I was too tired to subject myself to the traditional political raz-ma-taz of a convention last night, a decision I rather regret given the highly positive reviews I’ve been seeing of Michelle Obama’s speech. Glancing through the Andrew Sullivan live-blog, though, I do see that there was some heckling of Elizabeth Warren (!), attributed to the Sanders supporters:
You know, I didn’t cover this primary election but watching some of these Bernie supporters throw various hissy fits, I wonder if I would have found myself backing Clinton. I understand the passion but they sure come off as assholes. Sanders himself was far better – poised, happy to have swung the debate his way, and endorsing Clinton without any serious caveats at all.
I find it far harder to call them assholes in view of the revelations of the activities of Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the DNC chairman who appears to have favored Clinton over Sanders in substantial ways despite rules stating that the DNC should remain neutral during the primaries.
I’ve been poking around just a little, and it appears many observers are looking at Schultz’s future. I think that this is really a secondary issue, despite her position as a Representative for Florida, a state up for grabs. Instead, as Trump continues to look more than a little suspect no matter the issue, this is the time for Clinton to look like the old-time saviour of the nation, to do so she must appeal to the independents who seem to view her with suspicion.
The fact that Schultz favored her will, instead, once again cast black suspicion on Hillary. I’ve yet to see any reports indicating the leaked emails suggest that Hillary knew she was being awarded improper help – much less having actually illicitly requested it. Nevertheless, suspicious independents as well as moderate Republicans (such as former NYC mayor Michael Bloomberg), urged on by the right wing, will be tempted to think that just such has occurred – and because there’s no effective way to deny it, the tar will stick.
So when the Sanders supporters, already miffed at Bernie’s loss in the primaries, are faced with the news of a conspiracy against Sanders at the highest levels of the Party, is it any surprise that they react with disrespect – even when it’s progressive icon Elizabeth Warren? They know they’ve been screwed over. If you don’t express your discontent at being screwed, you’ll never be respected.
But in the bigger picture, the real matter of concern is the perception of Hillary as once again engaged in dirty politics. Whether or not she has ever been in the past, the perception, from national polls, is that she cannot be trusted. From Gallup:
I’m left wondering how Schultz didn’t understand the importance of following the rules, and how this places her favorite in peril of losing this election. Trump should be so vulnerable that his post-convention bounce was miniscule, but with this disaster, neither candidate appears to be reasonably pristine – and that’s a problem. Only one has the experience to be trusted with nuclear weapons and to recognize the dangers posed by Russia, while the other appears to be carrying water for Putin. But instead of this being crystal clear to the majority of the electorate, we’re instead pre-occupied with questions of the trustability of a former Senator and Secretary who has performed competently and honorably in her previous positions.
If we find the country at risk in December, a substantial portion of the blame should be placed at Schultz’s feet.
