Hey.
So, many people are seemingly afraid of the Sanders campaign. There's a fear that if he were the nominee, he'd lose in November. There's a fear that he lacks some essential qualities of leadership, and/or that he would struggle to govern as President. There's a fear that he doesn't possess necessary demographic characteristics, charisma, or even a properly Presidential first name.
While I'm completely on board with Sanders, I think these fears--yes, I think such concerns boil down through anxiety to fear--are legitimate, if at the very least in the minds of those who experience them. I don't blame anyone for being anxious or fearful about Sanders, because of course there is so much at stake. So I think it's very important to discuss these fears & their origins/sources openly in order to potentially move past them.
Subcroissant, the subconscious...
Because this deals with fear, this may touch on CT, by way of description; certainly not endorsement.
McGovern: I might seem out on the limb here because I hadn't even been born, but honestly I think it helps. The circumstances involved in the campaign, the other candidates, the delegates at the Democratic Convention, and that election were unique enough that it's a mistake to draw broad conclusions about American liberal identification from that crushing loss. I think McGovern traumatized many Democrats, who have as a result believed ever since, and somewhat mistakenly, that the USA would never elect a liberal. At that time, the Right was in ascendance at the lowest levels of local government, & the hippie-punching culture war was beginning in earnest, so there was a real cultural swing in motion.
However, this is not 1972. Much has changed. SO SO MUCH. The calamities of Thomas Eagleton & the delegate support at that convention that resulted in the creation of superdelegates is unlikely to repeat, and as some have mentioned, perhaps these very superdelegates will prevent Sanders from winning the nomination. I'm getting ahead of myself, but I hope my point has been made: McGovern's 43-year-old defeat is no reason to oppose Sanders for the Democratic nomination.
Too Old: Sanders is only 6 years older than Clinton. Yes, the age gap looks larger than it is, and sure, some people will vote based on that. It can't be helped, but we'll see how primary voters weigh that issue. At least the inexperience tag placed on Obama will carry little to no weight this time around.
I also have faith that in November, many people will vote for an older honest person over a slick younger person with better hair (backed by a shitload of terrible ads everyone hates). I can accept that others will not feel that way. But the fact that Sanders is of the same demographic that are the most reliable voters, AND he is unambiguously in favor of not just preserving but EXPANDING Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid, tells me that he is the best candidate for transpartisan appeal among the 60+ demographic. Plus, Millennials won't vote against Bernie based on hair. If anything, it's more authentic, more honest, and THAT means votes. Which leads into...
Charisma: Bernie isn't Obama. Then again, no one else is, not in this field. Clinton is a good, likeable person... but it's hard to say she isn't scripted. Being scripted helps in staying on message, but my sense of the electorate is a hunger for authenticity and honesty, and the script can go from fine line to over the edge here. Sanders easily stays on message but doesn't seem to need or follow any script. He's not tall, he uses his arms frequently... yet he's authentic, he's warm, he allows his fire to rise up, and he's very relatable as a result. I honestly don't see a charisma deficit except as a reflection of the current popularity gap.
Polls: Um... fuck these. Outside the early states, none of these matter until next year, and you cannot change my mind on this. They simply do not matter, and if you claim they do, I will smile very nicely as I insist that you are wrong. This is classic Anxious Fear: looking at Clinton's numbers V. Republicans now, then comparing to Sanders' numbers V. those same Republicans, and seeing inevitable fact, is a mistake.
My hobby is stormchasing; I've taught myself the basics of meteorology, emphasizing severe weather. There are multiple forecasting models used by mets, & these are built to analyze & forecast for different periods of the future: short, medium, and long range forecasts. National polling for next year is at this time, if anything, less accurately predictive than the long range forecast. Now, that forecast may yet turn out to be correct, but would you put anything of great value at stake on it, if you didn't have to? No, of course not. Just as the weather forecast can change drastically over a week, so too can national polling change over the course of several months to a year. Just stop with the national polling argument, because while everyone has an opinon or sense, no one knows what will happen.
Not Enough Money: Ah, now we're getting into it. Money Wins Elections. This is indisputable... but the extent to which Money wins, and in what circumstances can it be defeated, is disputable. We won't know if the Sanders small donor money machine will succeed or fail until next year, but until then, anyone saying to themselves, "I love Bernie, BUT..." and then puts Money as the BUT, has little to lose by committing now and conceding later if need be. Let's try to Wellstone this, keeping in mind it may not work. If Sanders gets the nomination via grassroots superiority, as Obama did, then all the Democratic fundraising power out there will go his way... UNLESS:
Too Anti-Establishment: Welcome to conspiratorial territory, the subconscious and all it contains in its murk. Here lies your deepest darkest fear, and you know it. You are afraid that even upon winning a majority of delegates, somehow the superdelegates will band together to prevent a Sanders nomination, because they are too corrupt & bought off to allow a democratic socialist independent to swoop in and defeat America's First Female President Who Is Also Totally Acceptable To The Oligarchs. You are afraid that even upon surmounting that theoretical obstacle & winning the nomination, that the money for November would swing so far Right that Jeb! or Walker or Rubio or whoever would cakewalk to the White House on a road paved with red-baiting, hippie-punching, anti-Semitic, dementia-alluding threats to everyone's job in perpetuity.
Worse, that the DNC would unofficially yet indisputably meekly step aside and let that happen, because of their own Stockholm Syndrome relationship with their Wall Street captors.
Hey, I get it. System Mountain is high, the trail is hard, and at times there's lava coming down. It sucks. We're supposed to defer, and take whatever crumbs we get, as our betters make all the decisions, coating them with representatively democratic veneer. But even if it were to turn out that way--and I do not believe or suggest that it will, only that such a fear is real--we'd need to find that out. And sooner is always better than later.
So, if you are supporting Clinton because you believe in her, and are champions of her positions & policies, that's fine; we'll hash that out in the primary process.
But if you are supporting her only because you have some of these reservations about Sanders, please reconsider. There's a real opportunity here, and we need you. There is of course NO guarantee of ultimate success; we need to keep expectations real for our own sanity and wellbeing. However, the potential for success is certainly worth all the effort we can muster. If we give Sanders the same effort we gave Obama, let alone MORE, a new Probable may yet emerge from the merely Possible. Sanders himself reminds us at every opportunity that he can't be elected without a movement, & that movement, if it emerges, will also have the potential for a Democratic Congress. I do not see this potential for Clinton at all, not unless she drastically changes, and I see no evidence that she is likely to change in that way. Of course she'll have my complete support if she wins, but until the second she does, I'm putting my effort into the potential movement.
What will be will be; fear not.
Thanks.