hope all of you moderates who are always chanting about “party unity” will live up to the ideas you espouse and vote for Bernie if he receives the nomination.
I will be doing the same for whoever the nominee is if it is not Bernie. Our democracy depends on it.
10
@Roman
"Party unity" means "compromise with the center". Bernie refuses to compromise, thus there will be no center coalition behind him.
Sanders ,according to this column is a transformative candidate for the D's, which would lead to Trump winning re-election. Yep, that's surely transformative.
8
That Sanders has changed the Democratic party is a no-rainer. That he has also changed the electorate however, is the real prize. More than anyone else Sanders, thanks to his consistency, has transformed the American electorate and pulled the entire country back towards the center left and away from the dominating sharp right-wing shift of the GOP. Sanders efforts have given a depleted and battered middle-class hope and a voice not only on the dream of universal healthcare but also hope for a realistic shot at at a college education for ALL Americans. He is the voice that the NAFTA/banker Democrats tried to drown out and failed - an echo and a touch of FDR.
17
Bernie has far from won. If anything, last night's result was a sound defeat for the progressive wing of Democratic party in New Hampshire, as Warren and Sanders together captured only 35% of the votes. It is only a matter of time when the moderates put their act together and consolidate behind one candidate.
2
How is Bernie “surging “ when his vote totals and winning percentages in Iowa and New Hampshire are just more than half of his 2016 results? I’d like to see an analysis of why almost half of his voters 2016 voters in these states went elsewhere and where did they go?
11
@Steve R It is called arithmetic. In 2016, Sanders was opposed to one candidate. In 2016, there is a multiple candidate field, so that several people are dividing up the vote.
31
@Craige Champion
Add to that the simple fact that some voters who support Sanders' platform are just too afraid he can't win against Trump.
5
@Craige Champion That's misleading. Klobuchar and Buttigieg together garnered significantly more votes than Sanders and Warren combined. It was a clear indication of voters preferring a more moderate, and less divisive, candidate. Buttigieg even made inroads in areas that had been considered Sanders's stronghold along the Vermont border. In addition, only 14% of young voters, Sanders's supposed die-hard base, cast votes. A surge?
3
Wow, all these changes attributed to Sanders have been part of the Democratic Party for years. The only thing Sanders may have accomplished is to push them to the front of the agenda. Many Democrats in the past were working on those issues. It was only a matter of time that they resonated. Your history seems to be lacking.
6
@David Gifford
Yes, sure, and certainly FDR espoused all of what Sanders stands for...but you must have been sleeping since Ronald Reagan. The Democratic Party has become Republican Lite. Otherwise, why didn't Sanders win the nomination in 2016 instead of Clinton?
That's what Mr. Kazin is getting at--Sanders slapped us all out of our nap. But, can he win?
2
@David Gifford None of that's true - Sanders's messaging has been consistent for nearly 40 years, a period in which none of his colleagues gave a hoot about it - not even a single nod.
The majority of this country is opposed to his policies. He’s just another side of the trump coin.
21
@Bob yes, and night is day.
@Bob
If the coin has Hitler on one side and FDR on the other
1
True enough Professor Luke-Warm.
Yet historical straight-jackets can be broken: not easily and not often, depending on the deeper currents of the economy and the society.
I hope that is what we are seeing. The whole establishment at the Times, CNN and the Party apparatus in Washington dread Sanders, and you've given him only grudging support here.
Yet only he has the programs to match the scope of the nations great problems in the Age of Inequality, for Citizens and Nature. Or to meet the challenge posed by the UN report from October of 2018. You remember that one, right? Which said the nature of the changes needed to be made in the economy were unprecedented in scope and urgency.
Only one candidate has sketched out a response to meet the scientists call.
36
@William Neil The mere fact that you feel the need to mock the name of the author in a Trumpian way does not help make your case. I don't think Sanders is the left's version of Trump - but some of his supporters surely are.
2
Yes he will transform the party much as George McGovern was able to do. Of course, most Sanders followers don’t know of George McGovern.
8
@Jeff C Yep-- BTW I voted for McGovern. My son jokingly tells people that " my father was one of the twenty-five people who voted for McGovern'
You are correct that Sanders' supporters don't know about McGovern. What's that old saying " those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it".
