It’s not that I am voting for Sanders, right? Nothing peculiar about that, at least in these quarters.
It’s that I honestly never imagined he would win. Not that he has not exceeded expectations, and I’m very glad of that.
You should be too—and you should also help with that by voting for him. It will make Clinton a better president.
Since he won’t win, we do not have to worry about who will be the better candidate in November. (It’s a pointless argument anyway, and one that frankly most of the partisans lack the intellectual rigor to undergo without bias.) Don’t have to worry about the Supreme Court, or President Trump, or any of that stuff, at least not in the primary.
Nor is this an appeal to “vote your heart in the primary,” and idea (sorry jconway) that has never made much sense to me. Rather it is purely pragmatic, if you believe that things have to change.
What kind of president will Clinton be without a strong left flank? I think we all know. But a strong showing by Sanders, that emboldens and activates people, will buttress her better instincts and give her a better hand to play.
She’s going to the Convention and probably to the White House. What do you want her to do there? What political climate do you want to hold sway? Do you want a vocal progressive grass roots?
Goodness, if we do our jobs right, maybe she won’t appoint a Treasury secretary from Wall Street. Wouldn’t that be something!
I’m not saying this to criticize Clinton. I’ve always liked her, and I’ve voted for her in the past. But her politics are clearly based on navigating the currents and shoals of what is—of doing as good a job as conventional wisdom permits. Fair enough: it is our job to change those currents and that wisdom to what should be.
Don’t blow it.
jconway says
To wit, I argued vote your heart in this primary because I am confident of Democratic victory in the fall and have been confident of a Clinton victory for the nomination for quite some time. Were we nominating a candidate as appealing to our base and as unappealing to the general electorate as Trump (Grayson?) it would be an entirely different set of circumstances. But generally, (Coakley excepted) we don’t tend to do that on our side of the aisle anymore, so the risk is low. We are largely on the same page here and this wa a fine post and we share similar reasoning.