Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: I am not trying to be a jerk I want to understand why BLM is targetting Bernie and Liberals. [View all]Cleita
(75,480 posts)11. I was looking back at some analysis of the Dean Scream back in the day.
I came across this article, which is not entirely favorable to Howard Dean, but this stood out to me:
http://www.psmag.com/politics-and-law/looking-back-dean-scream-72209 Bold letters are mine.
The winner of a presidential nomination contest tends to be the candidate with the most insider support, and Dean simply didn't have that. He had generated the ability to raise money, largely with the help of the Internet, and he could make a lot of noise. But as Iowa demonstrated, he had a hard time translating that support into actual votes.
Sometimes, party insiders converge on a candidate long before the contests ever begin. That didn't happen in 2004. A lot of Democratic governors and members of Congress waited to issue endorsements because they wanted to see how the candidates did in the early contests. Dean's failure in Iowa demonstrated to them that he wasn't a closer. (Contrast that experience with 2008's Iowa Caucus, when Barack Obama demonstrated that a candidacy with celebrity-like appeal could actually translate hype into votes.)
Why didn't insiders flock to Dean? Keep in mind the nature of his candidacy. He described himself as representing "the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party," suggesting that others were not quite Democratic enough. He referred to the Democratic members of Congress who had voted with Republicans to support the Iraq War as "cockroaches." He notably made enemies of many of the party elites. This is a terrific strategy to generate press but a terrible pathway to win a party's nomination. Party insiders were far more impressed with John Kerry's steady ability to generate votes and his longstanding party bona fides.
Sometimes, party insiders converge on a candidate long before the contests ever begin. That didn't happen in 2004. A lot of Democratic governors and members of Congress waited to issue endorsements because they wanted to see how the candidates did in the early contests. Dean's failure in Iowa demonstrated to them that he wasn't a closer. (Contrast that experience with 2008's Iowa Caucus, when Barack Obama demonstrated that a candidacy with celebrity-like appeal could actually translate hype into votes.)
Why didn't insiders flock to Dean? Keep in mind the nature of his candidacy. He described himself as representing "the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party," suggesting that others were not quite Democratic enough. He referred to the Democratic members of Congress who had voted with Republicans to support the Iraq War as "cockroaches." He notably made enemies of many of the party elites. This is a terrific strategy to generate press but a terrible pathway to win a party's nomination. Party insiders were far more impressed with John Kerry's steady ability to generate votes and his longstanding party bona fides.
I think the same dynamics are in play here. It isn't the Republicans attacking Bernie but the Washington Democratic insiders. They are using issues that are causing civil unrest and letting Bernie lift the whole burden. You notice that BLM is not attending any of Hillary's $2,700 a plate fundraisers. Never mind that Bernie has served in Washington for almost 25 years, he is not one of the establishment Democrats. I think it's time to break up that good ole boys and girls club. Bernie's campaign has to recognize the tactics, meet them headlong and then squash them.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
56 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I am not trying to be a jerk I want to understand why BLM is targetting Bernie and Liberals. [View all]
diabeticman
Aug 2015
OP
There are at least five other threads on the first page of GD that you and your wife could read
PeaceNikki
Aug 2015
#1
... and shouting "racist white supremacist" at Obama or Holder would sound even dumber than
GoneFishin
Aug 2015
#37
You can always see the ghosts of these kind of things and folks because of what is missing
nolabels
Aug 2015
#25
Bernie's done more than reached out, he's hired Black organizer Symone Sanders
99th_Monkey
Aug 2015
#50
It isn't. Hillary got harassed at Netroots last time she went and hasn't been there since.
pnwmom
Aug 2015
#5
Because the GOP's "latte liberal" meme has sunk in to a few ignorant goofs "on our side" n/m
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
Aug 2015
#8
I'm going to share an anecdote about that.... maybe it'll shed a bit of light on the
underahedgerow
Aug 2015
#10
Ugly answer is to carry the DNC for the 1%, while looking like the peoples party champion of Women
orpupilofnature57
Aug 2015
#27
but they're openly targeting Sanders, not using him as a venture to get attention for an issue
MisterP
Aug 2015
#28
I don't think there are plants,shills,agents or even Hillary supporters getting mic time
olddots
Aug 2015
#30
The thing is, you use protest and disruption to target politicians who are not listening.
Maedhros
Aug 2015
#31
I don't think they are. Where they can get in to these forums that do not control access
Yo_Mama
Aug 2015
#35
They're alienating those white allies, like me. I guess that's shaking things up.
RiverLover
Aug 2015
#45
The fact you insist on telling us all ONCE AGAIN about Bernie's supposed illustrious career
KittyWampus
Aug 2015
#44
O'Malley sat down with BLM, he listened, I have not heard of O'Malley being interrupted by BLM since
Thinkingabout
Aug 2015
#52
Seattle's "Outside Agitators 206" & why they want to drive a wedge between BLM and Democrats
Go Vols
Aug 2015
#54
Because it's a leaderless group, so any dipshit can claim to speak for them.
backscatter712
Aug 2015
#55