3
@Jeff C Dear Gawd, you took the words right out of my mouth. This election is shaping up just like Nixon vs McGovern 1n '72. The results will be almost an exact parallel should Sanders win the primaries.
1
For anyone worried about the Sanders ascent, he won more under-30 votes in NH than anyone else combined. The youth vote in Iowa rose 33% over 2016, giving Sanders a majority of the votes there. It's time to retire the axioms about a socialist (really a social democrat) winning in the United States. People are tired of healthcare, housing, and education costs galloping past wage growth. People see that the earth is burning, and want a green new deal. People want to reverse the unacceptable wealth inequality destroying this country. A political realignment is coming, if we vote for it
94
@Ted B People may or may not want those things. It doesn’t matter. What matters if you want to be elected President is what the 1.5 Million very moderate to conservative people in those swing counties along the I-4 corridor in central Florida or the suburbs outside Philadelphia want. In 2020, they and those living in a few other swing counties will decide the election.
9
Maybe those Floridians need to ask Republicans what they’re doing about salt-water intrusion, sink holes. Maybe some of them will remember walkin Lautin (spelling...again) Chiles.
2
I would love to see Bernie Sanders win, but in reading this essay I couldn't help feeling that none of the policies identified as 'Sandersian,' policies which I support by the way, offer anything to the majority of those who actually vote.
A higher minimum wage, medicare for all, and free college tuition sound less like something they'll get than like something they'll have to pay for to people who already have a good income, good health insurance, and a good education.
Add in the anti-semitism, sexism, and homophobia the Democratic field incites in the significant part of the population that still harbors those prejudices, plus the almost unfathomable fact that Deficit Don is actually gaining in popularity . . . .
And now the Democrats will spend 17 days campaigning in a state they have no hope of winning in November, and one with an electorate completely different from the one they'll need to appeal to in November. By the time they're done, the general election in Michigan and Pennsylvania may already be lost.
They will be in South Carolina, but the Democratic candidates need to speak, EVERY TIME THEY SPEAK, as if they were speaking to a factory worker in rural Pennsylvania. Because THAT'S the guy who will decide who our next president will be.
And right now he isn't feeling like the Democrats even know he exists.
27
@Green Tea Hmmm...good point about candidates campaigning in a State that they are not likely to win in Novmember....Another good reason to perhaps allow the DNC to set the schedule for primaries.
The Democratic Party will be far greater affected by the refugees from Trump's "National Conservative American Workers Party" than by the latest surge on the left.
Moderate candidates were the majorities in both Iowa and New Hampshire. They were the source of Democrat gains in the mid-terms.
Sanders is too Trump-like in his extremism, the thuggish behavior of his supporters, and his hatred of "elites". That will be a legacy of ashes. We can only hope both parties do not burn.
14
Excellent history lesson. I still recall George McGovern's campaign and prior to him Eugene McCarthy's challenge to president Johnson's Vietnam War. I agree that win or lose Bernie has championed issues that will remain--the environment, the excessive concentration of wealth and income, universal healthcare.
3
@john " I agree that win or lose Bernie has championed issues that will remain--the environment, the excessive concentration of wealth and income, universal healthcare."
So tell us again how Bernie was responsible for sponsoring legislation in the areas that you enumerated and how this legislation became law.
I thank Bernie Sanders for what he has done to make it possible for progressives to talk about positive change in the USA. His ideas and the "plans" put forward by Elizabeth Warren will eventually make the pendulum swing back toward the real middle.
That being said, I think it's plain that Sanders can't win in a national election, even against someone like Donald Trump. It's unfortunate that so many enthusiastic Bernie supporters can't understand that reality. I fear that their disappointment will taint the 2020 election and that makes me fear for the future of the nation.
25
@Betsy S
Perhaps. But will you vote for him if he wins the primary? I know that I will. I haven't been enthusiastic about Sanders in the past, but I wish him the very best and will do my best to support him if he keeps winning. It would be unfortunate if those who talk about the "real middle" and Sanders' inability to defeat "even Trump" would fulfill their own prophecy by doing what the NY Times excels at--i.e. giving Bernie Sanders bad press.
