Much has already been made of the dust-up at the Nevada state Democratic convention. Was Bernie robbed by corruption? Was an unruly mob turned back? Opinions run hot through both social media and legacy media as the fight for the nomination heats up into a rather physical confrontation. But one point has rarely been made in all the noise:
What was actually at stake were two national delegates of the 4,765 total, or 0.04%.
For all the fuss you’d naturally assume that there was more to it than this, but there wasn’t. And the noise becomes much more than a juicy news story or a call to arms for a disgruntled group who believe they were robbed. It comes down to a question of strategy or how actual change is made, whether by a democratic process, a revolution, or some combination of the two.
By that standard what happened was completely shameful for a number of reasons.
While there has been a lot of heat generated over the discourse of the convention, very little light has been shown. There are cell phone videos of people shouting and one scene where the paramedics were called for reasons that remain unclear. It seems unfair to characterize what happened as “violent”, but it certainly was nasty.
Politifact has their analysis, which is probably the clearest, coldest one I’ve seen. Sanders’ supporters certainly won’t like it one bit, but as a veteran of conventions I have to say that it is very reasonable. These things are governed by rules, which in this case were very tough, set up to verify that the overall rules for delegate selection are followed.
What it ultimately comes down to is that 58 Sanders delegates didn’t even show up that day, leaving their crew outnumbered. You can’t have a “revolution” if people don’t even show up when they are supposed to.
For all the noise generated we have to ask ourselves, “What did this accomplish?” At the best, on that day two more National Delegates would have gone to Sanders, again 0.04% of the total. That doesn’t get Sanders any closer to the nomination. What needs to happen for his campaign to win is that superdelegates, which is to say party insiders, need to change their mind. How did the performance in Las Vegas help the cause of turning the supers? How was that a way to make friends and influence people?
Compare and contrast this with the movement that carefully kept its eyes on the prize and eventually made a big difference – the Civil Rights movement. When attacked by dogs and firehoses they didn’t strike back. They didn’t flinch. They didn’t call in death threats to the officials involved. They sang, “We shall overcome” to keep up their spirits as the made it clear that they were there and weren’t going anywhere until justice was done.
Imagine if the Sanders delegates had held their seats and started singing, loudly, never letting up.
The Black Lives Matter movement has also done a great job of staying non-violent and making their case known. The response to it, which has sometimes been violent and has often threatened more violence, has made it clear to the white world which once denied racism was a problem – racism is indeed still a problem. The demeanor of those involved speaks more loudly than their words.
That is how you make real change. That is how a movement becomes a force for progress.
Whether the goal of the Sanders crew is nominating Sanders or creating a permanent movement for progressive change, the incident in Las Vegas was nothing but a setback. The stakes in place were minuscule, but the outrage large and unfocused. Their leadership utterly failed them in terms of getting people to turn out, explaining the rules they were operating under, and developing a coherent plan of action.
Lashing out might “feel good”, but real change comes from applying that energy into something much more positive. You don’t have to be Dr. Martin Luther King to understand that – Malcolm X never shied from threats but also stayed organized and kept his eyes on the prize. Saul Alinsky demanded as much, too.
In the end we have to ask ourselves, “What was accomplished at this convention?” The short version is that everyone lost. The stakes were far too low for any other result once it became nasty and divisive. The battleground was poorly chosen and the leadership was terrible. Everyone who favors progressive action should be ashamed of what happened there because it only fuels more nastiness – which, if we learned anything from 1968, only plays to the candidate who best represents order and calm.
What really happened in Las Vegas? Nothing good for anyone.
I get that there are rules, the problem is that those rules favor the party favorites. It makes people unable to accept the more reasonable rules of order when they are side by side rules that are not. I think what happened is a boil-over of months’ long frustration at the DNC anointing Clinton before voting started. And unfortunately, it was timed to have that convention in Nevada, where the party is terribly disorganized and inept (I know because I lived there), right when it became clear that Sanders will not overcome the media bias, poor debate scheduling, database blocking, and closed primaries with massive exit poll discrepancies that have been in his path since the beginning.
Also…Nevadans. Not the best at civility. (I can say that, being from there.)
Thanks, Josh. I’m just dismayed at all this. I honestly think the stakes couldn’t be much lower for so much fuss, and no one was paying attention to what the downside might be.
I know, I’m a Clinton supporter. But I’m all for Sanders going to the convention, and I’m all for him raising a fuss. He should get a lot of representation in the platform, for sure.
But this … this does no one any good. It doesn’t help him or the cause, and it certainly doesn’t help Clinton. Bleck.
Nope. It doesn’t. But I think the media is missing that this was Nevada. The dysfunction there…just try to volunteer for the party. Seriously like they don’t want the help. Most disorganized group around. And Nevadans are definitely not representative of the majority of supporters on either side.
I hope and pray it was a totally isolated incident. That would be good for us all.
Let’s see what happens when it gets to New Jersey. 🙂
This is all BS. Sanders has lost and this cult won’t believe it.
I worry about the same thing. There are a series of “facts” which are not true that have been believed by the Sanders camp simply because they have been repeated often.
Interesting thought: according to Nate Silver over at FiveThirtyEight, if the Democrat Primary used the rules of the Republican Primary then Bernie would have less than half his current amount.
Not to go either way, but I think something has happened with Bernie: proving the Democrat Primary system is able to handle robust divides without allowing a ‘lesser-of-evils,’ e.g. Donald Trump, sucking all the oxygen out of the room.
Proportional delegates have kept this race alive a lot longer than it would otherwise, yes. That’s the main reason I get angry when I hear all this “It’s rigged!” talk. Yeesh.
Sanders just really makes me mad at this point. What a sore loser! It’s over Bernie and all you are doing is handing the election to Trump. Can’t you see that or are you too stubborn to admit you didn’t win and want to burn everything down out of spite?
That does seem to be what’s happening, yes. And it’s not good for anyone.
I wish everyone would just calm down. 2 delegates is nothing and the whole sorry episode only made them look bad. If they want to torpedo Hillary they missed by a wide mark.
That has been my feeling. The DNC chair hasn’t helped, but letting this burn out really only makes Sanders’ side look terrible.
Reblogged this on KCJones.