Much has been made of Bernie’s “Inability to generate big turnout”, because it’s the “entire justification for his campaign”. Let’s put aside for the moment that there is no longer a disastrous war and complete economic implosion taking place this year (little things that tend to motivate people to pay attention to politics) And let’s not discuss why Clinton ( once again in the political fight of her life ) can’t inspire people to come out for her. Let us for a moment look at the “entire reason” HRC claims to be the strongest candidate…
“I’ve been tested and won”
I live in New York, and I’m old enough to remember 2000. In 2000 the democratic sea parted for Clinton as she carpet bagged from Arkansas into NY with a giant campaign war chest and tons of political endorsements. A lot of good long time Democratic talent was intimated away from a run against Clinton. Her challenger in the Primary that year was political Juggernaut and orthopedic surgeon (for real, her primary opponent was a surgeon with ZERO political experience…. I voted for him). Her opponent in the general… another GOP juggernaut named Rick Lazio who I think is selling vacuum cleaners door-to-door up in Buffalo now (<- I made that up). So with all those advantages in 2000, and down ticket from an enormously popular (in NY) candidate named Al Gore she managed to... wait for it... under perform Gore by 5%. She won with 55% of the vote when Gore carried NY by over 60%
So to rehash she carpetbagged her way into one of the deepest "Blue" states there is, had all the tailwind in the world behind her, and managed to turn it into a legitimate race against political titan Rick Lazio.
It has always been the same story ; a total lack of authenticity. Seems trivial but I remember a moment where Clinton who’d previously claimed to be “lifelong” Chicago Cubs fan showed up at a Yankee game decked out in Yankees gear. The pandering to New Yorkers was nauseating. Then 9/11 happens and for a moment the vitriol against most political leaders evaporated. Flash forward to the 2006 race. With the Iraq war in complete disaster the GOP sacrificial lamb was John Spencer but that was only after Fox News resident-lazy-eyed-Obama-basher Jeanine Pirro ran and dropped out. I believe the GOP congressional leadership passed the hat (← I made that up too) and threw in few grand behind Spencer. That didn’t stop Clinton from raising (and spending) $37 Million in defense of her seat. She won handily with 67% of the vote.
Important to note here; Just how costly her votes for the Iraq war had been for the American people were only starting to come into focus in 2006. The economic implosion hadn’t happened yet, so her pro-wall-street positions were not under the microscope. The first election she faced with a real (albeit long shot) opponent she lost. That election was the 2008 Primary.
She faced then, an opponent much like Bernie. Obama faced strong head winds (Establishment support, “Super Delegate” discouragement, less money, less name recognition, fewer big money donors, largely written off initially by MSM ) Obama beat her by showing amazing political talent against some of strongest political head winds ever seen.
So now in 2016-
Clinton once again has all those advantages, but multiplied by a factor of two. She has twice the “super” delegate support. She has establishment DNC politicians helping her campaign in every way they know how. She has added Secretary of State to her resume ( Does anyone think for 1 second that that appointment, and promise to “clear the field” wasn’t the deal necessary for HRC to not to contest the 2008 primary & pursuit a “brokered” convention?) She got the debate schedule that she wanted. 2016 was supposed to be a layup for Clinton. Just about every advantage possible has been afforded her and she still finds herself nearly tied in national polls among Democrats and losing badly among Independents. Did I mention her favorable rating isn’t so favorable (somewhere near -20).
I’m clearly supporting Bernie this cycle, and the obvious counter point would be to say “who has Sanders beaten?” But being the “grizzled”“Tough” political veteran who’s “consistently beaten the GOP” is not the reason Sanders is giving to vote for him. There’s an argument to be made that Sanders smaller profile victories in VT against the GOP, on behalf of minority, LGBT, and poor communities took more political courage, and demonstrated more consistency than HRC. Let’s not concede to “conventional wisdom” that because he represents a small mostly white state that he’s some “hay seed” without the “political chops” of HRC.
After all as Spike Lee would say “He’s Bernie from Brooklyn”