26
@PD I am no Sanders fan, but of course I'd vote for him over Trump.
13
It’s unfortunate that you think your version of reality is true. The reality is that a Trump v Bernie contest would be close and either could win. In this contest we will all have to pick sides and hope. But battles are not won by giving up before the first shot is fired, they are won by fighting hard to the very end.
2
I’m from Wisconsin. I will be in Milwaukee at the Convention as a volunteer this summer.
No matter Bernie or whoever - the goal and energy at the convention has got to be one thing - gather voters in November, lots, and lots, and lots of them, and get Donald Trump and his brood out of the White House.
And then, maybe having a few beers - the ones that made Milwaukee famous, as the ad goes. Nothing would be more satisfying than having a Milwaukee toast to seeing the Trump brood depart from our White House.
43
@MIMA You can’t “ gather voters” with worn out middle of the road reheated candidates.
Sanders remains an unelectable minor candidate. He would do well to retire and take care of his serious health issues.
15
@Me
Sanders seems to be refusing, thus far, to release his medical records. Uhmm.
I don't know whether Sanders and other very left party members have have made democrats less likely to win the election and paving the way for eight more years of Trump. While he is very popular most Democrats and few Independents and Republicans are more moderate or conservative.
If the Democratic candidate is from the very left, this leaves more votes for other parties. It is also less likely for Sanders' liberal programs to gain any traction in Congress.
4
@John
What you and others call "very left" is in fact the general, settled policy of all of Western Europe, and is most the case in the most successful ones. Sanders, for reasons best known to himself, labels himself as socialist, but he is no more so in current conditions (and perhaps less so) than Franklin Roosevelt was in his time.
108
@Roger Evans true, it is settled in Europe, but not here, where the elections are held. And that is what counts, not what is settled in the EU.
Let's not put the cart in front of the horses. Sanders won in New Hampshire, not surprisingly since it's his home state next door neighbor, by 1.4 percentage points for crying out loud! That's practically nothing.
Actually it should be seeing as a huge disappointment to his campaign.
33
@JEH Certainly wish he had won by more, but in this strong field of candidates it is worth celebrating by his supporters. Should he win the nomination I will be pleased, and if he does not, his supporters will vote Democratic.
1
And he also won it by a very thin margin, much less than 2016. He and Pete are actually going to get the same number of delegates from NH so maybe we should hold off on the “transformative standard bearer” talk for now.
5
@HPower and Innisfree - you just summed up the two Americas. The people experiencing the “good times” described by HPower largely fall into two camps - one is oblivious to the travails of those described by Innisfree and the other camp who are convinced that they are responsible (and therefore deserving) of their plight.
2
Thank you, Mr. Kazin, for your historical perspective.
It is very true that the for the past 30 years Republicans have been reshaping our nation to siphon resources upward to the wealthiest of our citizens. The current president is their dream come to fruition - lopsided tax cut, rollback of planet-friendly regulations, stomping on the separation of powers that was put in place by our founders.
In November, vote blue, no matter who.
37
The mood of the country is for a nicer gentler Trump. In this climate, all efforts are geared to make Bernie's campaign fail. The centrists will doom the country for more Trump look-alikes in the future. That is where the country is. Fascism is less scary than Bernie Sanders.
12
Thank you, Michael Kazin. If Sanders does not make it for some reason in 2020, it will be a temporary delay of the inevitable. I believe that a movement has indeed been launched that will not go away, long after he is gone. Sorry, DNC and corporate media, you may find a way to defeat Sanders this time around, but your worst nightmare has arrived. And it's not Bernie Sanders. Again, thank you, thank you, Michael Kazin.
207
Dear Craige Champion,
I read Michael Kazin's piece here as yet another effort to delay or defeat Sanders this time around, and its title is the dead giveaway.
Or to look at this another way, have you yet seen an Opinion piece here in The New York Times declaring that Bernie Sanders is the best candidate to win the Democratic nomination and to go on to crush Trump in November?
And Kazin is ever loyal to the Democratic Party he was born into and weened on—the same party that scandalously thwarted the rising (read: threatening) Bernie Sanders and his millions of supporters in 2016.
