Here is how Peter Daou at Blue Nation Review describes the change:
Bernie Sanders has done many things right in this race — and one thing very wrong. It is the wrong decision that I believe partially accounts for his poor showing on March 15th.
Let’s start with what’s right about Bernie’s message: he is a passionate purveyor of core progressive principles who has activated and energized millions of young voters. He speaks with conviction about crucial issues and he has helped bring those issues to the fore in 2016.
Here’s what’s wrong, terribly wrong: He caved to the pressure from his campaign manager Jeff Weaver and top aide Tad Devine to ride the ever-present wave of Hillary hate and to go after her character, impugning her honesty and insinuating that she is untrustworthy.
As I’ve argued repeatedly, Bernie’s Wall Street dog whistle is a barely concealed attempt to accuse Hillary Clinton of corruption, despite the fact that he lacks a scintilla of evidence to support that claim. No matter how lofty and inspiring his message, it is deeply unjust – and frankly, reckless – to run a campaign premised on the destruction of Hillary’s character through false innuendo. Especially when Democrats are facing a dangerous opponent like Donald Trump in a general election.
At some point in late 2015, Bernie’s campaign message and the behavior of his supporters became less about something and more against someone. Bernie’s campaign team determined that his path to victory runs right through Hillary’s integrity.
Tad Devine, Jeff Weaver, Cornel West, Killer Mike, and other Bernie aides and surrogates have led the charge against Hillary’s character, calling her honesty into question with no justification or evidence.
It has been a grave mistake for his candidacy, perhaps fatal. You can’t spend 2015 promising to run a positive, issue-driven campaign, then pivot in 2016 to a full-bore character attack against Hillary Clinton.
Going forward, it would be unwise for Hillary’s supporters to pressure Bernie to drop out, despite the prohibitive delegate math. All we should ask is that he drop the character attacks and stay positive.
(The image of Bernie Sanders above is by DonkeyHotey.)
I more than agree with your basic post. At first I thought it was just some of his fanatical and adolescent supporters -- but then Baier asked him, on the FOX Town Hall, if he considered Hillary 'honest and trustworthy' and he responded "We'll let the voters decide that."
ReplyDelete'
But it has been much worse than that, throughout the wwhole campaign. I was one of the many who started out 'we've got two very good candidates. I prefer Hillary, but wouldn't mind if the choice were Bernie.' I think you did as well.
'
Every time, it seems, he has opened his mouth, he has sunk in my admiration. Now, while nothing would be worse than Trump or Cruz, I hate to say it, but if the choice were Kasich or even Ryan -- as awful as both of them are and I am not fooled by Kasich's demeanor -- and Bernie, by now I might go with them instead of Bernie. (Even the 'last resort' argument about SCOTUS might fail, because I have no idea who Bernie would pick, or whether he would even conceivably nominate someone even possibly confirmable.)
'
I actually think a Sanders presidency would wind up setting Liberalism back decades. (I also have to say that The Tape has already made a Sanders victory next to impossible against anyone but, maybe, Trump. After months of making surprising headway in convincing people that socialism and communism were two different -- and usually antagonistic -- ideologies, that one tape of him praising Castro and the Ortegas destroyed all his progress -- and his excuse that he was talking against 'regime change' was limp and belied by his own words elsewhere. And both of us are old enough to remember how the McCarthy days were.)
'
But I had come to the opinion I expressed before the tape came out. It is amazing how simply ignorant he sounds after having been in Congress for 25 years, ignorant of both the powers and the weaknesses of the Presidency, ignorance of what are state matters and what are federal matters, ignorance of how many problems are coming from state legislatures and the importance of down-ballot candidates.
[This is the site where there are character limits, so Part 2 to follow]
Part 2
ReplyDelete'
What's worse, he doesn't seem to understand that every President is put in a situation where he needs the support of members of his party, on issues where their constituents are fiercely opposed to his position. That's when he needs to have some favors to call in. There is absolutely nothing wrong or even questionable in his saying 'Remember when I stood up for you. Well, you know I am asking you to do a right thing, and now I need you to stand up for me." But, so far there's no evidence he will have anyone to say that to, and he has no history I can recall of helping Down-ballot Democrats.
'
It's much more than that. We know, Lord, we know, what he opposes as far as trade deals go -- which seems to be almost anything -- but we have not the slightest idea what he is FOR when it comes to trade. At times he seems to be discussing an almost mercantilist self-sufficiency as a goal, other times he speaks about the importance of trade in a global economy, but not how he'd want that conducted. Does he want a return to tariffs and trade wars?
'
Then there is the whole question of foreign affairs, and I am not discussing the BIG issues like ISIS, the Middle East, Russia, Ukraine, etc. Presidents can be swept into a crisis involving Moldova and Romania, Thailand and Vietnam, or Uganda and the Gabon at a mpment's notice, and so far I've seen no evidence he could find most of these, because he just doesn't seem interested -- and he refuses to even tell people who hiss advisors on this issue are.
'
And both trade and foreign affairs raise the question of prioritizing human rights. We, obviously, can't refuse to deal with all of the countries with bad human rights records, but we need some idea as to how he is prioritizing on this question, and I can't answer this.
'
And one final comment on trade. One reason why I could never be a socialist is that socialists are supposed to be 'Internationally minded' (Workers of the world, unite) but whenever they've seen power, they have turned even more protectionist than the conservatives, pushed by Union supporters. Yes, it is sad when any plant closes, if the plant is moved even a couple of hundred miles away. But it matters if it is moved to Mexico, because it stimulates their economy, puts more money into circulation, raises their wage rates, and lets them buy our products. (And some one should tell the anti-immigrants that it also gives Mexicans hope that they can survive in their own country and lessens the push towards our borders.
'
Of course, this requires us to begin to renegotiate some of the pacts to make sure the recipients pat their workers well, have enforceable worker safety solutions, and human rights in general. I'd love to know how Bernie would deal with this sort of conflict between two good goals. I have no idea how Bernie would handle this dilemma or even if he'd recognize it.
'
And I suppose, even with all of that, I'd still vote for him, but it wouldn't be easy.