Should we fear Bernie?

[TurkeysGhost]

Getting ready for the whiplash of Biden supporters celebrating low youth voter turnout in the primary, bemoaning the same low turnout in the general.

 

[Shadowdweller]

In all seriousness, can someone explain who the Democratic Party establishment is? I mean, what are their names, what powers/controls to they have, and what actions have they actually taken to keep Sanders from winning the nomination?

Every time I see it brought up, it seems to be taken for granted that this person or body of people is a known thing and their actions are obvious.

Generally speaking, that would be the DNC - the controlling body of the Democratic Party. They do things like write the official party platform, organize and decide on the rules for debates, allocate party funds, etc. Chairperson Tom Perez, for example, supposedly nixed a debate about climate change policy this election cycle. They tend to have some influence with the press. Tbf, virtually none of the people using the word "establishment" actually have any idea what DNC officials can and cannot do.

 

[Upchurch]

Democratic establishment consists of the public political figures whom we've seen endorsing Biden in public.

That suggests, at this point, that “the Democratic Party establishment” is simply people who don’t support Sanders. In other words, Sanders’ more zealous supporters are complaining that Sanders isn’t winning because not enough people want him to win.

As to how the process works, here's a relevant summary from the book The Party Decides:

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/5312951-the-party-decides

Sure, but that’s “involved people are involved”, right? The corollary being that “people who aren’t involved aren’t involved”. Sanders has spent most of his career as an independent, not a Democrat.

But back to my question, has the DNC been doing anything to specifically harm Sanders?

 

[d4m10n]

But back to my question, has the DNC been doing anything to specifically harm Sanders?

I wouldn't say so, but then I wouldn't put forward the DNC as the actual nexus of establishment power. They were bound to publicly maintain an appearance of neutrality between two dozen candidates.

Instead, I would refer to the "persuasive power of a united front of inside players" who have lined up behind Biden, thereby signaling to the core party faithful whom they should support at the polls. Of these significant players, I would say Clyburn, Buttigieg, & Klobuchar probably tipped the balance.

 

[d4m10n]

That suggests, at this point, that “the Democratic Party establishment” is simply people who don’t support Sanders.

Sanders has received at least a few endorsements from Democratic Party figures with some clout (Congresswomen, etc.). They just happen to be vastly outnumbered, and that imbalance serves to signal to voters where the mainstream of the party wants to go.

 

[Upchurch]

I wouldn't say so, but then I wouldn't put forward the DNC as the actual nexus of establishment power. They were bound to publicly maintain an appearance of neutrality between two dozen candidates.

Ugh. Sorry. My brain merged your post with Shadowdweller's.

Instead, I would refer to the "persuasive power of a united front of inside players" who have lined up behind Biden, thereby signaling to the core party faithful whom they should support at the polls. Of these significant players, I would say Clyburn, Buttigieg, & Klobuchar probably tipped the balance.

I wonder how they decide who to endorse and how much influence endorsements actually have.

 

[applecorped]

Nothing to fear from Dead Man Walking

 

[d4m10n]

I wonder how they decide who to endorse and how much influence endorsements actually have.

Normally, individually, not that much. Collectively, they serve a signalling function. There's more to it than endorsements, of course. I strongly recommend this book if you're interested in a thorough and expert analysis.

 

[applecorped]

There are a shortage of competent Democratic Senate candidates in Massachusetts?

I may even nominate this

 

[JoeMorgue]

Again.. what do people think Political Parties are?

"Political parties are going to push candidate who will win and not fundamentally change the nature of the party" is one of those things I simply can't imagine what people keep having trouble with.

If someone walked into... Ben and Jerry's right now and told Ben and Jerry that he could make them more money if he turned Ben and Jerry's into a multinational chemical manufacturing conglomerate he'd wouldn't be welcomed with open arms despite being technically correct.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Again.. what do people think Political Parties are?

"Political parties are going to push candidate who will win and not fundamentally change the nature of the party" is one of those things I simply can't imagine what people keep having trouble with.

If someone walked into... Ben and Jerry's right now and told Ben and Jerry that he could make them more money if he turned Ben and Jerry's into a multinational chemical manufacturing conglomerate he'd wouldn't be welcomed with open arms despite being technically correct.

Winning and staying the same sometimes come into conflict.

If this was the re-election campaign for Hillary, the tone would be very different.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Winning and staying the same sometimes come into conflict.

If this was the re-election campaign for Hillary, the tone would be very different.

Yes and if in 2016 we had lost to a... normal, sane (within their context) mainstream Republican instead of... *gestures broadly at Trump* that it would be as well.