George McGovern's campaign manager for president in 1972 says Sanders will lead the Democratic party to an historic defeat. He's correct. Reading comments from the Sanders' supporters who say the demographics favor him remind me of a time when, at 16, I thought Barry Goldwater would beat Lyndon Johnson. Turns out, Lyndon went to bed every night praying for Goldwater to be his opponent. A major win by Trump over Sanders would result in a Republican House and Senate, a Supreme Court with six conservatives, and a transformed judicial branch by 2024.
22
@T. Walters
Do you remember that everyone predicted that Trump would not win, and he did. Would not be so quick to bury Sanders. He is a formidable Candidate.
12
George McGovern ran one of the worst campaigns in history so I would not place much faith in what his campaign manager thinks.
1
Only in the eyes of avowed socialists does Bernie Sanders have more moral authority than Mike Bloomberg. The self-made billionaire has spent his money heavily on progressive causes and is far more responsible for the Democratic takeover of the House in 2018 than Sanders.
Winning this election requires winning in Ohio, Wisconsin, Western Pennsylvania, Florida and Colorado. Bernie Sanders will surely win Bronx, NY. He'll never win in Racine, WI. Mike Bloomberg can do that... and take the Bronx too.
The outcome in New Hampshire makes this point. Sanders eeked out a narrow victory in a crowded field. But the combined votes of moderates Buttigieg and Klobuchar exceeded those of Sanders and Warren by ten points. If New Hampshire is a bellwether, the direction is to nominate a moderate.
A Sanders nomination is could well result in a landslide win by Trump along with Republican control of both House and Senate. That risk should be too high for even the most fervent progressive. Moreover if Sanders did win, the nation would be divided even further.
We need a candidate who will bring the country together to deliver a resounding repudiation of Donald Trump in a landslide Democratic victory. That landslide requires crossover votes and wins beyond urban centers and coasts. Moral authority that unites the nation is what's needed to beat Trump and Trumpism. Mike Bloomberg can do that. Bernie Sanders can't.
Mike Bloomberg/Stacey Abrams 2020!
66
@Mad Moderate Who makes a billion dollars? How is that even possible? No, you take a billion dollars.
13
@Mad Moderate "Michael Bloomberg Has Used His Fortune to Help Republicans, Too." - another NYT article.
"The former mayor of New York poured in $11.7 million to help re-elect the Republican incumbent, Senator Pat Toomey, who had led an effort, albeit unsuccessful, to expand background checks for gun purchasers, a top priority of Mr. Bloomberg’s.
Mr. Toomey won by less than two percentage points, handing a key victory to the Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell: The Republicans held on to control of the chamber by two seats. At the time, it was the most expensive Senate race the country had ever seen, and Mr. Bloomberg’s money was one of the largest influxes of outside influence."
6
@Kevin Gun control is one of his priorities and getting Republican support is necessary for it to succeed. A fine example of pursuing what's good rather than seeking perfection. On balance with other issues, gun control isn't a top priority for me. But I don't fault Bloomberg because it's one of his.
3
American public life is caught in the grip of two simultaneous emergencies. One is Trumpism. The other is the long-standing lack of any political party to represent the interests of ordinary Americans.
Picking Sanders at least assures that the second emergency will be addressed. With luck, Sanders will win, and alleviate both emergencies. No other Democratic candidate offers that chance. Except for Sanders, no candidate has any reasonable chance of addressing the second emergency at all. That makes Sanders a pretty reasonable pick.
159
@S.P.
"He alone can fix it" has a familiar ring. It's the kind of cult-of-personality talk that authoritarians encourage.
Warren at least has plans and a budget. I didn't agree with many of her policies, but she put in the work. Bernie and his bros are just lazy whiners that want someone else to do the work for them.
I am a very left liberal and I am absolutely repelled by Bernie because I think you ought to pay for what you get. If you do not pay for what you get, someone else is paying for you. Has Bernie even held a job? I'm seriously asking.
2
@J c
Does being a mayor, a Congressperson, and a Senator count? He has been all three. Burlington was reinvigorated by his leadership. It has a beautiful lakefront park used by all. Had he not been mayor, that lakefront would be owned and controlled by a private condo complex. Is that what you would prefer?
