SANDERS’ CAMPAIGN CAN’T WIN
The prospect of nominating him terrifies the Democrats
In chasing the Democratic nomination, Hillary Clinton may have the governors, the senators, the celebrities and the baby boomers.
But Bernie Sanders, the sour septuagenarian, has the kids. Among the young and the hip, The Bern rocks.
Analyst Nate Silver says the “most eye-popping statistic” from the vote in Iowa was that Sanders beat Clinton 84 per cent to 14 per cent among Democrats under 29. He won voters between 30 and 44 by 21 per cent. Among those older than 45, Clinton won easily.
Sanders has the means to carry his surprising campaign into the spring — largely because of his popularity among millennials.
The division among Democrats is “really something,” Silver says. True, Barack Obama led Clinton among young people when he beat her for the nomination in 2008, but by far less. He was also much younger than Clinton. At 74, Sanders is six years older than Clinton.
Silver explains that Sanders is popular among young Americans because they are not threatened by this selfproclaimed “socialist.” They associate the term with the affluent, generous industrialized democracies of northern Europe.
Older Americans link socialism with the communism of the Soviet Union, evoking the failed command economy and political repression.
In a May 2015 poll, Silver notes, a plurality of voters between 18 and 29 had a favourable view of socialism. Among those 65 and older, 15 per cent had a favourable view.
This does not mean that young supporters of Sanders want to nationalize General Motors. But they’re fine if Sanders raises the marginal personal income tax rate to 77 per cent among the richest Americans. They worry about economic security and embrace his promise to tame Wall Street. Their commitment is genuine and admirable.
So they’re filling his rallies, some wearing a Bernie face mask with a scowl and a mop of white hair. They sell his blue T-shirts for US$20 each. (They may be union-made, but the cotton is rough and the price too high).
“Let’s start a revolution today!” declares Sanders. But if he wins the nomination, his disciples will have sown disaster for their party and their country.
The Children’s Crusade — which it will be surely called if Sanders continues to succeed — may win the argument for Sanders, but it will lose the case for the Democrats. As the Washington Post warns, nominating Sanders would be “insanity.”
Sanders is unelectable. His taxation and healthcare plans are a fairy tale in Republican Washington. The prospect of nominating him so terrifies senior Democrats there is talk here of drafting Vice-President Joe Biden if Clinton stumbles.
America has been here before. Forty-four years ago, George McGovern, the liberal, anti-war senator from South Dakota, was the great hope of my generation.
As Sanders is to millennials, McGovern was to baby boomers. At 17, I joined the insurgency in remote field offices in Laconia and Berlin in New Hampshire.
We canvassed, made telephone calls, wrote letters. We smoked pot and demolished Dunkin’ Donuts.
On March 7, 1972, McGovern won 37 per cent of the vote here, mortally wounding Sen. Ed Muskie, the establish- ment candidate, who actually got 46 per cent. McGovern won the Democratic nomination that summer in Miami, giving a surreal acceptance speech at 3 a.m.
Oh, the revolution was at hand. We knew it. Nixon was a crook and a warmonger, and with 18-year-olds voting for the first time, we would win!
In McGovern, a decent progressive and Second World War pilot, we had our man. The country disagreed. In November he lost everywhere but Massachusetts and the District of Columbia.
We felt as certain about McGovern then as our counterparts do today about Sanders — even if America is not in Vietnam and national unemployment is low. Sanders is an idealist and a scold. Like McGovern, he is recruiting an unlikely army of acolytes.
The sound, the fervour and the disastrous naiveté feel the same in 2016 as they did in 1972.
The Children’s Crusade — which it will be surely called if Sanders continues to succeed — may win the argument for Sanders, but it will lose the case for the Democrats.
— Andrew Cohen