Quantcast
Connect with us

Exploiting fissures on the left is like shooting fish in a barrel — and that’s a big problem for Democrats

Published

on

- Commentary

This article was paid for by Raw Story subscribers. Not a subscriber? Try us and go ad-free for $1. Prefer to give a one-time tip? Click here.

On Saturday, Politico came up with a big scoop: Bernie Sanders’ campaign is trying to convince Democratic voters to support their candidate in the primaries.

It wasn’t phrased that way, of course. “The nonaggression pact between Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren is seriously fraying,” wrote Alex Thompson. “Sanders’ campaign has begun stealthily attacking Warren as a candidate of the upper crust who could not expand the Democratic base in a general election, according to talking points his campaign is using to sway voters.” The talking-points were ostensibly distributed to volunteers canvassing for Sanders, although the report noted that “it is unclear whether the script is being used for phone calls or door knocking or both, or in which locations.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Everything about the story screamed ragebait–from the headline, “Bernie campaign slams Warren as candidate of the elite,” to the suggestion that a script for talking to voters who support one of the other top-tier candidates–which didn’t focus exclusively on Warren–was a “stealth[y]” attack on the Massachusetts Senator. Thompson then followed up with another piece headlined, “Warren ‘disappointed’ that Bernie ‘sending his volunteers out to trash me.’”

The following day, a tweeter named Eric Isaac claimed that a “random user who’s only ever posted once before posted that document in the Sanders volunteer Slack group. A moderator promptly removed it and stated that it was NOT a campaign source.” Isaac added that while he would happily back up that claim with a screenshot of the conversation, doing so “would be violating the agreement I made with the campaign to not share screenshots from slack.” Isaac has fewer than 2,000 followers as of this writing, but the tweet rocketed around Twitter with over 20,000 retweets and likes, and since then Sanders supporters have been yelling at reporters for spreading fake news. Asked about it later, Sanders rightly called it a “media blow-up.” He said, “we have hundreds of employees. Elizabeth Warren has hundreds of employees. And people sometimes say things that they shouldn’t.” But the outrage cycle was complete. Both pieces appeared on Politico’s list of the most-read stories over the weekend.

There are, obviously, real and substantial differences between all of the top-tier candidates, including Warren and Sanders. They’re all vying for the same nomination and must try to persuade Democratic voters that they’re the best person both to take on Trump and to govern. And while the “nonaggression pact” between Sanders and Warren is mostly a creation of political pundits, the two allies have campaigned against each other in a largely respectful manner, even if some of their surrogates haven’t always followed their cues.

The “attack” on Warren was mild and banal. I only write about it as an example of how easy it is to set off a circular firing squad among the broad left. These kinds of thin nontroversies are a regular feature of our excruciatingly long primary campaigns, and they draw in supporters of all the candidates at one point or another.

After the disastrous 2016 election cycle and three years of Trump, the Democratic coalition is primed to react reflexively to these manufactured nontroversies. The notion that some murky establishment is constantly sabotaging the left is as deeply entrenched within one faction as the idea that Sanders’ persistence in the race cost Hillary Clinton the election and gave us Trump is within the other. These buttons are just too easy to push.

ADVERTISEMENT

The real problem is that in their zeal to find perfidy among other candidates’ supporters, a lot of political junkies (most of these kerfuffles don’t even register among average voters) can’t recognize the difference between organic intra-coalition tensions and those driven by reporters looking to exploit controversy for clicks or various actors seeking to sow or deepen divisions within the Democrats’ “big tent” for political gain.

Alex Thompson covers Warren and the left for Politico. He isn’t part of some nebulous plot to undermine progressives–he has to file stories that people will want to read on a regular basis over the course of a two-year-long campaign. But that’s not the case with Republicans or the alt-right or various foreign actors seeking to capitalize on divisions within the American electorate in order to advance their own agendas.

ADVERTISEMENT

With the specter of 2016 and the dynamics of social media in the background, Democratic activists on all sides of their party’s divide(s) are primed to react to every bit of purported evidence that their opponents are wittingly or unwittingly helping Trump get re-elected. Many seem unwilling or incapable of letting an opportunity to engage in intra-coalitional combat pass. That will continue to pose a problem for liberals and the left–who need each other to win–as long as activists with big platforms lack the skepticism and media literacy to distinguish between real conflicts that matter and cheap, divisive ragebait.

ADVERTISEMENT

This article was paid for by Raw Story subscribers. Not a subscriber? Try us and go ad-free for $1. Prefer to give a one-time tip? Click here.


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

2020 Election

These 6 GOP senators have negative approval ratings — threatening Republican control in 2020

Published

on

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) may not be in control of the body following the 2020 elections. In fact, he might not even be a senator.

On Thursday, Morning Consult released a new poll on all 100 senators, based on 494,899 interviews with voters. The survey had some major red flags for Republicans hoping to hold control of the chamber in 2020.

President Donald Trump's impeachment trial is putting enormous pressure on vulnerable Republicans, Morning Consult's Eli Yokley explained.

Continue Reading

2020 Election

It’s 2020 and Florida’s Supreme Court just ruled in favor of a poll tax

Published

on

"Florida cannot violate the U.S. Constitution's protections. The right to vote cannot be contingent on the ability to pay."

Florida's state Supreme Court on Thursday ruled in favor of denying convicted felons the right to vote if they do not pay fines and fees associated with their incarceration, a decision that was immediately assailed by rights activists as an unconstitutional and immoral poll tax.

In a statement condemning the ruling (pdf), the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), ACLU of Florida, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law and NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund said the ruling "does not—indeed, cannot—alter what the U.S. Constitution requires."

Continue Reading
 

2020 Election

Trump ridiculed as a ‘big baby’ for showing kids a map of 2016 results: ‘It’s his blankie’

Published

on

President Donald Trump was blasted as a "baby" for apparently worrying about his legitimacy after two articles of impeachment were transmitted from the House of Representatives to the U.S. Senate.

During an Oval Office event on "constitutional prayer in public schools," Trump had a large map on his desk showing the 2016 election, with red showing areas won by Trump and blue showing areas won by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the 2016 Democratic Party nominee.

The map, however, is misleading as it shows the election results by area. But land does not vote, people do. And despite the largely-red map, Trump lost the popular vote in 2016 by 2,868,686 votes.

Continue Reading
 
 
Help Raw Story Uncover Injustice. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1 and go ad-free.
close-image