The 2020 election is in full swing. The field is being filled with contenders with large national profiles, and with others without as much name recognition. Having a great number of people in the election is a good thing as it presents an array of options which were limited in 2016.
Choice is truly a wonderful thing… as long as those choices are respected. That is the great concern that should be on everyone’s mind as we progress through the 2020 electoral cycle. The whole point of democracy – which is the root of the word “Democrat” – is found in its definition:
Definition of democracy
1a : government by the people especially : rule of the majority3 capitalized : the principles and policies of the Democratic party in the U.S. from emancipation Republicanism to New Deal Democracy— C. M. Roberts4 : the common people especially when constituting the source of political authority5 : the absence of hereditary or arbitrary class distinctions or privileges
Reference: Merriam-Webster
In short, the will of the common people is the source of political power and authority. It is their vote and support which grants you the ability to be an arbiter of justice, or a writer of laws. Without their support, that power and authority is lost. It is their consent to your laws that gives you any authority over the masses.
For those reasons, it is imperative that the will of the people is obeyed. When that will is undermined, it is no longer a democracy… and that is when tyranny and revolutions begin.
If you are wondering what the point is for explaining this, I will make it plain. The DNC and their shenanigans in 2016 directly led to Donald Trump becoming President of the United States. If the DNC is perceived as tipping of the balance toward any candidate, it can alienate supporters of other candidates.
If the outcome of the election is determined by the voters and perceived to be done without bias of the power brokers in the DNC, I think even the weakest Democratic candidate can beat Donald Trump this election. The progressives and liberals would coalesce around that candidate and put a Democrat in the White House.
Before we get too deep into the weeds, lets get this out of the way now… 2016 is over and done with. There is no changing it. We have the results we have, and there is no changing that fact. There is no point in re-litigating it. That being said, there is value in learning from the mistakes of that year so that they aren’t repeated.
The perception of the DNC trying to help the Clinton campaign may have been the difference between a Clinton presidency, and a Trump presidency. Some would quickly argue that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote and the antiquated electoral college system is what put Trump in office. This is true.
It is also true that the electoral college is the system we currently elect our presidents under. It is also arguable that there was a sufficient margin of Sanders voters who voted for Trump in 2016 to have affected the results in Michigan and Wisconsin.
Here’s How Many Sanders-Trump Voters There Were In Key Swing States
Political scientist Brian Schaffner recently tweeted out rough numbers on the share of Bernie Sanders primary voters who eventually went on to vote for Donald Trump in the general election, based on the massive CCES poll. Using those numbers and other available data, here is our back-of-the-envelope math on how many Sanders-Trump voters there were in those states — potentially enough to have handed Hillary Clinton those states (and the presidency).
Michigan 598,943 8% 47,915 10,704 Pennsylvania 731,881 16% 117,100 44,292 Wisconsin 570,192 9% 51,317 22,748
The problem isn’t solely that they voted for Trump, but also the fact that a great number of Sanders supporters thought they were screwed in the primary by the DNC. It’s not as though they were thinking this in a vacuum. They had reason for it. Even corporate news networks noticed it.
Reference: MSNBC’s Morning Joe
Then there’s Donna Brazile, DNC chair who said explicitly that the primary “wasn’t rigged” but mentions the memorandum between the DNC and The Clinton Campaign that “prevented the DNC from running it’s own operation”.
Reference: ABC’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos
Whether it is called rigged or not, just the perception of the DNC having a clear preference was enough for certain individuals to vote for Trump, Jill Stein or stay home. According to FiveThirtyEight, the number of voters who voted for Jill Stein account for more than the victory margin in certain key states that many expected Clinton to win.
harry (Harry Enten, senior political writer): The case, as far as I see it, is twofold: First, the number of votes cast for Stein in the three states that proved to be pivotal (Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin) exceeded Trump’s margin of victory over Clinton.
Reference: FiveThirtyEight – Jill Stein: Democratic Spoiler Or Scapegoat?
Is this to say that all of these voters who defected to Stein or Trump would have voted for Clinton? No, of course not. You can try to mitigate your losses by simply staying out of the fray and letting the voters decide for themselves who will represent them.
As long as the election is run fairly, it doesn’t matter which candidate wins, Biden, Sanders, Buttigieg, Yang… they are all substantially better than leaving Trump in power. They will likely get the support across the board.
If the DNC tips the scales again, or even appears to be doing it, then they are undermining the very process that they profess to care about. They would be undermining democracy. Period. That will alienate anyone who feels burned by it. Still, it seems as though certain members within the DNC do not want to let this play out.
Why does the DNC insist on doing this? This is how we got into this mess in the first place. Regardless of the candidate, this should not be how elections are decided. Make your case on the debate stage. If a candidate is not viable, the people should make that choice based on what they find out on the debate stage or on the news.
The power brokers within the party should not be trying to make that decision for them. That would be no better than the voter suppression that they rightly demonize the Republican party for. That would be the height of hypocrisy.
-
The power to decide elections should reside solely with the voters, not the power brokers within the party.
Let me be clear, this is not a argument for one candidate. It is an argument for any and all candidates who run for office, even ones I am not in favor of. Nor is this a request for a coronation. This is simply a request to allow the democratic process to take place organically. Live up to the meaning of your party name. Let the voters decide who wins without your influence.
If you ignore this, then you risk repeating the results of 2016 and giving Trump another term. None of us wants that… or at least, I hope we don’t.
Sources:
- https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/democracy
- https://www.npr.org/2017/08/24/545812242/1-in-10-sanders-primary-voters-ended-up-supporting-trump-survey-finds
- MSNBC youtube site, clip from Morning Joe “https://youtu.be/dGeyhgp2N8A?t=292”
- This Week “https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZcl9fCEvi8”
- https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/jill-stein-democratic-spoiler-or-scapegoat/
- “https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/16/us/politics/bernie-sanders-democratic-party.html”
Seeing Through the B.S. 