Sydney Ember of the New York Times seems somewhere between miffed and mystified that everyone is racing to endorse Joe Biden and that they’re getting praised for it. In particular, she seems almost incensed that folks are lining up to say nice things about Bernie Sanders, when they spent a year or more trashing him: “Never mind that Mr. Biden had spent part of the Democratic primary race accusing Mr. Sanders of disloyalty for considering a primary challenge against Mr. Obama in 2012.”
She’s also undecided about what it all means. On the one hand, she says “Mr. Sanders is in the uniquely awkward position of being venerated by a party he has never joined…” And, then on the other hand, she argues both the prior criticism and the current praise of Sanders are nothing but a show that calls “into question whether political messages are simply a form of competitive posturing.” Maybe no one actually believed all those nasty things they said about Bernie, or perhaps they’ve instantly concluded it was all hyperbole: “Mr. Sanders is joining a long line of losing candidates who seemed more palatable to onetime critics in hindsight…Democrats also looked fondly back at Senators John McCain, of Arizona, and Mitt Romney, of Utah, as pre-Trump Republicans who were actually never that bad.”
They say that one of the symptoms you have Covid-19 is that you lose your senses of taste and smell. Fortunately, the only sense I seem to have lost is for what’s truly important enough to write about during our current global crisis. Sometimes it seems like virtually nothing meets that test. But I know that pandemic itself meets it, which is why I am astonished that Ms. Ember managed to write this entire piece about rivals coalescing behind Biden without once mentioning the viral outbreak that has already cost tens of thousands of Americans their lives.
She’s correct that the Democratic Establishment exhaled in relief when Sanders ended his campaign and quickly endorsed Biden. But it’s not only “a projection of how desperate Democrats are to beat Mr. Trump.” It’s more than just the post-traumatic hangover from 2016, when Sanders hung on too long and did too much damage to Hillary Clinton. It’s a recognition that these are no ordinary times and that we need to get focused on fixing the country’s many problems rather than bickering among ourselves.
The pandemic is the central explanation for why Bernie Sanders ended his campaign when he did. Knowing he was defeated didn’t force him out in 2016, and he was initially inclined to again gather as many convention delegates as he could in a bid to affect the party platform. He changed his mind because there was many levels more resistance to him continuing this time around. He changed his mind because social distancing rules made it impossible for him to hold rallies or get his message out. He changed his mind because Joe Biden offered him something that Clinton didn’t, which is a bunch of working groups to work on the platform prior to the convention. This was gracious, but also a recognition that the convention may not be held in physical space but rather, much like the upcoming NFL Draft, only in the online world.
You can’t understand or intelligently discuss Sanders’ behavior without putting Covid-19 front and center. To a lesser degree, the same can be said for the decision-making of Elizabeth Warren. This can be seen even in the area of health care. That’s the issue, more than any other, where principles and ideals argued for a continuation of the debate straight through the convention. But now that we’re seeing our medical system stagger under the magnitude of the crisis, it’s less about knowing that Sanders and Warren had a point than realizing that Biden will have the space and incentive and even the obligation to go bigger than he initially intended.
The crisis is not only the reason why Sanders dropped out, it’s the reason the Establishment is so willing to let bygones be bygones. There’s nothing phony about it. It’s just people treating the times with the urgency they demand.
5
5
5
What’s more, if you’re doing NYT deep-dive analytical political reporting, then the “story” about the Democrats this week isn’t about whether they all *really* mean what they say. It’s about how well organized they are, what a great week it’s been for Biden and the party, and how it signals that Trump faces a formidable opponent.
1) it seems pretty clear now that Sanders stayed in the race through Wisconsin at the request (or at least, with the support) of party leaders, likely including Biden and Obama, so as to drive up Democratic turnout for the state’s judicial elections. The strategy worked; Dems booted a right-wing Trumper from the state Supreme Court, and defeated at least two judges appointed by Scott Walker, despite having only 5 polling places in Milwaukee and the UW students scattered from Madison.
2) The exquisitely sequenced and pitch-perfect series of endorsements rolled out this week:
*first Sanders, appropriately so because democracy relies on losers who will concede they’ve lost. The conversation between Sanders and Biden hit the right balance of public formality and personal warmth you’d expect from two long-time colleagues. The substance of the six workings they’ve formed to shape the party’s platform came across as a significant step by each towards bridging the divide between the party’s factions.
*second Obama, the party elder and (still!) the most popular politician in the country, giving his blessing (as it were) to the union of party’s factions and to the work done by Biden and Sanders, not just during this campaign but throughout their long careers. Obama also made clear that he was chomping at the proverbial bit to go after Trump and the Republican party relentlessly for the next six months, and thereby signaled his expectation and desire that Democrats everywhere will do the same.
*third Warren. This was, to my mind, the most artful of the three endorsements. Had she endorsed before Sanders, she’d have risked alienating some of her own supporters and splitting the left-wing faction of the party. By waiting, she kept her own base together while unifying it with the rest of the party.
Is there more work to do to unify the party for the fall? Of course. But this was about as good a week as it’s possible to have for a challenger clinching the party nomination to have, and it suggests that for the first time in his long career, Joe Biden may be poised to run a good campaign for president.
5
Can you tell me with a straight face that if the positions were reversed the Establishment wouldn’t be desperate to stop Bernie even now? Not saying the rush to Biden isn’t necessary (but oops, rape) but bygones my ass.