Bernie ‘20 = Corbyn ‘19 McGovern ‘72
As much as I agree with Sanders on a number of important issues, he will never be elected president and barring an incident such as shooting someone on 5th Avenue, his nomination would secure a second term for the incumbent. I definitely respect the role Sanders has played in bringing “liberals” out of the closet again, but it’s best to focus now on the imperative task of bringing together a sufficient majority to save the country - and world - from its current despot.
21
@John B. Bernie is not at all Corbyn. One reason Corbyn basically got booted was his anti-Semitism. And McGovern was another time, another country, figuratively. Give Peace a Chance. Give People a Chance. Give Bernie a Chance. Imagine....
2
@John B.
Bernie's core constituency are not liberals. They are reactionaries. Witness how many voted for Trump last time. How they abuse and threaten. Listen to them on eg Chapo Trap House--they *literally hate work* and wish someone else would do it for them.
Fighting fire with fire doesn't get us back to democracy. It burns the house down.
2
You assume there is a candidate other than Bernie who can beat Trump. Have you seen the other candidates? Everyone one of them is a clown who will give Trump no trouble. If you really want to beat Trump you should put your money on the one guy with an army of voters behind him who will not quit. Bernie brings a movement. The other candidates bring a pretty face.
If Sanders were to come clean and embrace the fact that his platform is aspirational and unlikely to be implemented until after he and his fellow Boomers are dead it would inject a dose of reality seldom seen in politics. The trouble is we don’t have the time to wait until the Me Generation shuffles off this mortal coil. The jury is in on Climate Change, the sentence remains to be seen.
7
The principal supporters of Bryan in 1896 were indebted farmers. They were facing bankruptcy due to extremely low market prices for agricultural commodities in what they perceived to be an economic system rigged against them. American industrial production was protected by extremely high tariffs, but neither party favored aid to the agricultural sector.
Like Sanders, Bryan favored a "socialist" agenda and ran his campaign on small contributions. Bryan was the first presidential candidate in American history to go to the people in his whistle stop tour. Hie negotiated an alliance with organized labor in the Northeast and ran African-American and White candidates in the South.
Bryan raised $300,000 from the people, but the first billionaire in history, John D. Rockefeller, matched Bryan's entire fundraising machine by writing one check to William McKinley. Altogether McKinley raised $7,000,000 from other millionaires. The newspapers labeled Bryan's supporters as "hayseed socialists."
The Democratic Party saw that it could not win in the South unless if it had to run against Bryan, so they endorsed him. Henceforth Bryan ran as a Democrat.
Although Bryan lost in 1896, most of the reforms he advocated eventually were achieved in the Progressive Era and during the 1930s when FDR was president.
Here is the 1896 platform of the People's Party: http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=4067
38
If you’re still yearning for the days of Centrist Hegemony, keep wishing. The horseshoe theory isn’t real, and Bernie is the greatest thing to ever happen to the working class. Centrists would compromise with the far-right before ever compromising with Bernie’s ilk and y’know what, good, we won’t be needing centrists come next January. Primary challengers will put moderate congresspeople and Senators in their place. A bold agenda will flourish. Stopping us or attempting to will only aid Trump. Perhaps that’s what the centrists prefer deep down. Bloomberg supporters and the moderate field will find out how the Bern feels on Super Tuesday!
145
Agree 100%. Bloomberg would rather have Trump.
12
@JM I agree. Western PA where I live is much like Western Mass in terms of outlook and issues (my wife worked in Palmer for a while). Voters in these and other forgotten geographic areas went for Trump because he at least pretended to pay attention to our concerns. It's time for the Democratic establishment to understand that dynamic and feel the Bern!
16
A centrist Democrat has always really been a Republican but without the guts to party with the criminals. The faster these disloyal centrists are eliminated the better. They deserve no candidate and no voice.
2
Reading the traditional "America, come home" antiwar message common to Democratic campaigns, I had a small brainstorm. I'd just been reading about the famous early social Darwinist sociologist William Graham Sumner, who during the original Gilded Age celebrated economic inequality much as Republicans do today. The short bio mentioned he'd (with borrowed money, no less) partook of the Civil War practice of paying another to do his compulsory military service for him.
