The case for Bernie Sanders

I’ve actually found the Democratic primary process clarifying. I’d like to present here the case for why I’m voting for Bernie in the Washington primary.

I share this not to persuade or convince anyone, but to share my own process of thinking through this election cycle. I welcome respectful feedback, questions, and insights into your own thinking.

Background

I came into the primary without a clear preference. I would say my top 3 going in were Warren, Castro, and Bernie, in no particular order. And there were lots of things I liked about other candidates: Yang’s refreshing authenticity and his clear-eyed assessment of some core economic challenges we face; Buttigieg’s rhetoric around the importance of bridging and belonging; Booker’s sincerity and history of walking the talk; Gabbard’s commitment to challenging the military industrial complex; Harris’ sharp cross-examining; Gillibrand’s advocacy for children and families, etc.

It seems clear to me that there are only three candidates remaining who offer solutions at anywhere near the scale of the problem: Sanders, Warren, and Gabbard.

Buttigieg, Klobuchar, and Biden to me represent the status quo; a nostalgic return to the Obama years without any reckoning with how fundamentally different the world is today… or how the Obama years ultimately failed to deliver for too many people. All have problematic foreign policies (to the extent they’ve even bothered to articulate one) and tepid domestic policy (health care in particular). More to the point, they have never led anything: what’s one issue where they’re leading the charge for a bolder vision of our future? No thanks; I pass.

Steyer is a one-trick pony, and Bernie is better at his signature issue. Plutocratic politics is not the answer. Pass.

Bloomberg has a terrible record (the guy chose to go Republican during the Bush years), and his entire campaign is anti-democratic: plutocratic politics is not the answer to plutocratic politics. Hard pass.

Gabbard: on paper, everything she does well, Sanders and/or Warren do better. More to the point: I don’t trust her judgment. I fear her desire to be seen as above the fray “I’ll talk to anyone” (e.g. Assad, Trump) and her equivocation on impeachment betrays either a misreading of power politics or a willingness to put her own interests above a broader agenda. Both are disqualifying for me.

Which leaves Warren and Sanders. I gotta say: I consider this an unqualified GREAT place for the Democratic Party to be in 2020. I’m not thrilled about two white septuagenarians being the standard-bearers for the party, but I am very excited about everything they represent.

Let me first say: I love Elizabeth Warren. She’s a straight baller, and anyone who says otherwise I have a hard time taking seriously. She’s smart, passionate, committed, unbelievably thorough, and has consistently led the field with her bold and detailed policy proposals. I trust her deeply.

To the tie-breakers, in rough order of importance to me:

1) Theory of politics.

This is best captured through their slogans. Bernie’s is “Not me, us.” Warren’s is “I have a plan for that.” I think Bernie’s represents a better understanding of the nature of politics in a polarized era, and the scale of what we’re up against. I’m skeptical of anyone who claims they have an answer to the world. No one does: it’s too complex, and there are always tradeoffs. But it’s more than that: it’s about how we think democracy works. Democracy requires active citizenship, and ongoing civic engagement. Warren’s slogan conveys a message of “I’ve got this.” It’s the progressive version of Trump’s “only I can save us.” And it’s wrong. In an era of divided politics (and likely a GOP-held Senate), only powerful movements have any hope of leading to the kind of sustainable change we so urgently need (including and even primarily at the state and local level).

2) Foreign policy.

Warren doesn’t really have one. It’s never been what she’s passionate about. And that’s okay… but not as president. She doesn’t have a strong instinct here, and it shows: she equivocates on Israel/Palestine, and I fear would be too hawkish and too susceptible to influence by a deeply entrenched foreign policy establishment. Bernie’s is the best foreign policy in the entire field: skeptical of military force and the illusions we like to tell ourselves about America’s history abroad; a commitment to solidarity with people everywhere, not just their leaders.

3) The cabinet.

In my view, Warren is a truly unique force in American politics. There is no one else that matches her rare combination of tenacity, passion, intelligence, policy chops, and political/bureaucratic maneuvering. So who’s behind her? Who’s her Sec State? Director of the National Economic Council? Who are other politicians molded in her image? The best thing about Bernie… it’s not about Bernie. He’s 78. Who’s around him is hugely important. And not only are there people behind him (the Squad, e.g.), there’s an entire wing of the party (Justice Dems, much of the progressive caucus), and an entire movement — see e.g. this beautiful endorsement from the Dream Defenders PAC.

4) Electability.

The number one takeaway for me from the 20 years that I have been voting in presidential elections: you have to have a candidate people are going to be excited about. Of course I voted against Bush, but I didn’t knock doors for Gore or Kerry. You’re damn right I knocked doors for Obama. Of course I voted against Trump, but I didn’t knock doors for Clinton. We HAVE to put up a candidate that will mobilize people… and the base. Compared to party elites, the Democratic party base is younger, more female, more people of color, and more working/middle class. If we don’t give people a reason to vote FOR someone… they’ll stay home (this Politico piece offers a thorough take on this phenomenon). Bernie has consistently built the largest ground game we’ve ever seen, and done so in part because he’s NOT tied to the Democratic party.

This is something I think older generations and party elites fail to fully appreciate: many Americans (myself included) blame both parties for our current state. Sure, it’s undeniable that the GOP shoulders more of the blame. But where was the Democratic party standing up to Wall Street after the financial crisis? Passing progressive climate legislation? Standing up against the criminalization of black and brown people? Supporting a humane immigration policy? A reminder: 28% of Americans identify as Democrat. 41% identify as Independent. Do you want to lead a country, or a party? To be clear, I think Warren would also be good here; I just think Bernie has a better ground game and deeper bench.

5) Down-ballot.

After hemorrhaging at the state and local level throughout the Obama years, the Democratic Party is finally rebuilding… largely no thanks to the centralized party structure. Progressive efforts like the Justice Dems, the Progressive Caucus, DSA and a host of new actors like Indivisible and other women-led efforts like Emerge America have galvanized recruitment and action at the state and local level. The most exciting candidates nationally are all thanks to this pipeline: who’s the last DNC-backed state candidate who caught your attention at a national level? This builds on the point above: we need to get people to the polls, AND keep them engaged beyond November.

So that’s where I come out. I’d love to see how others see it.

My dream? I would love to see a Bernie/Stacey Abrams ticket, with Elizabeth Warren in charge of implementing economic policy (likely in a non-Senate confirmed position, if Mitch is still in charge).