Bernie Sanders is in big trouble: You don’t have to be a neoliberal shill to see the cold, hard fact
I'M POSTING THIS FOR DISCUSSION--NOT BECAUSE I AGREE WITH IT
http://www.salon.com/2015/10/28/bernie_sanders_is_in_big_trouble_you_dont_have_to_be_a_neoliberal_shill_to_see_the_cold_hard_facts/#comments
...But if you want to know any of the reasons why Sanders is in trouble, you can start with the news yesterday that Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown has endorsed Clinton. As Matt Yglesias points out, Brown would be perhaps the most natural endorsement for Sanders in the entire Senate. He is an old-school liberal, pro-union and anti-free trade. Ideologically and personally, he and the senator from Vermont are very close. They have worked together on writing and introducing legislation as recently as earlier this month.
Yet Brown joined 33 of his Senate colleagues who have already endorsed Clinton. From a pragmatic political viewpoint, the move makes sense. Brown has been mentioned as a possible vice presidential candidate for Clinton. He represents that most swinging swing state of Ohio, which makes his being on the ticket very attractive for her and the party. If he stays in the Senate, he’s up for re-election in the 2018. Since getting Democratic voters out to the polls in the midterms is always tough, an endorsement from President Hillary Clinton could be very helpful. Not to mention the money that the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee will be more likely to contribute to his campaign.
In terms of the Bernie Sanders campaign for president though, Brown’s endorsement is another sign that Sanders is being beaten in the invisible primary for the Democratic nomination. And winning the invisible primary is still a hugely important step for a Democrat, one that the Vermont senator has either neglected or just flat-out lost. For anyone unfamiliar with the term “invisible primary,” here is a pretty good explainer. In brief, the invisible primary is the conversation that takes place between different factions and leaders of a party in the year leading up to the start of voting in Iowa. This conversation results in the party starting to coalesce behind a front-runner. If there is more than one strong candidate, this can go all the way up to the convention. If there is only one clear front-runner, the party will start lining up early behind him or her.
This is what has happened with Hillary Clinton. Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight has been keeping track of endorsements with this chart, which makes it starkly clear just how much of a lead Clinton has over Sanders in that area. Something to keep in mind is that many of those endorsers (including Sherrod Brown) are superdelegates, who are free to pledge their support to a candidate regardless of how the voting went in their state’s primary. Two months ago, Bloomberg reported that Clinton had already unofficially locked up commitments from 440 of the approximately 713 superdelegates who will cast ballots at next summer’s Democratic convention...
SINCE NONE OF THOSE DELEGATES ARE CEMENTED IN PLACE, AND SINCE THE CLINTON FOUNDATION IS IN DEEP DOO-DOO, I REFUSE TO ACCEPT DEFEAT BEFORE THE BATTLE HAS EVEN STARTED.
AND WHILE THE PARTY MAY THINK IT'S IN CHARGE OF THE PROCESS, THEY HAVE ANOTHER THINK COMING. IT'S OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE, FOR THE PEOPLE, AND AS DEMOCRATS, THEY BETTER START ACTING LIKE IT.
= new reply since forum marked as read
