Rigging nominations may or not win elections, but it’s despicable

he Democratic Party is showing some ugly faces these days, as entrenched party leaders find both their president and much of their constituency headed in directions that the “party” disapproves. From Sen. Chuck Schumer choosing to risk war to Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz stifling supporters of her party’s president and the peace deal with Iran, to the insurgent candidacies of Bernie Sanders and Martin O’Malley, party leaders find themselves leading toward goals widely rejected by others.  

This is actually a hopeful sign – that there’s resistance. But the struggle to define Democratic values as more than just another oxymoron is still in its early stages. It’s also something of a shadowy war in which the party “leaders” seek to deny insurgents oxygen by limiting the number of debates, thereby helping Hillary Clinton ascend to her predicted coronation as the party’s nominee. Another way of looking at that is that the party “leadership” is engaged in a delicate game of attempted vote-rigging by ignorance. What about that can be good for the party, never mind the country?     

Leading up to the recent Democratic National Committee (DNC) summer meeting August 26-29, the National Journal (NJ) offered an unintentionally hilarious “insider” assessment of the state of the Democratic Party. “Looming” over the meeting, NJ pontificated, was: A Bernie breakthrough? A Hillary resurgence? O’Malley coming up on the outside? No, none of those. What loomed over the meeting was “Joe Biden’s phantom candidacy.” Seriously, according to NJ, Biden was getting “much of the buzz” from the party delegates even though he wasn’t even attending the meeting. NJ quotes two of the DNC’s 450 members as wanting an “interesting race” and not wanting an “anointed candidate” (the unnamed Hillary Clinton). NJ had no trouble mentioning Clinton over and over in its story, treating her as the only looming alternative to Biden (who had a conference call with DNC members on August 26).  

So what might these insider tea leaves mean? Apparently the party hierarchy is pretty much solidly behind Clinton and willing to rig the rules (on debates, for example) in her favor. And one might infer that, whatever dissatisfaction the party leaders might have with Clinton, they have no interest in Bernie Sanders or anyone else. NJ doesn’t even mention Bernie till the last paragraph, and then only to say he will be speaking. NPR, on the other hand, wonders if this is “2008 all over again?” when the “unbeatable” Clinton lost to another insurgent. So there’s some ferment in our official media.    [more…] 

Original published at Reader Supported News