You're stuck in your mindset that we lost 2016 by not being progressive enough despite literally every single piece of reality saying otherwise.

A racist, xenophobic, pandering to the working class demagogue did not seize power of a populace that was angry, frustrated, and disaffected with the fact that progressivism wasn't happening fast enough.

 

[Suddenly]

A racist, xenophobic, pandering to the working class demagogue did not seize power of a populace that was angry, frustrated, and disaffected with the fact that progressivism wasn't happening fast enough.

As to labor issues? Yeah, that is pretty close to how it all went down. Trump was the culmination of the GOP campaign that the liberals were hypocrites that did nothing to help working people and just wanted your vote so that they could tax your employers out of business and give the money to inner city minorities that do nothing but sell crack.

Democrats fought against this by supporting NAFTA and otherwise not bothering except to show that they could be racist by supporting draconian criminal justice policies for drug crime and gutting welfare programs.

 

[Steve]

Subsidiary of "Them."

Giant ants?

 

[theprestige]

In all seriousness, can someone explain who the Democratic Party establishment is? I mean, what are their names, what powers/controls to they have, and what actions have they actually taken to keep Sanders from winning the nomination?

I won't go into the level of detail (names, actions) you're asking for, but this is how I see it:

In government, the Democratic establishment consists of those Democrats in the legislature who collectively choose the Majority/Minority leader in their chamber. This faction, collectively, wields their majority in the caucus to set the Democratic agenda, reward the productive, and punish the counter-productive. They decide which among their members get which committee seats, and which of the bills put forth get their support.

Outside of government, the Democratic National Committee obviously sets primary campaign rules, and probably does a lot of other less visible stuff in terms of raising money, setting agendas, picking winners and losers up- and down-ticket, etc. In addition, the DNC Superdelegates, as a class, can have a lot of influence over who gets what quid pro quo. You remember how Hillary Clinton made an effort to woo Superdelegates before the primaries had even started? That's because they're part of the Democratic establishment.

Finally, no discussion of an institutional establishment is complete without at least mentioning money. The biggest fundraisers, and the biggest donors, are going to have a lot of influence over the party. The owners and mouthpieces of the biggest media outlets on the left are probably also part of this category, but I'm not prepared to defend that bit.

 

[Suddenly]

I won't go into the level of detail (names, actions) you're asking for, but this is how I see it:

In government, the Democratic establishment consists of those Democrats in the legislature who collectively choose the Majority/Minority leader in their chamber. This faction, collectively, wields their majority in the caucus to set the Democratic agenda, reward the productive, and punish the counter-productive. They decide which among their members get which committee seats, and which of the bills put forth get their support.

Outside of government, the Democratic National Committee obviously sets primary campaign rules, and probably does a lot of other less visible stuff in terms of raising money, setting agendas, picking winners and losers up- and down-ticket, etc. In addition, the DNC Superdelegates, as a class, can have a lot of influence over who gets what quid pro quo. You remember how Hillary Clinton made an effort to woo Superdelegates before the primaries had even started? That's because they're part of the Democratic establishment.

Finally, no discussion of an institutional establishment is complete without at least mentioning money. The biggest fundraisers, and the biggest donors, are going to have a lot of influence over the party. The owners and mouthpieces of the biggest media outlets on the left are probably also part of this category, but I'm not prepared to defend that bit.

That's the detailed version.

In any large entity there is a critical mass that will resist change and will benefit from the status quo. They are, well, established and somewhat entrenched. Which is morally neutral but obviously can cause that entity to be alienated from it's supposed purpose when it fails to change.

The objections from Sanders supporters is mostly just complaining that the establishment is going to as an entity be hostile, and those who feel served by it will join together in defense. Which is why they are all supporting Biden against him.

They find this nefarious, but really without a core establishment no institution would be stable enough to ever be of practical use.

(I'm all for challenging the establishment, but not whining about the nature of establishment itself.)

 

[d4m10n]

Nothing to fear from Dead Man Walking

Not so!

 

[Craig4]

In all seriousness, can someone explain who the Democratic Party establishment is? I mean, what are their names, what powers/controls to they have, and what actions have they actually taken to keep Sanders from winning the nomination?

Every time I see it brought up, it seems to be taken for granted that this person or body of people is a known thing and their actions are obvious.

In the south, it's everyone who got the **** kicked out of them for walking across the Edmund Pettus Bridge. That goes a long way to explaining why Sanders did poorly with Black voters in the South.

 

[d4m10n]

Is "flattening the curve" among the considerations Bernie Sanders should weigh when considering whether to drop out sooner rather than later?

 

[applecorped]

It was not fun while it lasted