Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Tom Rinaldo

(22,912 posts)
Fri Feb 26, 2016, 12:08 PM Feb 2016

MEMO TO MATHEWS: "It's the only way change happens in America"

Bernie Sanders said that to Chris Mathews about Social Change Movements when Mathews fixated, during their interview, on the impossibility of winning 60 votes in the U.S. Senate next January for a progressive legislative agenda.

MEMO to Chris Mathews:

Not only is Bernie Sanders right (it doesn't just take a village, it takes a movement to bring about real change) but those of us who know radical change is essential in America won't be judging progress towards it by some Senate vote count in January.

The Republican opposition doesn't care how reasonable the next Democratic President may seem if we elect one this November - they will obstruct the same regardless. Any changes that Republicans in Congress may allow into law will by definition be insufficient, or they will not pass. Whether we have a President Sanders or a President Clinton, that is the reality.

At the end of the day, before the United States government enters permanent shut down during some prolonged budget crisis, some compromises will be reached and no one will be happy with them. There is no inherent conflict between being a visionary and being pragmatic, as Hillary Clinton likes to point out. After the forces on both sides are fully marshaled, after all the fiery speeches are made and the behind the scenes maneuvers executed, we will all do the math and take the best deal we can get for now. That will be the case whether it is Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton who is sitting in the oval office. If anything I would suggest that by asking for more to begin with we will end up with more at the finish, but even that difference won't be earth shattering.

Whoever we elect our next President will have the same intrinsic powers of the Executive Branch. They each will have a veto pen, they each can issue executive orders. They each will staff the executive branch with people who share their priorities for America. While a Republican opposition in Congress can make a show of resisting some high profile presidential appointments, there will be a Democratic administration put in place which will work to implement Democratic objectives through rules and regulations. And unless we elect a Democratic majority House and a Democratic super majority in the Senate in November, Republicans will retain their ability to obstruct.

Even if we accept that Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders each have the same ultimate goals for America, Hillary Clinton through the power of her being will not be able to implement a more positive program for America come next January than could Bernie Sanders, particularly in so far as legislation is involved; and vice versa.

With all due respect Chris you have fundamentally missed the point. We aren't playing a short game here, we are playing a very long one Your most basic miscalculation is apparent in how you framed your verbal challenge to Bernie Sanders. You asked him what he can possibly achieve as President next January when you can barely understand yourself how he got to the place where that concept is even conceivable. You point out that for Sanders to succeed his notion of a political revolution has to be more than just an idealistic slogan, there must be real evidence it can happen. Then you note that young people did not vote in high enough percentages for Sanders to even win in Nevada.

OK Chris, you have a point. Now turn it on its head. If your political world view holds up though the current election cycle, there won't be a President Sanders in office come January to propose any legislative agenda for Republicans to obstruct. But what will have to happen for Bernie Sanders to actually win the Presidency and then confront the congressional obstacles you envisioned? The answer is a political revolution that you couldn't see any hint of as recently as last summer, one that in your estimation is still insufficient to win Bernie Sanders the Democratic Party nomination for President let alone the Presidency itself. You may be right about that now Chris, but what if you are wrong, what would that say about America and the political power of a social movement for change? You are gaming a 2017 political battle map based on conventional 2015 political intelligence, so I'm not surprised by the conclusions you reach.

Like I said, you may be right. There is something happening in America that is upsetting all conventional political thinking, but it may not be advanced so far as to elect a President Sanders now after first having to defeat the most sophisticated and entrenched political machine in Democratic politics. The fact that Bernie has already gotten this far though should stop and give you pause. Sanders isn't just winning the classic "Rock the Vote" vote, his youth support isn't confined to students. America below 40 is looking like Sanders country, and not just among Democrats. Unlike Hillary Clinton Bernie Sanders has done quite well with Independents too, and they are the largest voting bloc in America,

So no I don't expect a President Bernie Sanders to rapidly move a progressive agenda through Congress with strong Republican opposition. I expect him to continue to catalyze a social change movement that is rapidly growing in this nation while moving to the fore. Bernie has the power of a message whose time has come Chris, but someone had to pierce the cone of silence that was preventing it from being heard, and that is what his candidacy has now done. Sanders, with the help of a movement growing behind him, has already rewritten the political agenda in this county - he has changed the frame of reference. How far back do you have to go to find issues of burgeoning poverty and income inequality dominating a national election campaign like they are now? That's not Hillary Clinton's doing.

