What we all need to learn now that Bernie Sanders’s presidential bid is over

Bernie Sanders at a rally
Peter Bolton

Bernie Sanders has withdrawn from the Democratic Party primary. This has prompted a fierce debate about what went wrong. While he clearly faced unfair disadvantages from the start, progressives must also accept that he made some unnecessary mistakes. And if we’re going to win victories in the future, we must learn from them.

Unfair from the get-go…

On 8 April, Sanders live-streamed an announcement online in which he confirmed rumors that he was suspending his campaign. He emphasized that the coronavirus (Covid-19) crisis was a large part of why he made his decision. And while he indicated that he’d work with establishment rival and presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden to face Donald Trump in November’s presidential election, he stopped short of unequivocally endorsing him.

As The Canary previously reported, the race was never a fair one. The favored establishment candidates had inbuilt fundraising advantages due to their willingness to accept corporate donations. Mainstream media coverage has also severely disadvantaged Sanders, with even purportedly left-of-center TV stations like MSNBC portraying him in a negative light.

…but also some unforced errors

However, there are also some crucial unforced errors that Sanders made throughout the campaign. One was his failure to connect with the majority of African-American voters, who ended up supporting Biden. The sad irony is that Biden has let the African-American community down throughout his political career. For example, he consistently supported of reactionary ‘law and order’ measures that have led to mass incarceration and have had a disproportionate impact on Americans of color.

African-American leader Jesse Jackson did endorse Sanders. But by that stage, it was largely too little, too late; and traditional African-American voters had largely mobilized around Biden. This strange affection for the establishment wing of the Democratic Party on the part of (mostly older) African-Americans probably has an element of ‘Stockholm syndrome’ to it. But it also probably owes in part to the fact that Biden and the Clintons have done more to court their vote. Rather than following suit, Sanders failed to show up at crucially important rallies in the US South – where many African-Americans live – as ‘Super Tuesday’ and ‘Super Tuesday 2’ approached.

Biden also clearly benefited from having served as vice president to first African-American president Barack Obama, whose failures largely escaped criticism in the mainstream liberal media.

The biggest blunder of all? Being too polite.

But all of this pales in comparison to Sanders’s biggest mistake of all – his unwillingness to aggressively attack Biden for his sordid political record. As Branko Marcetic points in his recent book Yesterday’s Man: The Case Against Joe Biden, Biden forged close relationships with corporate donors like DuPont Chemical and multiple credit-card companies, who bankrolled many of his election campaigns. Biden returned the favor by supporting so-called ‘pro-business’ deregulatory policies.

Sanders scarcely brought any of this up during any of the debates or his public addresses. Rather, he spoke of Joe Biden in largely positive terms just as he had with Hillary Clinton during the 2016 Democratic Party primary race. The reality is that neither of these figures were deserving of such treatment, especially when considering their records on foreign policy.

Both Biden and Clinton supported the disastrous invasion of Iraq, for example, which according to some estimates led to the deaths of millions of people. Also, they are both indelibly tarnished by their association with the sordid foreign policy record of the Obama administration (Clinton served as its secretary of state). This included supporting a coup in Honduras in 2009; a drone-strike campaign that dwarfed even that of George W. Bush; increasing troop numbers in Iraq and Afghanistan; and fawning treatment of the governments of Israel and Saudi Arabia – two of the worst human rights violators in the Middle East. But rather than going on the attack and calling Biden and Clinton out on this record, Sanders essentially put on kid gloves in debates and other public appearances.

Sound familiar?

Over in the UK, former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn made the mistake of giving too many concessions to establishment political rivals and their corporate-media allies, tacitly accepting the premise that their attacks were being waged in good faith. And while Sanders responded to attacks better, he also failed to fully articulate his opponents’ motives – i.e. that entrenched power feared the threat that a genuinely progressive president would pose to the status quo.

On both sides of the Atlantic, Corbyn and Sanders have inspired and mobilised millions. But sadly, they both failed to win power. Rather than dwelling on that failure, though, we must learn from it. And the biggest lesson is that we must stop being so deferential to our enemies.

Featured image via Flickr – Gage Skidmore

We need your help ...

The coronavirus pandemic is changing our world, fast. And we will do all we can to keep bringing you news and analysis throughout. But we are worried about maintaining enough income to pay our staff and minimal overheads.

Now, more than ever, we need a vibrant, independent media that holds the government to account and calls it out when it puts vested economic interests above human lives. We need a media that shows solidarity with the people most affected by the crisis – and one that can help to build a world based on collaboration and compassion.

We have been fighting against an establishment that is trying to shut us down. And like most independent media, we don’t have the deep pockets of investors to call on to bail us out.

Can you help by chipping in a few pounds each month?

The Canary Support us
  • Show Comments
    1. I must take issue with your statement that the race was “never (financially) a fair one.”
      The definition of fairness is, “Impartial and just treatment or behavior without favoritism or discrimination”. Bernie was at a DISADVANTAGE because of his decision not to pander to the large corporations and donors. A choice that had many positives that offer the negative .
      Glenn Patron

    2. I think it a wise decision as he wasn’t supported by the Democratic Establishment as in the last election, much like Corbyn from the beginning of his term. He’s also 78.
      I’m glad he’s looking after himself, and saving needless amounts of money from ordinary people in a futile attempt to become President. He’ll still be speaking up in a different way.
      One man against an entrenched Empire isn’t a fair contest.
      His practical move is to be admired.

    3. As with Corbyn, the Canary deludes itself about the popularity of Sanders policies.
      Forget the focus groups you seem to place such faith in. The only test that counts is the public vote. As we discovered here in December.

    Leave a Reply

    Join the conversation

    Please read our comment moderation policy here.