When that practice was mentioned in my 8th grade social studies class, all students sneered at the injustice and hypocrisy involved. We were so naive, as it turned out, as it's still the case that the affluent universally get out of it; they're exempted. But back then, they at least had to pay.
My idea that now, recognizing that the poor are reverse-exempted from military service (often steered or forced down the military service path because poor, the reverse of the exemption enjoyed by the rich), we institute a "reverse-reverse exemption" for the rich compelling a military contribution as proportionate to their wealth as the poor's actual physical service is poverty-based.
My formula would be simple, for people earning over $500,000 per year, any year that are soldiers are in harm's way, to be exempted from military service, you must pay $.0001 (hundredth of a penny) for each dollar you have, with that rate increased to $.005 (half a penny) for each dollar you have for the very highest earners.
3
@anon (actually me, Andrew)
Actually, start the rate for $500,000 earners at $.001 (10th of a penny) per dollar earned, which would mean a $500 per year payment for exemption from military service; the $1 billion earner paying a half-penny per dollar earned would be paying $5 million per year for the exemption (which may seem like a lot, but she or he would be keeping $995 million; with some frugality like eating out a bit less, they could probably scrape by).
Hate to toot my own horn, but could anything possibly be fairer, and culturally more salutary in terms of affirming shared sacrifice?
1
It is amazing to me how fractured Democrats are. A New Hampshire town of 5 could not unanimously agree on one candidate. While a record field of 20 plus candidates ran, in the end it will most likely be a former Republican billionaire taking on Sanders or Buttigieg. The transformative figure will be Bloomberg, who has not appeared in one debate, who has skipped the early states, who has outspent all other candidates combined. We don't know what his real message is, only that "Mike will get it done". If beating Trump is the goal, which many Democrats say is their number one concern, they may have their guy. But everything Democrats have ever stood for will be lost in the process.
14
@Lambros Balatsias "transformative"? I doubt it.More of the same Wall St/Silicon Valley, big pharma, insurance companies and tax cuts for the rich sounds more like it.
18
The social transformation agenda doesn't need to be lost with Bloomberg.
Bloomberg appears to have the nouse for meaningful financial reform, taxation, wages, management, spreading the tax burden, raising the minimum wage and getting money flowing for everyone - which in turn leads to an increase in consumer confidence and spending onto business investment and development.
Either Warren or Klobuchar appear to have the nouse for social democratic reform. Fix social welfare, fix medicare - get some means tested user pays happening. Implement sustainable climate change policies and invest in them, and address issues of injustice. Reinstate sensible dialogue with America's allies and recommit to a 'rules based' collectivism with the UN, rather than undermining and destablising it (which will also be good for foreign investment).
So a combined ticket looks really good. Match Trump in election funding, and unseat him with fiscal responsibility combined with sensible and staged social reform, and reestablishing a good working relationship with allies - and deescalate with so called 'enemies'.
All of the above calls for cool and experienced heads which a good combined ticket, as above, can achieve.
You still get reform, but you get practicality with it.
6
"and if successful could well lose to President Trump"
Don't underestimate Senator Sanders, one aspect of his campaign that no other candidate can claim, including Trump, is the draw of the under 40 voters. A group that tends not to vote in elections. Sanders can bring them to the polls in the millions, and the moderates who detest Trump will vote Sanders just to get Trump out of the Oval Office.
267
@cherrylog754
Well ... that's a nice dream but Iowa showed that Sanders wasn't much of a draw to the polls. NH echoed that--he barely pulled out a win in a state that was hugely for him last time. People are moving away from Bernie -- me included. I voted for him last time. More evidence of that is the cumulative total of the moderates in NH. They in total have more votes than Bernie. Why are folks moving away? Mainly because he can't win against Trump. Evidence? Bernie isn't expanding his base, in fact its shrinking as the two contests show. He has liberal enclaves and even that support is waning. If he can't carry his earlier lead, then how can he win the general? He can't. Of course I will VoteBlueNoMatterWho, but he won't get that consideration in Wisconsin or Ohio. Sad but true. And he will lose.
