From The New York Times, May 29, 2016:
“Early optimism that this would be an easy race is evaporating…. While [Hillary Clinton] enjoys many demographic advantages heading into the fall, key Democrats say they are growing worried that her campaign has not determined how to combat her unpredictable, often wily Republican rival, to whom criticism seldom sticks and rules of decorum seem not to apply.
“Mrs. Clinton is pressing ahead with a conventional campaign, echoing the 2012 themes used against the Republican nominee that year, Mitt Romney. But Mr. Trump is running a jarringly different crusade: accusing her husband, former President Bill Clinton, of rape; proposing that the country conduct brutal methods of torture; and suggesting that South Korea and Japan be permitted to develop nuclear arms. Prominent Democrats say a more provocative approach is needed.”
A provocative approach…like that of Bernie Sanders, perhaps?
Sanders is as “jarringly different” as Clinton is boringly conventional. But the Times is too locked into business as usual to recognize visionary leadership and revolutionary change, even when it’s staring them in the face.
The rest of this article is all about what Hillary should do to up her game—ignoring the fact that between them, Sanders and Trump have already changed the rules of game beyond anything the mainstream Democrats could have imagined.
This is shaping up to be as bizarre a presidential race as the Gore/Bush contest in 2000, with its hanging chads and sleazy strong-arm banana republic tactics. The intervening years have only made it more apparent how important US politics is to the fate of the entire world.
But what has changed since 2000 is the strengthening of grassroots political awareness and engagement by virtue of the World Wide Web. We are not as easily manipulated anymore by the party lines as touted by their mainstream media outlets (for example, the New York Times for the Democrats, Fox News for the Republicans).
The obverse of the surveillance state that the established authorities have been building up is the people’s surveillance of the state. What began with the horrifying release of the Abu Ghraib torture photos has continued not just with big sting operations like Wikileaks, but also with an army of ordinary citizens wielding smartphones.
From police brutality to sexual assault to chemical leaks and abuse of animals, it is getting more and more difficult for people in power to get away with crimes. Victims have become survivors, and survivors have become testifiers and avengers, crusaders who lead the charge for truth and justice.
Trump and Sanders recognize the power of the sleeping giant of the American public, amplified through social media. HRC and the NYT still don’t seem to get it.
Donald Trump and his followers are off in their own reality-TV parallel universe, using the same media-driven tools and tactics to accomplish their bigoted, dangerous, hateful agenda. In their own echo-chambers, they loom large enough to take themselves seriously, and those of us on the side of the real American dream of “liberty and justice for all” must not underestimate the potential might of the Trump mob.
However, there are more of us than there are of them. The slumbering, lumbering American public just needs to get aroused, and it will defeat the thin ranks of bigots and the fascists among us.
I ask you: where do you see the most political excitement among the opponents of Donald Trump?
Not among the grim defensive ranks of the Hillary-ites.
Only in the youthful, idealistic, enthusiastic crowds pouring into stadiums across the country to cheer on Bernie Sanders.
The New York Times is right about this much. To win this race, the Democratic Party must abandon convention and embrace the brave new world we find ourselves in now. The Clinton dynasty, like the Bushes and the singular Mr. Trump, are 20th century leftovers.
If the Democratic Party is to survive the turbulent 21st century, it must support forward-looking politicians with new ideas. It must support Bernie Sanders. And so must we.