The Atlantic: "The Pragmatic Case for Bernie Sanders" (MUST READ ANALYSIS!)

[Attorney in Texas]

The Pragmatic Case for Bernie Sanders - Political and social change emanate from persistent pressure for a just world, not settling for what is “realistic” before even getting to the negotiating table; here is an excerpt from this great analysis:

As Bernie Sanders defies expectations with a resounding New Hampshire victory and a virtual tie in Iowa, ... On the pragmatics of electability, nearly every major national poll consistently shows Sanders equaling or bettering Clinton against all Republicans. Polls show Sanders nearly tied with Clinton nationally and rising. On electability, if anything, Sanders has the edge right now. There is nothing empirical to suggest Clinton’s superior electability—quite the contrary given her loss to Barack Obama in 2008 and her flagging campaign this year. ... Sanders can inspire massive Democratic and liberal Independent turnout and likely win over many white working-class swing voters.

Clinton’s most persistent attack—parroted by mainstream media—claims that Sanders’s agenda is perhaps laudable but unrealistic. Moderation is more effective, she claims. However, this is a misreading of American politics and factual comparisons of the candidates’ track records.

The Clinton pragmatism frame is a strangely naïve and fatalistic misjudging of political culture and dynamics. During most of his eight years in office, President Obama has tacked to the center in hopes of bipartisan compromise on everything from gun control to the budget, only to be met by relentless Republican obstruction, even labeled a “socialist dictator.” Republicans did much the same during Bill Clinton’s first term—pushing him more deeply into the political center, where, with plenty of support from Hillary, Preisdent Clinton and the Gingrich Congress gutted welfare, enacted a deeply compromised crime bill, and reversed bank regulations (something Hillary is OK with even after the financial crisis).

No matter where a Democratic president is on the spectrum, Republicans block and push rightward. In her campaign, as in the past, Hillary Clinton has compromised her agenda before the political battle even begins.

Based on her record and political positions, it is not credible for Democrats to hope that a Clinton presidency can deliver progressive change. It is not pragmatic to hope that Clinton, by dint of her centrist leanings, can work with Congress on anything other than a centrist agenda—at best. To the extent that she gets things done with a Republican legislature, based on an electoral mandate of centrism, there is zero prospect of progressive reform on Wall Street, corporate accountability, wealth inequality, or campaign finance. In politics, if you demand a mile, you get a foot; demand a moderate inch, and at best, you get a centimeter.

On the other side of the ledger, history shows that political and social change emanate from persistent pressure—organizing and arguing for a more just world, not settling for what is deemed “realistic” before getting to the negotiating table. Remember when gay rights and gay marriage were “unrealistic”? Remember when voting rights, desegregation, and other basic justice were far from “pragmatic”? They became real through years of dedicated, principled, idealism... Clinton’s brand of pragmatism surrenders progressive change to centrism. If liberals and progressives support a $15 per-hour minimum wage, universally accessible health care, fair taxes on corporations and wealth, and meaningful reforms of Wall Street and campaign finance, they should elect a president who actually fights for these things. Sanders has spent his whole political life in pursuit of these ideals, and his campaign has moved these conversations to the fore; Clinton’s record on the other hand shows a consistent pattern of following, not leading on these issues. Clinton’s brand of pragmatism surrenders progressive change to centrism even before negotiations begin.

The whole article is well worth a full read!

[californiabernin]

1. Hillary Clinton, you're no leader. Nt

[Matariki]

2. "not settling for what is “realistic” before even getting to the negotiating table"

that can't be repeated enough.

[LWolf]

3. I hope all the DU pragmatists take notes.

I've been told here for years and years that the reason they support the candidates they do is because they are pragmatists.

Thank goodness we've got Sanders to offer to them.

[uponit7771]

4. Sanders message reach is narrow cause he's not even trying to be pragmatic but the revolution

... has too many asterisks by it to be taken seriously.

Revolution with asterisks is not a revolution - its marketing

[longship]

6. And Henry Kissinger is not a huge asterisk?

And a vote on Iraq war?

And, and, and...

Both candidates have asterisks. That's the way these things go.

I will make myself clear here. I will enthusiastically support and vote for the Democratic presidential nominee in November, no matter who it is. But I am supporting and voting for Bernie Sanders in the MI primary.

I ignore the utter spin of Democratic Party asterisks when it comes to opposing the horribly evil GOP, who go way beyond mere asterisks.

Your mileage may vary, however I suggest that you consider the alternatives.

My best to you.

[uponit7771]

8. Yeap, a big disgusting one at that and so is Mike "Obama is a master" Bigga and Cornell West right?

[Warren DeMontague]

10. Saying something you dont like is equivalent to carpet bombing cambodia?

Or the probably treasonous sabotaging of the '68 paris peace accords which directly led to 5 more years of US involvement in Vietnam and countless deaths on all sides?

Im sorry, but i have trouble believing that cornell west or even "killer" mike have body counts anywhere approaching that of Kissinger.

[longship]

5. Which is why I support Bernie Sanders in the MI primary.

Yes, I will support Hillary Clinton if she gets the nomination, but from my perspective is that the alternative is giving up. The only thing that saves her is that the alternative is too horrible to imagine. I pray that that is sufficient.

As the Zen Master said, "We'll see."

(One of the most powerful scenes in Mike Nichols' last film "Charlie Wilson's War" based on fact. Yes, that was Tom Hanks and Philip Seymour Hoffman, both playing real people.)
As Charlie Wilson once said, "Remember! That ball keeps on a-bouncing!"

Support Democrats this year or we lose big.

[Warren DeMontague]

11. The parable of the farmer's luck.

Unfortunately that is way over the head of the level of our current political discourse.

[Ferd Berfel]

7. ...we cannot survive any more 'Centrist' agendas !

"Based on her record and political positions, it is not credible for Democrats to hope that a Clinton presidency can deliver progressive change. It is not pragmatic to hope that Clinton, by dint of her centrist leanings, can work with Congress on anything other than a centrist agenda—at best"


Obama was pragmatic and completely wasted the first few years of his term

[Attorney in Texas]

15. nice graphic

[Live and Learn]

9. K&R nt

[Salviati]

12. I am very well aware that Bernie would have to compromise, like any other Democrat that we elect...

... But I am certain that I can trust Bernie to compromise with our best interests in mind, and I can be positive that whenever Bernie comes to a compromise, he's going to be leaving the table hungry for more.

[senz]

13. Thank you!!

So glad you're here, AiT.

[Vote2016]

14. excellent analysis