How long did it take for segregationists to lose control of the United States Senate Chris? No it didn't happen one day after an election. But when JFK defeated Richard Nixon for president in 1960 few could foresee that, less than four years later, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 would pass through the United States Senate. During those few intervening years an awful lot was going on outside the Halls of Congress. It's the only way change happens in America.

11 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

KPN

(15,642 posts)
2. Great OP!
Fri Feb 26, 2016, 12:30 PM
Feb 2016

Like Bernie himself, you were magnanimous in only saying "If your political world view holds up ... there won't be a President Sanders in office come January to propose any legislative agenda for Republicans to obstruct." as opposed to calling Matthews out for actively undermining Bernie's potential success.

Tom Rinaldo

(22,912 posts)
3. Sometimes I think an understatement is more powerful
Fri Feb 26, 2016, 12:33 PM
Feb 2016

I am comfortable taking on Chris Mathew's arguments on their face rather than muddying that with an attack on him personally.

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
6. However, he is in fact actively undermining Bernie's potential success. Pointing that out directly
Fri Feb 26, 2016, 12:54 PM
Feb 2016

isn't personal, it just is. But you did manage to make the point.

You managed to make many great points actually. Thank you!!

dmosh42

(2,217 posts)
4. I've seen this often where Matthews acts civil to most estavlishment figures, even Republicans. But.
Fri Feb 26, 2016, 12:41 PM
Feb 2016

I could see Matthews was on his "hit" mode last night in interviewing Bernie. Compare it to his interview with Hillary, or even Michelle Bachman, who were greeted with marshmallow questions and smiles. Even Matthews knew he was beyond limits as he said he didn't want to go back to 'fighting' as he did earlier. I have always seen him as sleazy in his style, catering to the establishment figures of whoever is in office at the time. What a lowlife!

Tom Rinaldo

(22,912 posts)
5. I've seen that too
Fri Feb 26, 2016, 12:47 PM
Feb 2016

In addition to the personal conflicts of interests that Mathews has in this race, Bernie is operating outside of the box that Mathews feels confident inside, inside he beltway stuff, and I think that threatens him on a professional level. Mathews prides himself on being a master of the inside game - I think someone like Bernie who looks right past it to a bigger picture unsettles him.

Tom Rinaldo

(22,912 posts)
9. I really can't recall another generational divide as broad as this one
Fri Feb 26, 2016, 04:37 PM
Feb 2016

Democrats under age 45 or so break for Bernie. Over 50 they swing to Hillary (with numerous exceptions like myself). In the 60's the counter culture really was below 35, and mostly below 25. On a basic level the fairly united future of our nation (most Republicans excepted) is calling for Bernie's leadership to help us get there.

dmosh42

(2,217 posts)
10. I'm only a few months younger than Bernie, but it took me a little longer to come around to his....
Fri Feb 26, 2016, 04:54 PM
Feb 2016

view mainly because I grew up with that post-WW2 idea that we were guided by some truths. Probably some time during the Nixon years my eyes finally opened more to what has really happened. Corporate corruption has always been part of democratic governments but free press and other things have held it in check more or less, but especially with Reagan, it has been going completely rotten to the core! The Dems in control also know this has happened, but they depend on the cash just like the Republicans. So, in my view, Bernie may be the last shot at turning things around.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»MEMO TO MATHEWS: "It's th...