Consider the odd fact about Bernie Sanders that, after being an independent politician for decades, he briefly joined the Democratic Party in 2016 to run a campaign for the nomination of a party he wasn't a member of until he joined for purposes of utility, then, after the election was over, he dropped out of the Democratic Party instead of remaining in the party whose nomination he and his inner circle claimed he had a right to. Oddest in that is that even as the wreckage of the 2016 election was smoking, Sanders' cult like supporters were talking about him running again, in 2020 (when, by the way, he will be 79 years old) FOR THE SAME PARTY THAT HE JUST DROPPED OUT OF.
In thinking about that passage from his call in show appearance in 1989, it occurred to me why Sanders didn't want to be part of a political party, why he hadn't taken his own advice and started or taken over a third party, it is because he isn't so much an independent as the central figure in a political cult, one which worked well for him in the offices and state he has been elected in, one which can work to take advantage of the anti-democratic caucuses that so many states have stupidly kept instead of going to far more democratic primaries. I believe he is hoping that in the crowded field of Democrats already announced for 2020 that his cult will carry him to the nomination where he figures he'll have no trouble knocking off Trump. I think the peculiarities of Bernie Sanders' career as the head of a cult have given him both too much confidence and too much arrogance. That's one thing that can happen when, instead of having to compete with other party members, you're the head of your own political cult.
I think it would be a good idea for someone to look very hard at the financial side of the Bernie Sanders campaign in 2016 and his ongoing cult, I would look, especially, at Jane O'Meara Sanders' finances and Jeff Weaver's. The same level of scrutiny that is needed in the Trump regime should be applied to Sanders and his inner circle. I think there are considerable financial attractions to run another campaign, look how many perennial candidates have been grifting off of our corrupt political system while getting nowhere in the past.
As stated yesterday, I have, in the past, respected Bernie Sanders while learning that his actual record of political achievement has been a lot less than advertised. Barack Obama's campaign fueled on the Aaron Sorkin style rhetoric of aspiration was one thing coming from a relatively young man, though the actual achievement he accomplished in office makes it sound empty and hollow now. For a man in his late 70s who has spent a lifetime in politics, if that's all there is to his campaign, you have every right to look at the past record of achievement. And that doesn't match the hype.
The Sanders campaign in 2016 was based on working the caucuses, something which it's clear he already understood the potential of in that 1989 statement. I expect that's still what he's hoping to do. You can do that on the basis of a cult centered on a single figure, I don't think you can win the presidency on that basis, certainly not without the aid of billionaires foreign and domestic. Trump had the mass media to do the same thing for him, Sanders will not. He is deluded if he thinks they will let him get anywhere near the presidency, it will be worse than what the media did to George McGovern when he ran against the, then, most corrupt president in our history, something which was already obvious by the election in 1972. Such delusion is not uncommon among cult figures.
No comments:
Post a Comment