11
@Alive and Well
Totally agree with you. I am a democrat and my husband is Independent. He does not agree with Saunders platform. I personally think he is the flip side of the Trump coin. So will not be casting my vote for him in the Maryland primaries. I don't believe he he will get the Independent vote which is needed in order to beat Trump. I am personally voting for Bloomberg and hopes that he wins the Democratic Nominee. I don't envision Saunders winning any of the Southern states.
5
@cherrylog754
Are you seriously arguing that he is more likely to win the general election because his support is strongest among those least likely to vote? Where is the evidence that he will actually increase turnout?
Bernie Sanders has the passionate support of a quarter of the most liberal voters. He hasn't shown an ability to expand beyond that.
8
Most of the major changes in our history took place in response to great events. Civil War, Industrial Revolution, WW l, Great Depression, and WW ll. They were pragmatic responses to collective distress and suffering not ideological agendas brought forward in relatively good times. Bernie may well have virtuous intent, but his message in good times, is not enough to carry the day. FDR was a pragmatist, and someone who could reach out across the nation to unify and heal. These times and Bernie's character are not at all the same.
20
@HPower Good times? There are joint suicide and opiod epidemics, half a million homeless, we are still entrenched in Afghanistan, young people are deeply in school debt and most of all we face a looming and ever-worsening climate crisis.
186
@Innisfree
It's good times for people who vote, and they won't be voting against Trump when Bernie wants to take away their private health insurance and force them to submit to a giant, untested government bureaucracy.
3
@HPower First, you completely overlooked the 1960's, which was a decade of considerable change in this country with the Civil Rights and Anti-war protests shifting the direction of domestic and foreign policy in fundamental ways. Second, the election of Trump is a clear signal that a large swath of the electorate wants a change from the neo-liberal/neo-conservative malarkey that so-called pragmatists have been putting forward for 30+ years while the gap between rich and poor widened.
8
"In fact, those candidates who manage to shift the party decisively are often not the ones who win the White House itself."
When I was in high school in NYC we were assigned to read They Also Ran: The Story of the Men Who Were Defeated for the Presidency by Irving Stone. Most were totally forgotten, whatever they might have contributed during their political career.
William Jennings Bryan, George McGovern, Jesse Jackson, Barry Goldwater, have one thing in common: they lost.
" Mr. Sanders wants to be the next Franklin Roosevelt — but if he can’t, better to be the next William Jennings Bryan or Jesse Jackson than the next William Howard Taft."
Mr. Sanders is not FDR and can never be. If he is the Democratic candidate he will lose the election and join the ranks of They Also Ran and be forgotten.
He is Mr. Trump's ideal Democratic candidate.
47
@Joshua Schwartz There is literally audio recording of Trump saying that he is most afraid of Sanders.
12
@Joshua Schwartz Hey Joshua you forgot to mention some other losers: Stevenson, Humphrey, Mondale, Dukakis, Gore, Kerry, H. Clinton — all Republican-lite Dems.
I don’t know if Sanders can win, but I’m certain that you don’t know that he can’t.
Bernie Sanders is one of the best things to happen to the party in years. Had Hillary Clinton and her minions in the DNC not attempted to sabotage Sanders at every turn in the 2016 primary he would have been the party nominee and our president. Clinton is apparently still out to get him, but her vitriol will only re-energize Bernie's base.
484
@John Jabo Should Bernie be the best thing for the Democratic Party. Should he capture the nomination, be prepared for another lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court of an ultra conservative Justice. Prepare for another four years of Trumpian travesties, and the resultant suffering.
31
@John Jabo Your comment worries me. Sanders had the implicit support of both the Trump campaign and the Russian "meddlers." They were using him to undermine Hillary Clinton because they expected her to win the election.
If Sanders had won the nomination, that would have changed. We still aren't seeing the full force of the opposition targeting Sanders.
Those jabs at "socialism" come the closest and Sanders is vulnerable to that kind of attack. I think Trump would love to run against Sanders.
34
@John Jabo How exactly did the DNC or Hillary "sabotage" Bernie causing Clinton to receive some 2 million more votes than his campaign? The DNC Emails certainly proved party insiders didn't like or trust Sanders but where did that translate into action that affected even a single vote ?
27