Bernie Sanders doesn't have to win the Democratic primary to do a lot of good

[BeyondGeography]

Jeb Lund
The Guardian

...Bernie is not rich and he does not spend his time figuring out how to convert political problems into wealth opportunities for people who are already rich. Many people depict this as a liability – mostly rich people who consider choosing the government to be exclusively their purview, and the sorts of people who become rich by overcharging rich people for campaign ads, advice and strategy. Both of these groups will tell you that Bernie has no chance, because it is in their bottom-line interests to make demonstrations of a lack of fealty to wealth seem politically anathema.

But, going off the last few election cycles, Bernie is also not this year’s “outsider candidate”, since that term has become synonymous with little more than a jerk who resists convenient branding. He will not, say, strike the self-aggrandizing and delusional pose of a Ralph Nader, who could only arrive at the conclusion that there was no essential difference between George W Bush and Al Gore by surveying the playing field from somewhere 20 yards up his own ass. Bernie’s not a neoconfederate gold-goblin who profited off racist newsletters, nor is he that man’s son, a right-winger failing to disguise himself as an alternative to the right wing. He’s not even Dennis Kucinich, who seemed like an all-right dude but failed to spark anything like a movement and now makes appearances at events like CPAC to be the both-sides-are-bad retired politician who can collect appearance fees from all sides.

...look, he’s probably going to lose. But there are two more things he’s not going to be when that happens.

One, Bernie’s almost certainly not going to be a sore loser and will probably stump for the eventual nominee. This will surely disappoint someone like Nader (from the vantage point of whichever cross he nailed himself to), but Bernie will probably try to nudge the system along leftward, even if he has to hold his nose to do it.

Two, his losing will have a point, and it may find its own movement. Bernie’s declared his unwillingness to use the current Super Pac rules to game the system and allow huge chunks of unaccounted-for money fuel his campaign. Instead, he’s collecting checks one townhall, YouTube video and stump appearance at a time. It’s still a hustle and it’s still gross, but it’s a more honest hustle – and ultimately the failure of even an honest hustle will illustrate the point he’s been making for years about the undemocratic nature of money in politics, and how an undemocratic system can’t be reformed by an undemocratic process.

More at:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/27/bernie-sanders-democratic-primary-do-good

[arcane1]

1. Whoever wins in 2016 will have the Sanders campaign hanging over their head.

And that can only be a good thing.

[daleanime]

2. But winning will do a lot more good.....

whereas giving up accomplishes almost nothing.

[quadrature]

3. how tall is Bernie? ...nt

[Midnight Writer]

4. Look at Goldwater's Quixotic 1964 campaign

He lost by a landslide, but he shifted the Republican Party to the right, a trend which is still strengthening 50 years later.

[Paka]

5. Sadly, McGovern didn't do that in '72.

[Midnight Writer]

6. True.

[Fearless]

7. He CAN win.